Recently, the Legal Affairs Office of the State Council released the "Administrative Regulations for the Construction Market (Draft for Public Comment)" (hereinafter referred to as the "Regulations"). These regulations aim to address rampant issues in the construction industry such as illegal subcontracting, bid rigging, and delays in payments. Additionally, the document highlights that government departments will face legal consequences if they interfere improperly with construction projects. Some experts have noted that these Regulations represent a comprehensive effort to standardize China's construction market through administrative legislation. Compared to previous laws, the content is more detailed and covers a broader spectrum of issues. However, the draft still has certain shortcomings. Establishing robust reward and penalty mechanisms is essential. Over the past few years, China's rapid economic growth has led to unprecedented activity in the construction market. This surge has exposed several challenges that need immediate attention. The Regulations analyze the current chaos in the market, pointing out unclear responsibilities among government departments, lack of transparency in project information, inflated budgets for government-funded projects, muddled capital management, illegal subcontracting, and compromised safety standards. To tackle these problems, the Regulations impose stricter oversight and penalties on the construction sector. They clearly define the roles of government departments and project participants, establishing new systems such as bans on illegal subcontracting, dismembered contracting, and party-designated subcontracting. Additionally, the Regulations require permanent signage for project information, real-time labor service data sharing, and mandates that project timelines cannot be arbitrarily shortened. Safety responsibilities must be assigned to chief supervising engineers, and payments for both project costs and labor wages must be made promptly. Violations will incur specific penalties. Zhang Yong, a lawyer from Beijing's Changhong Law Firm, remarked that these Regulations provide a comprehensive framework for managing the construction market. While some aspects revisit existing policies, others introduce novel approaches. The Regulations outline clear guidelines for balancing the rights, responsibilities, and benefits of relevant government bodies, construction companies, and supervisory entities. Detailed punitive measures have also been included. Zhou Jigao, Director of the Construction Engineering Business Research Committee of the Shanghai Bar Association, noted that these Regulations are more systematic than existing legal frameworks. Although several provinces, including Shanghai, Jiangsu, Hunan, and Jilin, already have local construction market regulations, none apply nationwide. According to reports, each province’s regulations differ in scope and detail. Zhou Jiao further emphasized that compared to the "Regulations on Construction Project Quality Management" and the "Regulations on Construction Project Safety Management," the new draft places greater emphasis on regulating the actions of construction entities. For instance, the Regulations stipulate that construction permits will not be granted if government funds or project funds are not properly allocated. Additionally, the draft prohibits arbitrary schedule reductions that could compromise quality and safety. Despite these efforts, Zhou Jiao identified gaps in the Regulations. He pointed out that some construction firms manipulate project costs by setting low bidding limits, leading to corner-cutting and substandard work. This issue, however, has not been adequately addressed in the draft. Implementation remains crucial. Recent cases of severe structural failures, like building collapses in Shanghai and bridge collapses in Harbin, highlight the urgent need for stricter enforcement. Zhang Yong suggests that the scope and intensity of liability must be expanded to hold violators accountable. He emphasized that despite bans on illegal subcontracting, these practices persist due to weak enforcement. Zhang Yong also highlighted inconsistencies within the draft. Article 9 restricts subcontracting to no more than two entities under a general contractor, whereas Article 27 of the Building Law allows multiple contractors to jointly undertake large or complex projects, assuming collective responsibility. Resolving this discrepancy requires careful coordination between existing laws. Zhou Jiao concurred, noting that despite stringent regulations against illegal subcontracting and affiliations, these issues persist due to poor enforcement of previous laws. The new draft clarifies responsibilities, but ensuring effective implementation remains a challenge. Overall, while the Regulations mark significant progress in addressing China’s construction market issues, their success ultimately hinges on rigorous execution and oversight.