China’s legal landscape has undergone a significant transformation with the implementation of the Criminal Law Amendment (XI) and the latest judicial interpretation (2024), fundamentally altering the treatment of self-money laundering activities. Previously, the legal principle of ‘non-punishable after-the-fact conduct’ meant that criminals who concealed or spent their illicit proceeds were considered to be engaging in the natural continuation of their primary offense, rather than committing a separate money laundering crime. This traditional approach has been completely overturned by recent legislative changes. Under the new legal framework, individuals who handle their own criminal proceeds may now face independent money laundering charges in specific circumstances. This development means perpetrators can be convicted for both the primary offense (such as financial fraud) and the subsequent money laundering activities, resulting in cumulative punishment for multiple crimes. Legal practitioners identify the distinction between ‘self-money laundering’ and the ‘natural continuation’ of primary criminal activities as a critical challenge in defense strategies. The fundamental differentiator lies in whether the disposal of illicit funds extends beyond the natural scope of the original crime and infringes upon additional legal interests, particularly national financial management秩序 and judicial asset recovery efforts. The core determinant for self-money laundering charges is the perpetrator’s subjective intent to conceal or disguise the nature, source, or ownership of criminal proceeds. High-risk behaviors include transferring funds to accounts of relatives or friends, conducting complex transactions through virtual assets, utilizing underground banking systems for currency exchange, or transferring money to corporate accounts without substantive business relationships. Conversely, lower-risk activities generally include depositing illicit funds into personal fixed-term accounts, using proceeds for ordinary daily expenses, or transferring money between personal bank accounts directly. For corporate entities, risk mitigation requires establishing comprehensive compliance awareness and preventive measures. Companies should develop robust internal anti-money laundering cultures, implement thorough policies and procedures, conduct enhanced customer due diligence, and establish specialized monitoring mechanisms for high-risk operations involving virtual assets, third-party payments, and large cross-border transactions. Individuals should avoid handling funds of unknown origin and ensure all financial transactions appear natural and reasonable. Critical precautions include refraining from using others’ accounts for financial activities, preventing transactions that significantly deviate from normal income and spending patterns, and exercising caution with cash handling to avoid concealing fund flows through dispersed deposits or frequent transfers. The new regulations represent three fundamental shifts in China’s legal approach: significantly enhanced enforcement力度 through dual punishment mechanisms, transformed enforcement strategies requiring simultaneous investigation of primary offenses and money laundering activities, and alignment with international anti-money laundering standards through independent criminalization of self-money laundering. Legal experts emphasize that the criminalization of self-money laundering represents an irreversible trend in China’s legal evolution, necessitating heightened vigilance from both individuals and corporations. For defense attorneys, this development creates a new battleground in criminal defense, requiring deep understanding of judicial boundaries regarding ‘independent legal interest infringement’ to effectively protect clients’ rights in cases involving multiple charges.
