2025-12-18 07:16:34

The latest spat between Beijing and Brussels is heating up over the EU's Foreign Subsidy Regulation (FSR) investigation. China's official stance? The rules are way too broad and casting an unfairly wide net.

Here's the thing: the FSR was designed to level the playing field in EU markets, but critics—including Chinese officials—argue it's become a catch-all mechanism that doesn't account for how different markets actually operate. The complaint centers on how "foreign subsidy" gets defined. Is it government funding? Favorable loans? Tax breaks? The boundaries are fuzzy, and that ambiguity is exactly what Beijing is calling out.

From a geopolitical angle, this isn't just about trade—it touches on how financial markets, tech investments, and capital flows across borders get regulated. If the rules are interpreted too loosely, it could reshape investment patterns and compliance requirements for companies operating in multiple jurisdictions.

What's interesting is that this kind of regulatory friction tends to ripple outward. Stricter subsidy definitions in one region often influence how other markets shape their own frameworks. Whether you're watching traditional finance or following the crypto and DeFi space, regulatory clarity matters. Ambiguous rules create compliance headaches and market uncertainty.

The EU maintains its FSR is proportionate and necessary. China clearly disagrees. Expect this debate to drag on while both sides posture and negotiate.

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

13 Likes

Reward
13
8
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

GateUser-c799715c

· 2025-12-21 07:12

It's just a blame game again, and FSR really can't figure out the rules clearly. In a world where everyone wants to make money, is it really that difficult to establish rules? In any case, no one will escape in the end, just wait for the compliance costs to skyrocket. Ah, this... vague definitions deserve criticism, no wonder Beijing is unhappy. Hey, you see, this is just like the wild growth of DeFi, everyone wants to regulate but can't manage it well. The big-eyed EU has also started to play "my rules go". Regulatory fights, retail investors suffer, it's the same every year.

View OriginalReply0

BlockTalk

· 2025-12-21 02:14

Is this another set? The EU's regulations are so vague, no wonder China is complaining. --- FSR is just a basket that holds everything; I really don't know how it can be compliant. --- Basically, it's a power struggle—whoever defines wins. --- This kind of regulatory friction is the most annoying, especially for DeFi. --- It's just great power games, and underlying users are the ones getting exploited. --- Vague definitions = a tool for legal money-making, has been around since ancient times. --- I really can't understand the EU's logic; broad rules will only scare away investors. --- Haha, it's that same pretext of "market fairness." --- This issue, like crypto regulation, ultimately hurts us. --- Beijing is right this time; who dares to act when the rules are unclear?

View OriginalReply0

MainnetDelayedAgain

· 2025-12-20 21:13

According to the database, it has been n months since the last clarification of this Jingbu dispute, and the project team's pie-in-the-sky plans are still fermenting. As for the ambiguity of the rules, it will ultimately lead to the realization of the twin brother of that phrase—delayed scheduling.

View OriginalReply0

StealthMoon

· 2025-12-18 07:46

FSR this set of tools is really just the EU passing the buck, with vague definitions that anyone can interpret. And they still want to regulate global investments? Chaos everywhere, great opportunities brothers. If the rules change, chaos ensues. The crypto circle fears this set the most, it's just bearish hype. China is right, the broad definition is a disguised form of sanctions, openly bullying people. Investors are really having a hard time now, compliance costs are also going to rise... By the way, if this really gets stuck, cross-chain arbitrage opportunities will come again hh. The EU's set will eventually backfire on itself, lifting a rock only to hit its own foot.

View OriginalReply0

WalletDetective

· 2025-12-18 07:46

To be honest, this FSR is just the EU wanting to set rules, and then they can put whatever they want into it. Vague definitions = arbitrary crackdown. I've seen this trick too many times. Wait, will this also affect on-chain fund flows?

View OriginalReply0

StakeTillRetire

· 2025-12-18 07:45

Here we go again with this routine, blaming others for vague definitions. This game is so old-fashioned.

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeCrier

· 2025-12-18 07:41

FSR's set of rules is indeed a bit confusing, with vague definitions making everyone uncomfortable... The crypto community has long been accustomed to this kind of policy uncertainty; the more complex the anti-regulation rules, the easier it is to find loopholes. Frankly, the China-Europe issue is still a matter of利益博弈 (interest game), all serving their own capital. Unclear rules are the biggest risk; DeFi is already difficult enough to navigate. In the end, this kind of regulatory friction will still be paid for by us small retail investors.

View OriginalReply0

not_your_keys

· 2025-12-18 07:24

Hmm... it's the same old trick again. As long as the definition is vague, anything can be stuffed in. Who exactly has the final say?

View OriginalReply0