Private investigation is not a licensed, regulated profession in mainland China the way it is in the United States, Canada, or many other countries. A 1993 Ministry of Public Security directive kept detective agencies from registering as a recognized business category through China’s Industry and Commerce Bureau, and Chinese legal commentators have described the resulting situation as an unresolved gray zone: formal evidence gathering investigations are, in principle, reserved to state authorities.
This is not just a technicality. A widely reported 2014 case in Shanghai resulted in prison sentences for two corporate investigators, a British national and his Chinese American wife, who were convicted of illegally obtaining personal data on Chinese citizens, including household registration records, property documents, and phone records, in the course of a corporate investigation. It is a concrete illustration of why work connected to mainland China has to be scoped conservatively.
Recording a conversation is not clearly one party consent the way it is in some other countries. Chinese courts have become more willing to admit secretly made recordings as evidence in recent years, but China’s Civil Code, in force since 2021, separately protects personal privacy under Article 1032, so recording someone without their knowledge can still expose the person doing the recording to a privacy claim.
China’s Personal Information Protection Law (PIPL), in force since November 2021, is a comprehensive data protection law, and its enforcement has continued to intensify, including new cross border data transfer certification rules that took effect January 2026. This is the legal backdrop that shapes what any investigation connected to mainland China can actually involve.