In January 2005, the Ministry of Commerce of the People's Republic of China announced anti-dumping duties on non-displacement single-mode optical fibres (used, for example, for long-distance telephony and multichannel television broadcasting systems) (HS code: 9001.1000) imported from Japan and South Korea. This measure was reviewed and extended in January 2011 and, subsequently, in January 2017 and January 2022. The rate of duty imposed on imports originating in Japan is 46%, while imports originating in South Korea range from 7.9% to 46%, depending on the company.

In April 2011, the Ministry of Commerce of the People's Republic of China announced anti-dumping duties on non-displacement single-mode optical fibres (used, for example, for long-distance telephony and multichannel television broadcasting systems) (HS code: 9001.1000) imported from the EU and the U.S. This measure was reviewed and extended in April 2017 and, subsequently in April 2022. The duty rate on imports originating from the European Union ranges from 12.9% to 29.1%, depending on the company. The duty rate on imports originating from the United States ranges from 33.3% to 78.2%, depending on the company.

Art. 10 of the Government Procurement Law states that procuring entities must procure domestic goods, construction, and other services, except in one of the following situations: (i) where the goods, construction, or other services needed are not available within the territory of China or cannot be acquired on reasonable commercial terms, even if they are available in China; (ii) where the items to be procured are for use abroad; and (iii) where otherwise provided for by other laws and administrative regulations.
Moreover, the Chinese public procurement regulations actively promote a Buy Chinese policy. In principle, only Chinese companies are allowed to bid in public tenders, with foreign companies permitted only under exceptions. Government agencies and related entities are required to purchase equipment and technology from Chinese state-owned or privately-owned manufacturing companies. It is reported that public tenders often lack sufficient publicity. Furthermore, central and local entities tend to implement these provisions very broadly, exceeding the discriminations imposed by the law.

A report by the National Development and Reform Commission of China and the Ministry of Finance bans the purchase of certain foreign IT products for selected government procurement lists. For example, one government procurement list banned ten Apple Inc. products, including the iPad, iPad Mini, MacBook Air and MacBook Pro.
A separate procurement list includes some Apple computers that departments can continue to buy on a smaller scale, i.e. purchases totalling less than 1.2 million yuan (USD 195,000). Products from Dell Inc., Hewlett-Packard Co. and Chinese maker Lenovo Group Ltd. were included on both lists. This ban applies to all central Communist Party departments, government ministries and local governments.

In June 2014, the Centre of Public Procurement of the Central Government issued the result of the public tender for central government procurement of electronic information products of 2014 (Vol. 21, GC-HJ140283). Under the "Antivirus Software" category, all foreign security providers such as Kaspersky and Symantec were excluded from the list. Only five Chinese providers, i.e. 360, Jiangmin, Rising, Kingsoft, and KILL, are listed for national security consideration.

The Administrative Measures for the Multi-level Protection of Information Security (MLPS) require all IT systems in China to be classified into different levels of security, from one to five (with the most sensitive systems designated as level 5). In 2019, the MLPS 2.0 (composed by GB/T 22239-2019, GB/T 25070-2019, and GB/T 28448-2019) has expanded the definition of 'information systems' to broader systems, including network infrastructure, cloud computing systems, mobile application platforms, connected devices and industrial control systems.
The MLPS 2.0 requires networks of level 3 and above to adopt network products and services appropriate to their security protection levels. Companies classified as level 2 and above require the procurement and use of encryption products and services to be preapproved by the Chinese government. Under the MLPS 2.0, companies must self-assess their security management and compliance, and such assessment results must be evaluated and endorsed by the MLPS regulatory body.
The MLPS 2.0 requires companies in China to set up their cloud infrastructure, including servers, virtualised networks, software, and information systems. Such cloud infrastructures are subject to testing and evaluation by the Chinese government. Overseas operation and maintenance of Chinese cloud computing platforms must also follow Chinese laws and regulations. The national standards also state that customers' data and users' personal information processed by cloud service providers should be stored inside China, which is an additional requirement. It is currently uncertain how these national standards would be enforced, and there have not yet been reports of enforcement.

Imported and exported encryption products must be certified by the Office of State Commercial Cryptography Administration (OSCCA). The use of encryption products without OSCCA certification is prohibited, regardless of the public, commercial or individual nature of use. However, it is reported that, in practice, only Chinese or Chinese-owned companies are eligible for OSCCA certification to sell, produce and carry out R&D for encryption technology in China, as well as to gain product licensing. Foreign or foreign-owned companies, even if based in China, are excluded. In practice, this means that using foreign encryption products in public procurement is effectively prohibited in China. International firms are therefore excluded from government contracts for ‘information security products’ such as smart cards, firewalls and secure databases.

Directive No. 618 establishes a framework for promoting Chinese products in government procurement by creating an accreditation system with specific criteria. To qualify, products must be manufactured by enterprises with full Chinese intellectual property ownership or by Chinese entities with legally obtained rights. The product's trademark must be owned by a Chinese-registered company and certified by relevant national or provincial authorities. The 2010 Notice revised some requirements, allowing for licensed foreign IP use while maintaining a focus on Chinese ownership or usage rights for trademarks. This regulatory approach presents significant challenges for non-Chinese companies, as it requires freedom from foreign restrictions on IP use and prioritises products with strong ties to Chinese intellectual property and enterprises. The overall policy aims to foster indigenous innovation and give preference to Chinese-developed or Chinese-owned products in government procurement, potentially limiting opportunities for foreign entities in this market.

According to Art. 9 of the Government Procurement Law, government procurement must facilitate the achievement of China's policies for economic and social development, including but not limited to environmental protection, assistance to underdeveloped or ethnic minority areas, and the promotion of SMEs.
The Ministry of Finance (MOF) has issued a Notification on Further Supporting Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) in Public Procurement (MOF Announcement No. 19) in response to the State Council's Notification on a Package of Policy Measures to Stabilize the Economy (Guo Fa 2022 No.12). This announcement outlines three primary directives for relevant procuring entities: (i) strict implementation of public procurement policies supporting SMEs; (ii) enhancement of price preferences for SMEs; (iii) augmentation of the proportion of reserves allocated for SMEs.
Furthermore, MOF Announcement No. 19 introduces significant modifications to the preferential treatment of SMEs in public procurement. The price deduction preferential rate for small and micro enterprises in goods and service procurement projects has been increased from the previously stipulated 6%-10% (as per Document No. 46 of Caiku 2020) to 10%-20%. Moreover, for large and medium-sized enterprises that form consortia with or subcontract to small and micro enterprises, the preferential rate has been elevated from 2%-3% to 4%-6%.

It is reported that under both its government procurement and tendering and bidding regimes, China continues to implement policies favouring products, services, and technologies made or developed by Chinese-owned and Chinese-controlled companies through explicit and implicit requirements. These policies hinder foreign companies from competing fairly in China. Despite China's commitment to equal treatment, foreign companies report instances where tendering documents mandate "domestic brands" and "indigenous designs." Since China has not yet established clear rules on what constitutes a "domestic product," procurement officials often prefer to err on the side of caution and purchase products from domestic Chinese companies.

China is not a party to the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA). However, the country has been an observer of the WTO GPA since 2002.

In accordance with Special Management Measure No. 14 of the Special Administrative Measures (Negative List) for Foreign Investment Access (2021 Edition), foreign investors are prohibited from holding more than 50% equity interest in any enterprise engaged in value-added telecommunication services, with the exception of e-commerce, domestic multi-party communication services, store-and-forward services, and call centre services. Similarly, Art. 6 of the Provisions on the Administration of Foreign-Invested Telecommunications Enterprises stipulates that foreign investors may not hold more than 50% equity interest in enterprises conducting value-added telecommunication services, unless otherwise prescribed by the state. This provision was revised in 2022 to include the exception “unless otherwise prescribed by the State,” aligning with national and local regulations aimed at further relaxing restrictions on the proportion of foreign ownership in the telecommunications sector. As specified in Art. 8 of the Telecommunications Regulations, value-added telecom businesses refer to telecommunication and information services provided through public network infrastructure. These services include electronic mail, voice mailboxes, online database storage and retrieval, electronic data interchange, online data processing and transaction processing, value-added fax, internet service provision (ISP), internet content provision (ICP), and video teleconferencing.

According to Art. 26.1 of the E-Commerce Law, e-commerce service providers and intermediaries must obtain e-commerce permits or licenses from the Ministry of Commerce (MOC) in addition to the general business registration. According to Art. 26.2, the licensing regime has two categories: (1) an e-commerce permit (for individual persons and sole proprietorships) and (2) an e-commerce license (for legal persons and branches of foreign companies). In August 2020, Cambodia issued Sub-Decree No. 134, an implementing regulation of the E-Commerce Law, clarifying that a license is required for legal persons and branches of foreign companies carrying out the following activities: e-commerce web services, e-commerce platform services, online market services, online auction website services, and other similar services provided through software or smart devices for the promotion of e-commerce (Art. 5.1).

In addition, pursuant to Art. 5.2 of the Sub-Decree, an E-Commerce permit is required for natural persons and sole proprietors that operate a business via electronic system in Cambodia (including those who conduct business via social media and electronic systems to supply or sell/purchase goods and services). Furthermore, according to Art. 7.1, legal entities or foreign branches that are intermediaries of electronic-commerce service providers must apply for a license at the MOC and meet the following conditions: (i) business registration and tax registration with registered business activities relating to e-commerce; (ii) it must have obtained an Online Service Certificate and domain name from the Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications; (iii) it must use an electronic application or means for operating e-commerce; (iv) the electronic system used by it must be accurate; (v) it must specify the payment method; (vi) it must have a business model and consumer protection form. If it is a legal entity or foreign branch acting as an intermediary, it must enter into a contract with the business service providers. Moreover, in October 2020, the MOC issued the Prakas No. 290 regulation, which set the required documents to apply for e-commerce licenses and permits and detailed procedures and time frames for the MOC to review the applications. The regulation also stipulates the timelines and procedures to renew the permits and licenses, among other things (Arts. 3–8.).

The E-Commerce Law broadly defines e-commerce service providers and intermediaries (Annex). An e-commerce service provider is defined as a "person who uses electronic means to supply goods and/or services except for insurance establishments". On the other hand, intermediary "refers to a person who provides the services of sending, receiving, transmitting or storing services of the electronic communication, either on a temporary or permanent basis, or provides other services relating to the electronic communication, including the following persons: a person representing the sender, receiver, transmitter, or the custodian; telecommunication service providers; network service providers; internet service providers; search engines providers; online payment service providers; online auction service providers; online marketplaces service providers and internet commerce service provider".

Art. 5 of the Law on Foreign Exchange states that foreign exchange operations shall be undertaken solely through authorised intermediaries. These operations include purchases and sales of foreign exchange on the foreign exchange market, transfers, all kinds of international settlements, and capital flows in foreign or domestic currency between Cambodia and the rest of the world or between residents and non-residents. As a result, only banks permanently established in the Kingdom of Cambodia are considered authorised intermediaries for international settlements.