Regarding the Chinese labels on cross-border imported food, from a legal perspective, the “import” in the legal provisions includes any form of import, so cross-border e-commerce imports and general trade imports are subject to the same laws and regulations; from the perspective of cross-border e-commerce policy documents, cross-border e-commerce is a new type of trade different from general trade, and the regulatory requirements are completely different from those of general trade. That is, a can of Aptamil milk powder without a Chinese label is imported through cross-border e-commerce (bonded import or overseas direct mail), which is compliant in the eyes of customs, commodity inspection and other regulatory departments, but in the eyes of judges, it is illegal.
From the perspective of effectiveness, laws are higher than administrative regulations. Moreover, the current policy documents on cross-border e-commerce issued by various departments are only “administrative regulations”, which are less effective than administrative regulations. Therefore, the various policies and regulations on encouraging cross-border e-commerce and the rules and regulations of pilot cities (especially inspection and quarantine-related policies and systems) formulated in recent years are mostly illegal to the Food Safety Law and other laws. This is undoubtedly bad news for the cross-border e-commerce industry.
So, how to resolve this contradiction? If we want to ensure that cross-border e-commerce can continue to develop, there may be two ways: one is judicial interpretation; the other is to amend the law. Amending the law needs to be passed by the National People’s Congress, which is particularly time-consuming, so “judicial interpretation” is a better way to resolve this contradiction. The Supreme People’s Court will interpret the “import” in the relevant laws to distinguish between general trade imports and cross-border e-commerce imports. After all, according to the original intention of the legislation at the time, “import” actually refers to general trade imports.
It is gratifying that the judicial department has noticed this problem. With the replacement of the old with the new, the law is often “slower” than commercial activities. Economic development, in many cases, comes from commercial innovation. The continued lack of laws will not only hinder economic development, but may also stifle commercial innovation. We look forward to the timely follow-up of relevant laws to avoid the embarrassment of cross-border e-commerce being compliant but illegal.