On October 10, the Zhejiang Regulatory Bureau of the National Financial Regulatory Administration published an administrative penalty disclosure form.

Among the entries, Sunshine Property & Casualty Insurance Co., Ltd. Zhejiang Branch was fined 900,000 yuan for failing to use insurance clauses and premium rates that had been approved or filed in accordance with regulations, while Ye Sheng was given a warning and fined 150,000 yuan.

In terms of the regulatory basis, the failure to use approved or filed insurance clauses and premium rates corresponds to Article 170, Item (3) of the Insurance Law of the People's Republic of China, which sets an institutional fine range of more than 100,000 yuan but no more than 500,000 yuan. In serious circumstances, an insurer may have its business scope restricted, be ordered to stop accepting new business, or have its business license revoked. Article 171 of the same law provides that directly responsible managers and other directly responsible personnel shall be given a warning and fined more than 10,000 yuan but no more than 100,000 yuan, and in serious cases their qualifications for office shall be revoked.

Comparing these two ranges with the penalties in this case, both the 900,000 yuan and the 150,000 yuan amounts exceed the upper limits set by the corresponding provisions for a single illegal act. The disclosure form did not itemize the specific facts of the violations and the amount of each individual fine, so the actual composition of the 900,000 yuan and 150,000 yuan penalties still needs to be confirmed by the penalty decision document.

It should be noted that this is not the first time the Zhejiang Branch of Sunshine P&C has been penalized on this issue. An administrative penalty disclosure form published by the Zhejiang Regulatory Bureau of the National Financial Regulatory Administration on September 25, 2025 showed that the Zhejiang Branch of Sunshine P&C was fined 400,000 yuan for failing to use approved or filed insurance clauses and premium rates, while Xu Zongkang was given a warning and fined 70,000 yuan. In the same batch of disclosures, the Taizhou Central Sub-branch and Hangzhou Central Sub-branch of Sunshine P&C were also fined 130,000 yuan each for using insurance agents to fabricate insurance intermediary business to extract commissions, with individual fines for responsible persons totaling 150,000 yuan.

Public information shows that Sunshine P&C was established in July 2005, is registered in Beijing, and is a nationwide insurance company mainly engaged in property insurance business. Its shareholders are Sunshine Insurance Group Company Limited and Sunshine Life Insurance Co., Ltd., with shareholding ratios of 96.31% and 3.69%, respectively.

In terms of operations, the 2026 interim report of Sunshine Insurance Group showed that Sunshine P&C achieved original insurance premium income of 23.62 billion yuan in the first half of 2026, down 6.5% year on year. The company explained that this was mainly affected by the halt in new financing-type guarantee insurance business. In the same period, net profit was 800 million yuan, up 55.1% year on year, the combined underwriting cost ratio was 98.7%, and underwriting profit was 310 million yuan.

According to a tracking rating announcement released by Dagong Global in December 2025, the company's original insurance premium income in 2025 was 47.888 billion yuan. Because it made reserves for financing-type guarantee insurance based on the principle of prudence, its combined cost ratio for the period rose to 102.1%, resulting in an underwriting loss and a year-on-year decline in net profit.

In terms of solvency, according to the 2026 interim report of Sunshine Insurance Group, as of June 30, 2026, Sunshine P&C's core solvency adequacy ratio was 171% and its comprehensive solvency adequacy ratio was 241%, far above the regulatory requirements of 50% and 100%. At the end of the same period, Sunshine Insurance Group's core and comprehensive solvency adequacy ratios were 132% and 185%, respectively.

Overall, this penalty has not affected the company's solvency indicators at the company level, but for the Zhejiang Branch, being penalized again about a year later and with a higher amount remains an issue it must face squarely in the implementation of clause and rate requirements.