China News Service, December 26. According to the website of the State Administration for Market Regulation, the State Administration for Market Regulation announced on the 26th a typical case of special governance of corporate charges in the transportation sector in 2021.

details as follows:

Some airport violations of charges

　　In recent years, the state has continued to promote the reform of the price charging mechanism in the civil aviation sector, insisting on the combination of market decision and deregulation. The current airport sector charges have initially formed a management system that combines government-guided prices and market-adjusted prices.

The aeronautical business charging items and important non-aeronautical business charging items collected by the airport from the airlines shall be determined and adjusted by the competent government department, and the connotation of the charging items shall be clarified.

In practice, some airport operators do not abide by the relevant charging policies, which increases the burden on airlines and airport customers.

Case 1: Beijing Capital International Airport Co., Ltd. repeatedly charges bridge-borne equipment operating fees

　　From January 2019 to December 2020, the parties concerned provided airlines with bridge-mounted equipment services. In addition to charging power unit fees and air-conditioning unit fees according to regulations, they also charge 100 yuan/time for air-conditioning power operations for bridge-mounted equipment A total of 27,901,900 yuan was collected.

　　At present, the parties concerned have refunded all overcharges of RMB 27,901,900.

In addition, a deposit of 12.05 million yuan was returned to reduce the cash flow burden of airport customers.

Case 2: China National Aviation Fuel Co., Ltd. Xi’an Branch’s self-supported project charges fuel storage fees, transportation fees, and quality inspection fees

　　In the process of selling aviation fuel, the parties involved self-supported charging items in addition to the stipulated aviation kerosene import and sales price difference, according to the standard of 30 yuan/ton·day, the standard of 750 yuan/time, the standard of 750 yuan/time, the standard of 3,000 yuan/ A quality inspection fee is charged for the second standard.

From January 2019 to May 2020, a total of 653,700 yuan was collected.

　　The party’s behavior violated Article 12 of the Price Law, and the market supervision department has filed a case for investigation.

Some railway companies charge illegal fees

　　Taking into account the characteristics of the development stage of my country's railway transportation industry and the price formation mechanism, the National Railway Group implements list management for some of the railway transportation and miscellaneous fees regulated by the market, and clarifies the connotation of the charging items.

At the same time, it has clearly ordered the abolition of some charging items to reduce the cost of railway transportation for enterprises.

However, some railway operators use methods such as splitting and packing to circumvent policy regulations, exceeding standard fees, or continue to charge canceled items in the name of service fees.

Case 3: China Railway Chengdu Bureau Group Co., Ltd. charges over-standard charges and collects items that were explicitly cancelled

　　In the process of providing truck repair services, the parties did not implement differentiated adjustments to the truck repair liquidation unit price in accordance with the regulations, and directly charged at the upper limit price. From January 2019 to March 2021, the over-standard fee was 1.5 million yuan.

The parties and the enterprise sign an agreement to provide vehicle technical services, and the service content is consistent with the off-track technical inspection fee that has been explicitly cancelled.

From January 2019 to April 2021, a technical inspection fee of RMB 9.205 million was collected in the name of vehicle technical service fee.

　　The party's behavior is suspected of violating the "Regulations on the Control of Arbitrary Charges", and a case has been filed for investigation.

Case 4: China Railway Kunming Bureau Group Co., Ltd. receives a project cancelled by express order

　　According to relevant documents, vehicle technical handover and maintenance fees and rail-crossing technical inspection fees are items of fees that are expressly cancelled.

In the provision of technical inspection services for the safety of railway vehicles to a special-purpose line enterprise, the parties charged a total of 2,615,700 yuan for the technical handover and maintenance of vehicles.

A total of 266,200 yuan of off-track technical inspection fees were collected from 23 companies.

　　The party's behavior is suspected of violating the "Regulations on the Control of Arbitrary Charges", and a case has been filed for investigation.

Some port companies illegally charge fees

　　Since the outbreak of the new crown pneumonia, the state has issued a series of preferential reduction and exemption policies for port charges, with the purpose of reducing the burden on the entire port industry chain, especially terminal enterprises.

However, during the implementation of the policy, it was discovered that some operators did not implement the preferential fee reduction and exemption policies, which led to the failure of the policy dividends to be transmitted to the terminal enterprises in a timely manner; some operators only charge but do not provide services, which has increased the burden on enterprises.

The above behavior not only affects the survival and development of small and medium-sized enterprises at the micro level, but also affects the optimization of my country's port business environment at the macro level.

Case 5: Yujiachang (Shanghai) International Logistics Co., Ltd. only charges but does not provide services

　　From May to August 2020, during the process of container cleaning services, the parties charged some container fees for not providing water washing or chemical washing services.

According to statistics, there are 240 and 162 unwashed 20-foot containers and 40-foot containers, 97 and 51 unwashed 20-foot containers and 40-foot containers, respectively. The overcharge totaled 66,900 yuan.

　　The party’s behavior violated Article 14 of the Price Law, and the market supervision department ordered corrections. The party refunded the overcharged amount of 66,900 yuan and imposed a fine of 200,700 yuan.

Case 6: Minmetals Logistics Zhejiang Co., Ltd. failed to implement the national port fee reduction policy

　　From March to December 2020, the parties concerned failed to implement the preferential policy of 20% reduction or exemption of cargo port fees and port facility security fees during the epidemic, and overcharged port facility security fees and cargo port fees of 94,000 yuan in violation of regulations.

　　The party's behavior violated Article 12 of the "Price Law", except that the refund of 46 yuan was not completed due to special reasons, the party has refunded the remaining overcharged price.

The market supervision department ordered corrections, confiscated the unrefunded 46 yuan, and imposed a fine of 200,000 yuan.