Suzhou Bank Hit with Record ¥7.21 M Fine for 11 Network and Data Security Violations

Penalty Core Information

On June 18, 2026, the People's Bank of China Jiangsu Branch published administrative penalty decision No. 苏银罚决字〔2026〕19‑21. Suzhou Bank Co., Ltd. was warned, publicly criticized, had illegal gains of approximately ¥399,480.86 confiscated, and was fined ¥7,210,200, bringing total penalties to ¥7,609,680.86.

11 Major Violations

Violation of network security management regulations

Violation of data security management regulations

Violation of credit information collection, provision, inquiry and related management regulations

Failure to conduct customer due‑diligence (anti‑money‑laundering)

Failure to retain customer identity information and transaction records (anti‑money‑laundering)

Failure to report suspicious transactions (anti‑money‑laundering)

Violation of account management regulations

Violation of acquiring (merchant) management regulations

Violation of RMB circulation management regulations

Violation of anti‑counterfeit currency business management regulations

Improperly occupying fiscal deposits or funds

Individual Accountability – "Dual‑Penalty" System

Two directly responsible individuals were also penalized:

Wu (吴某) , from Suzhou Bank Yuexi Branch, held responsible for violating anti‑counterfeit currency business regulations; warned and fined ¥65,000 (Decision No. 苏银罚决字〔2026〕20号).

Lu (陆某) , from Suzhou Bank Network Finance Department, held responsible for violating acquiring management regulations; warned and fined ¥50,000 (Decision No. 苏银罚决字〔2026〕21号).

Compliance Observation – The “Gap” Under Tight Supervision

The ¥7.21 million fine sets a record for Suzhou Bank since its establishment in September 2010 and ranks among the highest penalties for recent Chinese city‑commercial banks. Although the bank has achieved full coverage of branches across Jiangsu and rapidly expanded its business, multiple compliance lines—especially network and data security—exposed significant weaknesses.

Ironically, Suzhou Bank’s 2025 Sustainable Development Report shows a seemingly robust data‑security governance framework:

Top‑level design: Board assumes overall responsibility; Data Governance Committee implements policies; Party secretary serves as chief network‑security officer; a dedicated “Network Security Officer” is appointed.

Execution and supervision: Big‑data Management Department centralizes oversight; Information Technology Department handles technical protection; Legal‑Compliance and Audit Department supervise compliance.

Compliance actions: In 2025 the bank conducted risk self‑assessment of eleven systems against national standard GB/T 45577‑2025 (Data Security Technical – Data Security Risk Assessment Method) and planned remediation for 2026.

Despite these declared measures, the regulator’s heavy‑handed enforcement of eleven violations demonstrates a substantial “implementation‑to‑policy” gap in many financial institutions.

Conclusion

As a data‑intensive sector, the financial industry is entering an era of stringent network and data‑security regulation. Suzhou Bank’s record fine underscores that compliance cannot remain a paper exercise or periodic assessment; translating governance into continuous, technology‑driven risk control is now a mandatory challenge for all mid‑size Chinese banks undergoing digital transformation.