Central bank digital currency (CBDC) is generally defined as the digital form of a country’s fiat currency. Based on the distributed ledger technology and other financial technology, CBDC could improve the efficiency of domestic and cross-border payments, increase payment safety and soundness, and promote financial inclusion. However, it is argued that the introduction of CBDC would threaten data security and invade personal privacy. Currently, this issue has received growing concern, and some recommendations are proposed by countries or international organizations, like privacy design, restrictions on public authorities and payment intermediaries, and establishing independent supervisory authority. Other suggestions include getting countries involved in international coordination and promoting the formation of unified standards. Among major economies, China is the first to launch CBDC, which is known as e-CNY. Based on an overview of the privacy protection legislation in China, this article attempts to describe the rules that should be followed when dealing with personal data generated in e-CNY circulation.

The investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system is such a means to an end of further economic development and wider social political goals. With major protective provisions of expropriation against compensation, fair and equitable treatment, national treatment, most-favored-nation treatment, full protection and security and umbrella clause, it helps establish a predictable, transparent, and enforceable legal regime to protect foreign investors’ legitimate expectations and lawful investment. As China intends to attract foreign investments by offering a stable business operation environment, its signing a large number of BITs and FTAs may help reduce political and socio-economic risks, which give states, businesses, and individuals the confidence to work in a coordinated manner. The economic development goal, rule of law strategy, tense US-China relations, ideology of multilateralism and community of common destiny, all add up to China’s inclination to incremental but effective ISDS reform.

On December 27, 2017, the 31st session of the Standing Committee of the 12th National People’s Congress passed the Vessel Tonnage Tax Law of the People’s Republic of China. China’s Vessel Tonnage Tax Law has basically maintained the stability of the vessel tonnage tax collection system and accorded with the basic national conditions of China’s shipping industry. The system established by China’s Vessel Tonnage Tax Law is basically a traditional vessel tonnage tax system, which is different from those implemented by many other countries. This paper explores the reason why China chooses to implement the vessel tonnage tax system and evaluates the policy within a certain scope and from a certain angle. It also examines the shortcomings of China’s vessel tonnage tax system as well as the burden brought by it to the shipping enterprises and puts forward countermeasures and suggestions for reforming and perfecting the vessel tonnage tax system in China.

On February 26, 2016, PRC Law on the Exploration and Development of Resources in Deep Seabed Areas was adopted. As a landmark marine legislation, this law was formulated in line with the UNCLOS, the Rules of the International Seabed Authority, and the PRC Constitution. It opened a brand new era of marine development and utilization for China under the strategic background of maritime power. Facing the limitation and challenges about the ecosystem and risk prevention brought about by the UNCLOS and the Convention on Biological Diversity 1992, the maritime powers around the world, including China, have been making domestic legislation on the exploitation and protection of seabed resources beyond national jurisdiction. This paper introduces China’s policy for the exploitation and development of the ‘Areas’ in accordance with the UNCLOS, and makes a further interpretation on China’s related domestic legislations and practice.

Since its founding in 1949, the People’s Republic of China has acceded to more than 300 multilateral treaties. Among them, China made reservations to 83 treaties, accounting for nearly 27.7 percent of the total. Evidently, for China, formulating reservations to multilateral treaties is an issue of vital importance in the process of concluding and executing multilateral treaties. This paper examines the three main reasons why China inclines to formulate reservations to the treaties, then argues that the reservations formulated by China, whether in procedure or in substance, are not only in full conformity with the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, but also full of Chinese characteristics. This paper also analyzes several specific reservations that China shall withdraw, and addresses the limitations of China’s existing treaty reservation system. Accordingly, this paper concludes that the Chinese government should improve and perfect its treaty reservation system with some suggestions.