Following the nationwide crackdown on electric bikes by the Chinese Communist Party, it seems that ride-hailing cars are becoming another major target.
Various sources indicate that the Beijing Transportation Administration is conducting a thorough inspection of ride-hailing cars throughout the city, under the pretext of combating “illegal operations,” imposing penalties such as vehicle confiscation and fines on drivers. Lawyers believe that the government’s vehicle confiscation is illegal and infringes on the employment rights of the people.
Recently, a netizen known as “Xiao Qiang” posted a screenshot showing the administrative enforcement decision issued by the Beijing Municipal Transportation Commission’s comprehensive law enforcement team. The decision stated that the individual did not possess a “transportation certificate” for ride-hailing cars, and had engaged in “unauthorized ride-hailing operations,” resulting in a 30-day vehicle confiscation. The vehicle was impounded at the parking lot of Hongxing Property.
In the punishment document, the address column of the individual did not list their residential address in Beijing but instead their hometown address.
This news sparked heated discussions online. Netizens commented, “In Beijing, ride-hailing cars simply cannot obtain operating permits. Over 90% of cars do not have permits. They’re just waiting to catch everyone.” “They treat us like machines that only exist to make money.”
Xiao Qiang recently told a reporter that his car was confiscated by the transportation authority. He had dropped off a passenger at Chaoyang District Shilihe Metro Station, and as he was about to leave after the passenger exited, a group of people came and blocked his car. Initially reluctant to get out of the car, he was informed that resistance would only lead to more trouble and more severe penalties. Reluctantly, he complied and his car was taken to the impound lot. He was issued a fine and the vehicle was impounded for unauthorized operation.
The next morning, when Xiao Qiang went to the enforcement team to pay the fine, he noticed that everyone entering had to register, and there were already many people in the process.
“They just want money. I was fined 4,500 yuan, and an additional 60 yuan as ‘illegal gains’ that was confiscated. They handed me some blank documents and asked me to get them stamped at the rental company, provide written materials, and when I did everything they asked for, they didn’t even bother looking at them. They didn’t need any of it,” Xiao Qiang said.
He also questioned, “If it’s illegal, why don’t they penalize the rental companies or the platforms? Why target the drivers?” But he was threatened that if he didn’t comply, the penalties would increase.
Xiao Qiang believes, “The government deliberately keeps these vehicles in an illegal state so they can impose penalties whenever they want. They might not penalize you all the time, but when they feel like it, they have the ‘legal basis’ to do so.”
Since 2016, various local governments have issued regulations for ride-hailing management, requiring ride-hailing platforms to obtain operating permits, drivers to obtain driver certificates, and vehicles to obtain transportation permits for ride-hailing.
In December 2016, multiple departments in Beijing jointly issued the “Implementation Rules for the Management of Network Booking Taxi Business Services in Beijing.” Among the requirements for ride-hailing drivers, the first condition is to have a “Beijing household registration.”
“To operate a ride-hailing car in Beijing, you must be locally registered in Beijing, so us out-of-towners can’t get driver or vehicle permits. If they catch you, tough luck for you. But they don’t check continuously, just at certain locations, mainly in the morning,” Xiao Qiang explained.
This led to a game of cat and mouse between ride-hailing drivers and the transportation authority.
Within the industry, there was widespread sharing of information about where inspections were taking place. A message about Beijing’s strict vehicle confiscation activities warned drivers to pay attention and listed multiple inspection locations starting from 8 a.m., covering areas from the North Gate of the Forbidden City, Guomao Bridge, Zizhuyuan, Jianguomen to Daxing Airport, with some locations conducting checks around the clock, reminding drivers to drop off passengers at least 50 meters ahead.
Xiao Qiang also shared that after his car was inspected, he tried to plead with the authorities not to penalize him, citing his financial obligations such as mortgage and credit card debts. However, he was told, “Yesterday, I caught a woman who owes over 700,000 yuan on her credit card. Shouldn’t she be fined? With so many cases, we can’t show leniency to just one person.”
Amid an economic downturn and increased unemployment, more individuals are entering the ride-hailing industry. A report on the “Survival Status of Chinese Ride-hailing Drivers” showed that following the pandemic, many young people unable to find work, laid-off white-collar workers, and bankrupt sole proprietors have turned to ride-hailing, resulting in a rapid increase in the number of drivers.
To secure market share, major platforms have been reducing order prices. For instance, in Hefei, many drivers operate for 12 hours a day but struggle to earn over 300 yuan, sometimes not even reaching 200 yuan, whereas before 2018, they could earn between 360 to 420 yuan for the same hours.
Xiao Qiang mentioned that since September, the off-peak season has begun, and prices have dropped significantly across platforms. “The government doesn’t provide guidance on pricing; platforms do as they please. Some platforms now even have special prices as low as 1.1 or 1.2 yuan per kilometer, whereas previously during off-peak hours, the rate was at least 1.5 or 1.6 yuan per kilometer.”
He also highlighted how rental companies and platforms have various schemes to deduct drivers’ earnings. “According to regulations, platforms can’t take more than 29% of the earnings, but they always find ways to take more. For example, if a passenger books through DiDi, but the order is redirected to another platform, DiDi takes 29%, and the other platform takes additional fees. If a passenger pays 100 yuan, the driver might only receive 60 yuan, with 40% being deducted.”
Former Beijing lawyer Zhang Ren, in an interview with Da Ji Yuan, stated that ride-hailing is a profession, operating as a means of livelihood, and should be subject to administrative management guided by legal grounds. Prohibited activities must be clearly stated in the law.
He explained that administrative actions differ from civil actions. In civil matters, if not prohibited by law, one can engage in the activity; whereas in administrative actions, only what is allowed by law can be done, and what is not explicitly allowed cannot be done.
Furthermore, legislative laws have clear stipulations that heavier penalties can only be enforced by State Council administrative regulations and laws passed by provincial-level people’s congresses, such as local regulations. Local governments below provincial level do not have legislative authority.
“For instance, regarding penalties for ride-hailing, it must be based on regulations from the State Council or the Beijing Municipal People’s Congress. The Beijing Municipal Transportation Commission doesn’t have this authority; the law doesn’t empower them to impose heavy penalties. They can only issue warnings, fines, or confiscate vehicles, which are considered more severe actions,” he remarked.
The combination of economic downturn and malicious fines has led to a continued deterioration in the survival conditions of ride-hailing drivers. Xiao Qiang also believes that these vehicle inspections and fines are not legal and wants to uphold his rights. However, he is aware of the difficulties in seeking justice and recalls past efforts that failed to bring about change.
Zhang Ren understands these challenges, acknowledging that employment discrimination is prevalent and illegal, allowing for administrative review or litigation at the local level within two years, though some courts find various excuses to reject cases.
“When I was in Beijing, contributing to the city, it’s my right to have equal access to education, employment, as outlined in the Constitution. All government departments must not violate the Constitution in practice. It’s a systemic issue; although China has a Constitution, there’s no accountability for violating it, rendering it almost meaningless,” Zhang Ren concluded.