Purpose and recipient beat the dollar cap — a banquet to win a tender is not ‘culture’.
PRC rules on gifts and hospitality sit in AUCL commercial bribery, Criminal Law (especially if officials or certain medical/public bodies), tax/fapiao, and employer policy. There is no single national ‘RMB X is safe’ line this wiki will freeze. Officials, state-owned counterparties and healthcare are harder than a commercial dinner. Off-books and personal Alipay are the usual failure. Record who, why, and the fapiao. This is the hospitality page. AUCL statutory related pages and the basics related guide sit beside it.
4 questions before you choose the route.
This page identifies the right question and evidence. It does not determine the legal outcome on a reader’s facts.
Who is the recipient?
Official, SOE, doctor, private buyer.
WhoIs there a pending tender or approval?
Purpose.
WhyOn-books with fapiao?
Recording.
BooksPolicy cap vs legal risk?
Policy is not a statute.
PolicyWorking rule: Map the regulated role before marketing or launch in China.
The signal ledger.
These facts move the question beyond a label and into a product, money-flow and control analysis.
Bring a compact evidence docket—not a pitch deck.
Give a compliance team or counsel the operating facts that reveal the perimeter.
Questions people ask before they build.
Short answers for orientation. The right result can change with the service model and current rules.
Are holiday gifts always OK?
Modest, recorded, no pending decision — lower risk, not zero. Officials remain sensitive.
Where is the statute page?
Open /anti-unfair-competition-law-bribery-rules.
Primary authorities
Reviewed sources support orientation, not a fact-specific assessment.