Do not tell employees ‘this is privileged so you are safe’ — PRC confidentiality is not Delaware work-product.
PRC lawyers have professional confidentiality duties, and some communications with retained counsel are protected in practice, but there is no full US-style attorney-client privilege or work-product doctrine that blocks SAMR/PSB from asking questions or taking devices. In-house counsel are often treated as employees. Marking a memo ‘privileged’ does not make it so. Dual-hat FCPA investigations need a PRC-realistic plan. This page is the warning. Interview and raid pages are where the warning is used.
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.
External PRC counsel retained?
Better than HQ email only.
CounselWho is the client?
Company, not the employee.
ClientWill a regulator take the laptop anyway?
Raid reality.
RaidWhat can you honestly tell interviewees?
No fake Upjohn shield.
WarningWorking 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.
Is there any protection?
Yes, professional confidentiality and some practice around counsel files — not a US bubble. Plan for disclosure.
Should HQ lawyers fly in alone?
Usually pair with PRC counsel if a regulator is plausible.
Primary authorities
Reviewed sources support orientation, not a fact-specific assessment.