Establishing a new credit‑based regulatory mechanism for tendering and bidding, eight ministries and commissions have issued the Interim Measures on Credit Management in the Field of Tendering and Bidding.

Release date:

2026-09-27

Recently, eight departments—the National Development and Reform Commission, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the Ministry of Housing and Urban–Rural Development, the Ministry of Transport, the Ministry of Water Resources, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, the Ministry of Commerce, and the National Radio and Television Administration—jointly issued the Interim Measures on Credit Management in the Field of Tendering and Bidding (hereinafter referred to as the “Measures”), which will take effect on January 1, 2027. This marks the first regulatory framework in China for credit management in the tendering and bidding sector, providing crucial institutional support and legal safeguards for improving the credit‑based regulatory system, standardizing market order, and promoting the sustained, healthy development of the tendering and bidding industry.

Relevant officials from the National Development and Reform Commission answered questions from reporters regarding the Interim Measures for Credit Management in the Field of Tendering and Bidding:
I. What is the background behind the drafting of these Measures?
　　Strengthening and standardizing credit management in the field of tendering and bidding is of great significance for maintaining market order and advancing the development of a unified national market. The “Notice of the General Office of the State Council on Issuing the Implementation Plan for Establishing a Comprehensive Evaluation System for Corporate Creditworthiness” (Guobanfa [2026] No. 8) explicitly encourages business entities, in tendering, commercial transactions, and other market activities, to offer preferential treatment or facilitative measures to enterprises with sound credit standing. In recent years, the credit‑management mechanism in the tendering and bidding sector has been continuously improved, effectively contributing to the optimization and enhancement of the market environment. However, significant challenges remain, including insufficient sharing of public credit information, lack of uniform standards for public credit evaluation, and irregular application of evaluation results. To further strengthen credit management in the tendering and bidding field and to standardize public credit evaluation and the use of its outcomes, the National Development and Reform Commission, together with relevant departments, has, on the basis of in-depth research, extensive consultation, and careful summarization of experience, drafted these Measures.

II. What are the main principles and contents underlying the formulation of these Measures?
The Measures conscientiously implement the directives and requirements of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council, draw on practical experience in credit management for tendering and bidding, and address key concerns of market entities by introducing targeted measures. The Measures comprise five chapters and 37 articles.
Chapter I: General Provisions, which sets forth the legislative objectives, legal basis, scope of application, fundamental principles, and division of responsibilities, among other matters.
Chapter II, on the Management of Public Credit Information, clarifies the scope of public credit information in the field of tendering and bidding, as well as the specific requirements for its collection, sharing, public disclosure, and access. It also sets forth provisions regarding penalties for dishonesty and mechanisms for credit restoration.
Chapter III, on the Administration of Public Credit Evaluation, sets forth the entities responsible for conducting public credit evaluations, the evaluation requirements, and the channels for lodging objections and appeals. It clarifies the methods and stages for applying evaluation results, prohibits local authorities from independently carrying out credit evaluations in the field of tendering and bidding, and mandates the ongoing review and rectification of any illegal or non-compliant practices in the conduct of public credit evaluations and in the application of their results.
Chapter IV, Liability, sets forth the legal liabilities that shall be borne by the tenderer, members of the bid evaluation committee, and relevant departments and entities for violations of the requirements pertaining to credit management.
Chapter V, Supplementary Provisions, sets forth specific categories of public credit information in the field of tendering and bidding, market-based credit evaluation, as well as provisions regarding the interpreting authority and the effective date.

III. What specific mechanisms does the Measures prescribe to strengthen the management of public credit information in the field of tendering and bidding?

The Measures set forth a series of requirements aimed at establishing and improving a comprehensive, end-to-end management mechanism for public credit information, thereby promoting its more effective utilization in tendering and bidding activities.
First, a catalog‑based management mechanism. This clarifies the scope and specific categories of public credit information in the field of tendering and bidding, sets requirements for establishing a nationally unified credit information catalog and data standards, and standardizes the criteria for recognizing credit information.
Second, the mechanism for collecting and sharing information. Specific provisions are set forth regarding the methods and time limits for collecting public credit information in the field of tendering and bidding, thereby promoting the comprehensive collection and shared use of such information.
Third, a centralized public disclosure mechanism. The “Credit China” website publishes public credit information in the field of tendering and bidding for procurers, bidders, and tendering agencies, while the National Public Resources Trading Platform website discloses administrative penalty information regarding evaluation experts whose evaluation qualifications have been revoked in accordance with the law, thereby strengthening social oversight.
Fourth, the mechanism for information inquiry. The regulations stipulate that, for projects required by law to undergo tendering, public credit information in the field of tendering and bidding must be consulted at each stage—such as commissioning an agency, selecting and appointing bid evaluation experts, conducting the evaluation, and determining the winning bidder—and that disciplinary measures shall be imposed, in accordance with the law, on tendering agencies, bid evaluation experts, and bidders found to have engaged in untrustworthy conduct.
Fifth, the grievance‑handling mechanism. It sets forth procedures for addressing appeals related to public credit information in the field of tendering and bidding, establishes a unified appeal channel, specifies time limits for processing such appeals, and safeguards the legitimate rights and interests of all parties involved in tendering and bidding.

IV. What provisions does the Measures make to strengthen credit-based constraints on entities participating in tendering and bidding?
The Measures focus on four categories of participants in the tendering and bidding process—tenderers, bidders, tendering agents, and evaluation experts—and specify, item by item, the concrete circumstances and methods for implementing credit-based constraints.
First, for tendering agencies, their credit standing shall serve as an important reference for procurers in selecting the most qualified agency. Tendering agencies found to have engaged in any of seven categories of serious breaches of trust—such as disclosing confidential information related to transactions, colluding in bidding, bribing evaluation experts, or being listed as a discredited person subject to enforcement—are prohibited from being entrusted with agency services.
Second, with respect to bid evaluation experts, the entities responsible for establishing the expert database are required to apply credit‑based management measures throughout the entire expert‑management process. At the stage of inclusion in the database, experts who have been subject to administrative penalties, such as having their bid‑evaluation qualifications revoked, or who fall into any of three other categories of serious untrustworthiness, shall not be appointed to the database. In routine management, credit assessments should be encouraged, and differentiated management measures should be implemented accordingly. Furthermore, experts who exhibit any of eight types of serious untrustworthiness—such as failing to recuse themselves when they should—shall be removed from the database and their cases shall be made public.
Third, with respect to bidders, entities that have been legally designated as seriously untrustworthy are restricted from participating in tendering and bidding activities. For bidders who fall into any of five categories of serious untrustworthiness—such as collusive bidding, fraudulent practices, refusal to perform contractual obligations, or being listed as a discredited person subject to enforcement—the evaluation committee is required by law to reject their bids, and the procuring entity may not designate them as the winning bidder.
Fourth, with respect to procurers, they shall be brought within the scope of public credit evaluations conducted by relevant departments under the State Council. Administrative supervisory authorities for tendering and bidding at all levels are required, based on the evaluation results, to adjust upward or downward the proportion of random inspections and the frequency of checks, and may also implement facilitative measures such as the notification‑and‑commitment system, thereby guiding and urging procurers to perform their duties in a standardized manner.

V. What provisions does the Measures make regarding public credit evaluation and the application of its results?
The Measures set forth specific requirements for standardizing public credit assessments and expanding their application scenarios, thereby further enhancing the use of public credit assessment outcomes in the field of tendering and bidding.
First, the implementing entities are strictly defined. The regulations stipulate that the State Council’s administrative supervisory authority for tendering and bidding shall establish unified public credit evaluation standards for each industry, and expressly prohibit local authorities from independently conducting credit evaluations in the field of tendering and bidding. This measure addresses at the source issues such as the fragmentation of credit evaluation systems and the use of credit assessments to impose local protectionism.
Second, a “negative list” for evaluation has been established. It specifies prohibited circumstances in the conduct of public credit assessments and in the application of their results, thereby preventing the use of such assessments or their outcomes to restrict or exclude potential bidders or bidders. With respect to the assessment process, it is explicitly stipulated that differentiated scoring based on region, ownership structure, size, or other factors is prohibited, nor may information—such as past performance or market share—that does not accurately reflect an enterprise’s creditworthiness be included in the scope of credit evaluation. As for the application of evaluation results, it is required that these results shall not be used as the sole criterion or assigned unreasonable weights, and that credit ratings of the same level shall not be treated differently across enterprises of varying regions, ownership structures, or sizes.
Third, we will strengthen the application of evaluation results. We will encourage the use of public credit evaluation outcomes in key processes such as setting bid‑evaluation and qualification‑review criteria, establishing mechanisms for paying performance bonds, verifying the履约 capabilities of shortlisted bidders, and issuing letters of guarantee or insurance policies. Furthermore, we will require administrative supervisory authorities at all levels responsible for tendering and bidding to implement differentiated regulatory measures based on these public credit evaluation results, thereby fostering a sound order in which those who uphold integrity are rewarded and those who breach trust face restrictions.

VI. What considerations and arrangements have been made to promote the implementation of the Measures?
The Measures will come into effect on January 1, 2027. To ensure their effective implementation, the National Development and Reform Commission, in coordination with relevant departments, will focus on the following three key areas of work.
First, strengthen publicity, interpretation, and implementation. Encourage all relevant departments to accurately grasp the requirements of the Measures, standardize the organization and conduct of public credit assessments, and make effective use of the resulting evaluation outcomes. Conduct outreach and provide clarifications on the Measures to enterprises and bid‑evaluation experts, guiding and urging all stakeholders to participate in tendering and bidding activities in compliance with the law and with integrity.
Second, we will improve the supporting institutional framework. We will develop a catalog of public credit information in the field of tendering and bidding to clearly define the scope of such information. We will also formulate nationwide unified data standards and strengthen the interconnection and data sharing among the credit information-sharing platform, the public resources trading platform, and the relevant business systems of administrative supervisory authorities for tendering and bidding, thereby enhancing the accuracy and standardization of public credit information management in this sector.
Third, strengthen dynamic monitoring. Continuously track the implementation of the Measures, conduct regular follow-up and oversight of public credit assessments and their practical applications, ensure smooth channels for enterprises and the general public to report concerns, promptly address and rectify prominent issues such as the use of credit ratings to covertly erect trade barriers, and safeguard a fair and competitive market order.