I personally have dealt with more than two dozen exit ban matters in China. Around half of these were clear, in that the person banned from leaving China was told very explicitly not to leave, and in each case they knew why. The others were quite unclear, and involved people in China who feared they had become subject to an exit ban and people outside China who feared that if they were to go to China, they would never get out.

This post provides an in-depth look at China exit bans – what leads to them, how to assess your risk of being subject to one, and key actions you should take to avoid or address them. With China increasingly using exit bans against foreigners amid geopolitical tensions, practical guidance is essential for companies and individuals doing business in China. Read on for real-world examples, risk analysis steps, protective measures and advice for responding in detention scenarios. Being prepared is crucial before travelling to or spending time in China.

1. What Leads to China Exit Bans?

The typical reasons for the Chinese government imposing an exit ban that prohibits a foreigner from leaving China is for allegedly committing a crime, allegedly owing money to a Chinese company, or being in some other sort of dispute with a Chinese company or individual.

It is important that when determining whether you have violated the laws of China, you are actually aware of Chinese laws, and not just basing your determination on the laws of a country like the United States, Japan, or Denmark. You should instead think of countries like China, Iran, and North Korea, and it would also be instructive for you to read Chinese Government Raids and Shuts Down a Well-Known American Business. This is a REALLY BIG Deal. The focus of this post is on Chinese government raids and shutdowns, but the core reasons for Chinese government raids and shutdowns is similar to the core reasons for exit bans.

Last year, professors Chris Carr and Jack Wroldsen wrote a guest post for us, entitled Exit Ban Risk When Doing Business in China – Hold ‘Em, Fold ‘Em or Return? That post began by discussing the increased trepidation people have about being detained in China, in part due to the newly passed Hong Kong National Security Law and the tribulations of Canadians Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor. This fear of being detained in China due to exit bans is definitely still prevalent and I know this because I have been retained to do more “travel to China risk assessments in the last three months than in the last ten years. As the Wall Street Journal reported in Dozens of Americans Are Barred from Leaving China, Adding to Tensions:”

Legal experts say virtually any party to a civil dispute in China involving a foreign national can ask local police to add their opponent’s name to a national database of exit bans that police check at every airport, railway station and other border crossing. . . . U.S. authorities say they don’t know how many Americans face exit bans in China, as targets of such bans often fear that involving diplomats could be viewed as provocative and deepen their predicament.

The Carr/Wroldsen article then describes how foreigners in China usually learn they are subject to an exit ban at the airport when the Chinese authorities prevent them from boarding an international flight or crossing the border but otherwise leave the person free to travel within China. They noted that exit bans are distinct from a debt or commercial hostage situation (Carr & Harris, 2021) in which the foreigner’s freedom of movement within China is restricted.

The post then discusses the professors’ recent Thunderbird International Business Review article, Exit Bans When Doing Business in China, that studied the frequency of China exit bans by using data obtained from the United States, Germany, Netherlands, United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada, along cases “from English and Mandarin media.” Their study looked only at exit bans that arose from civil (as opposed to criminal) business disputes “between a foreign businessperson and his or her local Chinese counterpart, where the foreigner was prevented from leaving China.” It did not cover exit ban cases stemming from political motivations or criminal charges.

Per their study, there have been at least 128 China exit ban cases and about a third of those were driven by business disputes. The professors wrote that “it is likely many more of the 128 cases were caused by business disputes, but because much of the data we received from government agencies was provided in aggregate form, we were unable to verify the driving force behind such cases  and it mostly involved senior-level executives, though it is not unheard of for juniors at companies to be banned if they are the only company personnel in China.”

The professors also recorded responses to an “admittedly unscientific poll on LinkedIn” regarding the likelihood of foreigners with business ties travelling to China. Per this poll, just under half said they likely would not be willing to go to China. They also received 34 private responses to their poll, and more than 60% of those people were not likely to go to China:

More interesting were the 34 private responses received, where people overall expressed less willingness to return to China than the public responders in (paraphrased) comments like, “I’m concerned with being canceled regardless of how I respond publicly, but here is my private vote.” The 34 private responses were as follows:

Definitely: 5 (15%)

Probably: 8 (24%)

Probably not: 11 (32%)

Definitely not: 10 (29%)

Although these collective responses are not a huge sample size, they are nevertheless indicative of the seemingly growing reticence of some businesspeople to return to China.

See also Westerners are increasingly scared of traveling to China as threat of detention rises.

To quote from professors Carr and Wroldsen’s blog post, “most exit ban cases probably go unreported because the targets or victims don’t wish to make their situation with Chinese authorities or their local business partner even worse, so our early research results likely o