**Chinese Beverage Giant Wahaha Founder’s Family Inheritance Dispute Sparks Public Controversy**
China’s beverage giant, Wahaha Group, founded by the late Zong Qinghou, has been embroiled in a family inheritance dispute a year and a half after his passing, drawing public attention. Zong was known for his humble demeanor, earning the reputation of “one wife, one daughter, one pair of cloth shoes.” However, the sudden revelation of three illegitimate children to the public shattered this image.
This cross-border lawsuit involving around $4.7 billion has not only exposed Zong’s little-known family relationships but also raised widespread doubts about his role as a member of the National People’s Congress of China and a so-called “patriotic entrepreneur”.
In July 2025, Zong’s “only daughter,” Wahaha’s current chairman Zong Fuli, was sued in Hong Kong and Hangzhou by three plaintiffs who claim to be “half-siblings from the same father.” Prior to this, Zong Fuli had been publicly regarded as Zong Qinghou’s only child. She was born in January 1982 in Hangzhou, Zhejiang, and has been with Wahaha Group since 2004.
According to Caijing magazine, court documents reveal that the three plaintiffs requested a freeze on assets totaling $1.8 billion in Zong Fuli’s Hong Kong HSBC account under Jian Hao Ventures Ltd. and sought to claim the promised trust rights of $700 million each from Zong Qinghou’s pre-death commitment. Furthermore, the three individuals also sought a division of Zong Qinghou’s 29.4% stake in Wahaha Group, valued at over 20 billion Chinese yuan.
One of the key points of this lawsuit is the identification of the three plaintiffs. The plaintiffs’ lawyers claimed that in the 1990s, Zong Qinghou had three children with the former Wahaha executive Du Jianying, namely Zong Jichang, Zong Jieli, and Zong Jisheng, all of whom are American citizens. Birth certificates and other documents have been submitted to the court, and an application has been made to retrieve Zong Qinghou’s blood sample from the First Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine in 2023 for DNA comparison. If the blood relationship is confirmed, non-marital children are entitled to equal inheritance rights under Article 1071 of the People’s Republic of China Civil Code.
As per the court documents, the plaintiffs claimed that Zong Qinghou instructed the financial team to establish an offshore trust in HSBC Hong Kong in 2003, promising to reserve $700 million for each of the three illegitimate children, sourced from Wahaha Group’s future dividends. However, as of early 2024, the account balance was only $1.8 billion, falling short by $300 million, and $1.1 million was transferred out in May 2024. The plaintiffs accused Zong Fuli of improperly disposing of trust assets and sought a court injunction.
On the other hand, Zong Fuli’s side presented a will signed by Zong Qinghou in 2020, explicitly stating, “All my overseas assets shall be inherited by my only daughter Zong Fuli, and other children shall not claim any rights.”
Zong Fuli’s legal team questioned the validity of the evidence presented by the plaintiffs, stating that she had not received any instructions from her father and emphasizing that even if a parent-child relationship is established, the effectiveness of the 2020 will may take precedence over statutory inheritance laws.
Caijing magazine cited a senior lawyer in the wealth inheritance field, stating, “In the inheritance disputes of illegitimate children, paternity determination is a key factor. However, if the will is valid and does not violate the mandatory inheritance quota, the statutory inheritance rights of illegitimate children may be excluded.”
Moreover, there is a significant divergence in the characterization of this offshore asset between the two parties. The plaintiffs insist that the trust assets belong to the three children, while Zong Fuli argues that the HSBC account funds are actually reserves for Wahaha Group’s expansion in Southeast Asian markets, providing contracts and invoices to demonstrate that $1.1 million was used to pay the final installment for equipment at a Vietnamese factory.
In other words, Zong Fuli claims that this money belongs to the company for operational purposes rather than being part of the family’s trust estate. If proven true, this assertion undoubtedly further blurs the boundary between family wealth and business assets: whether a sum of money is the personal wealth left by a father to his children or part of a company’s overseas business budget, the distinct differences in nature make legal classification more complex.
Public records show that Zong Qinghou, the founder of Wahaha Group, a member of the Communist Party of China, served as the chairman of the Hangzhou Wahaha Group from 1991 until his death in February 2024. He ranked as China’s richest individual on the Hurun Rich List in 2010, 2012, and 2013 and was placed fifth in 2016 with a wealth of 112 billion yuan.
This family inheritance turmoil has exposed the lesser-known personal life of Zong Qinghou, revealing another side of him to the public. Zong Qinghou, known as the “cloth shoe tycoon” in the eyes of the Chinese people, renowned for his simple lifestyle and patriotic sentiments, had been portrayed by the media.
In the public eye, this “cloth shoe tycoon” was said to spend no more than 50,000 yuan on personal expenses annually, have an office space of less than 50 square meters, and was often described in many articles as an exemplary entrepreneur with “no gossip throughout his life”.
However, the emergence of his three illegitimate children and the exposure of the $1.8 billion offshore trust have shattered this public image, showing that this entrepreneur who rose from grassroots is not as perfect as rumored, and he too has his share of human desires and life troubles. This has prompted profound reflections from the public on the credibility and transparency of National People’s Congress representatives of the Communist Party.
On social media X, a user named Baoshu (@baoshu88) posted, “The image of Zong Qinghou in the eyes of the Chinese people: always wears inexpensive cloth shoes, even flies economy class after turning 70, a model laborer, a patriotic entrepreneur, devoted to his ex-wife, with only one daughter. The real Zong Qinghou: having three mistresses concurrently so that three illegitimate children are all American citizens, had a son at the age of 73, $1.8 billion in assets has been transferred overseas.”
According to reports by Ifeng Finance, Liu Yang, who has had dealings with the Zong family for many years, revealed that in 2018, a family history was compiled for Zong Qinghou’s deceased father, confirming that Zong Qinghou had six children besides Zong Fuli. Among them, Zong Jichang (Jacky Zong, born in 1996), Zong Jieli (Jessie Zong, born in 1998), and Zong Jisheng (Jerry Zong) are confirmed to be from the veteran of Wahaha, Du Jianying. There are discrepancies regarding Zong Jisheng’s birth year, and the exact year is currently unknown.
Liu Yang mentioned that before Du Jianying, Zong Qinghou had a daughter with an employee who later settled in the United States. It was rumored that a child was born in 2017 with another young employee as the mother. Additionally, there is an unrevealed child.
However, a report by Sina Finance on July 17 quoted a statement from Zong Qinghou’s brother, Zong Zehou, saying that apart from Du Jianying’s three children, there are no undisclosed other children of Zong Qinghou, and the online rumors are false. Zong Zehou also posted a family tree screenshot in response to the online articles, stating that only Du’s three children exist, questioning why, if there were others, they have not come forward to claim the inheritance.
This inheritance battle not only concerns the distribution of the Zong family’s wealth but also has the potential to reshape Wahaha’s ownership structure and market confidence.
As the founder and key figure of Wahaha Group, Zong Qinghou’s frugal nature and perspective on wealth have been an important emotional connection for the public, fostering goodwill and trust towards Wahaha. This unprecedented hit to his personal image may have a lasting impact on Wahaha’s brand reputation, posing a potential threat to its operational stability, especially amidst the fierce market competition with competitors like Nongfu Spring.
According to a survey by the National Business Federation Beverage Industry Association, since July 2025, three provincial-level distributors have temporarily ceased purchases due to concerns about “changes in equity affecting supply stability.” Additionally, Wahaha has closed 18 subsidiaries in recent years, with five of them having connections to Du Jianying’s children, further intensifying the tension between the family and the business.
This inheritance dispute also reflects the common issues in wealth succession among privately-owned enterprises in China. Caijing magazine’s analysis suggests that Zong Qinghou’s estate storm has exposed the shortcomings in the inheritance planning of a generation of Chinese entrepreneurs. Zong Qinghou failed to place his 29.4% stake in Wahaha Group into a family trust or nominee arrangement before his passing, resulting in his estate entering into statutory inheritance procedures posthumously, heightening the risks of dispersed control.
Zhu Zhaoyi, deputy researcher at the Peking University HSBC Business School Think Tank, wrote, “In traditional Chinese views, illegitimate children have long been a taboo subject. Some entrepreneurs, out of face-saving or family harmony, tend to conceal the existence of the ‘junior generation’ during their lifetime, hoping to balance through private compensation. However, the law does not recognize so-called ‘private promises’ but instead requires that identity relationships and property rights in inheritance be openly confirmed. Zong Qinghou may have believed he could play the role of a feudal patriarch, with his daughter overtly inheriting the business while secretly allowing his illegitimate children to enjoy wealth behind the scenes. However, when he suddenly passed away, these arrangements not disclosed in legal documents instantly became invalid, and subsequent generations can only settle interpersonal accounts in court, leaving the icy law to judge.”