来源：百宸律师事务所
发布日期：2025年10月30日
★文章为投中网首发内容
前言
随着全球经济的深度融合，中国企业“出海”这一话题的热度仍未消减。中国企业的“出海”战略，逐步从最初的市场拓展，演变为全球资源整合和产业链重塑的战略布局，加之全球经济的不确定性、国际政治环境的多变性以及跨境运营的复杂性，企业面临的客观挑战也愈加复杂。
以往大家讨论中国企业“出海”时，更多的是通过自身的视角了解“出海”潜在目的地、当地市场的特点与需求，及可能面临的风险与挑战。作为从创立最初就在陪伴中国企业以各种形式“出海”的百宸律师事务所，我们希望借此20周年之际，为各位读者提供一个全新的视角——
本文将通过“出海”目的地专家们的视角，来看看作为投资者的中国企业在各地所遇到的机遇和面临的挑战。为此我们采访了来自 印度尼西亚、泰国、哈萨克斯坦、智利、荷兰和美国 的六位法律和财税专家，他们根据各自的丰富实践经验，针对我们提出的以下三个问题，分别提供了深入的见解，并在最后分享了我们作为 中国 律师在服务中国企业出海过程中的真实感受，以飨读者：
- 您的国家是否适合中国企业海外扩张？为什么？
Is your country a suitable destination for Chinese enterprises expanding overseas? Why?
- 中国企业当地最常见挑战有哪些？
What are the most common challenges Chinese enterprises face locally?
- 您在为中国企业提供咨询时最常遇到哪些问题？
What issues do you most frequently encounter when advising Chinese enterprises?
01
印度尼西亚
被采访者：
Denia Isetianti
Soemadipradja & Taher 合伙人律师
denia_isetianti@soemath.com
1. 您的国家是否适合中国企业海外扩张？为什么？
是的。印尼提供 东南亚最大和增长最快的消费市场之一 ，拥有超过2.7亿人口，使其成为世界上最大的消费基础之一。这为中国企业提供了广阔的市场准入和跨多个行业的显著增长机会。
印尼还拥有 丰富的自然资源 ，为能源（包括可再生能源）、制造业和基础设施创造了强大的投资前景。同时，印尼政府推出了日益 开放和投资者友好的政策框架 ，提供诸如税收假期、税收津贴、优先获取能源和原材料，以及简化的移民和劳工法规等激励措施。
此外，印尼是 中国“一带一路”倡议（BRI）的关键伙伴 。印尼的主要“一带一路”项目包括雅加达-万隆高速铁路、地区工业园和促进贸易与投资流动的基础设施联通项目。这些项目不仅加强双边经济联系，还为中国企业融入印尼长期发展议程创造新机会，特别是在基础设施、数字经济和绿色转型领域。
综合来看，这些因素使印尼成为寻求建立或扩大海外业务的中国企业的一个引人注目的环境。2019年至2024年9月期间，中国在印尼的投资总额约为341.9亿美元。根据印尼投资协调委员会（BKPM）的数据，截至2025年第二季度，中国是印尼第三大外资来源地。
Yes. Indonesia offers one of the largest and fastest-growing consumer markets in Southeast Asia, with more than 270 million people, making it one of the biggest consumer bases in the world. This provides Chinese enterprises with broad market access and significant opportunities for growth across diverse sectors.
Indonesia is also endowed with abundant natural resources, creating strong investment prospects in energy (including renewable energy), manufacturing, and infrastructure. At the same time, the Indonesian government has introduced an increasingly open and investor-friendly policy framework, offering incentives such as tax holidays, tax allowances, preferential access to energy and raw materials, and streamlined immigration and labor regulations.
In addition, Indonesia is a key partner in China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Major BRI projects in Indonesia include the Jakarta–Bandung High-Speed Railway, regional industrial parks, and infrastructure connectivity projects that facilitate trade and investment flows. These projects not only strengthen bilateral economic ties but also create new opportunities for Chinese enterprises to integrate into Indonesia’s long-term development agenda, particularly in the areas of infrastructure, digital economy, and green transition.
Taken together, these factors make Indonesia a compelling environment for Chinese enterprises seeking to establish or scale their presence abroad. Between 2019 and September 2024, Chinese investments in Indonesia totaled approximately USD 34.19 billion. According to Indonesia’s Investment Coordinating Board (BKPM), as of the second quarter of 2025, China ranked as the third-largest source of foreign investment in Indonesia.
2. 中国企业当地最常见挑战有哪些？
对于在印尼探索机会的中国企业来说，不仅要了解显著的增长潜力，还要了解在此运营的监管和实际挑战。
首先，印尼法律要求每家外资公司（PT PMA）每业务线的最低总投资额为100亿印尼盾（不包括土地和建筑）， 约合450-500万人民币 。这意味着只有大型企业对外资开放，限制了与当地小型企业的直接竞争。此外，《正面投资清单》规定了哪些行业完全开放、限制或禁止外资持股，意味着一些行业的 外资持股上限为49%或需要与印尼合作伙伴成立合资企业 。
我们看到许多中国公司试图通过名义持有人安排绕过这些要求——股份注册在印尼个人或实体名下，而外国投资者提供资金。通常，这是基于承诺“快速解决”的当地代理的建议。 然而，这种结构在印尼法律下是严格禁止的。它们最初可能显得方便，但经常导致关于所有权和利润权的严重争议、监管处罚，以及在最坏情况下，整个投资的损失。
除了所有权和资本要求外，中国投资者经常遇到：
监管复杂性和官僚主义 ——尽管进行了改革，许可、批准和合规过程可能缓慢，且在各省不一致。
本地合作伙伴风险 ——当需要合资企业时，关于控制、利润分享或治理的期望不一致经常造成紧张。
税务和汇回挑战 ——利润汇回和税务合规可能比预期更复杂，特别是如果所有权结构不清晰。
土地限制 ——外国人不能直接拥有永久产权土地，使依赖房地产的行业投资更加复杂。
文化和沟通障碍 ——商业实践的差异和严重依赖当地中介可能导致误解。
对于中国企业来说，避免这些陷阱的最佳方式是透明地构建投资，遵守印尼法律， 并与合格的顾问合作，而不是依赖捷径 。通过适当的准备，印尼仍然是中国对外投资在东南亚最具吸引力的目的地之一，特别是在基础设施、制造业、数字经济和绿色转型领域——这些领域在印尼政府的优先事项和“一带一路”倡议下都得到强力支持。
For Chinese enterprises exploring opportunities in Indonesia, it is important to understand not only the significant growth potential but also the regulatory and practical challenges of operating here.
First, Indonesian law requires a minimum total investment of IDR 10 billion per business line (excluding land and building), roughly RMB 4.5–5 million, for any foreign-owned company (PT PMA). This means that only large-scale businesses are open to foreign investment, limiting direct competition with smaller local businesses. In addition, the Positive Investment List specifies which sectors are fully open, restricted, or closed to foreign ownership—meaning some industries are capped at 49% or require joint ventures with Indonesian partners.
We have seen many Chinese companies attempt to bypass these requirements through nominee arrangements—where shares are registered under the name of an Indonesian individual or entity, while the foreign investor provides the funds. Often, this is based on advice from local agents who promise a “quick fix.” However, such structures are strictly prohibited under Indonesian law. They may appear convenient at the start but frequently result in serious disputes over ownership and profit rights, regulatory penalties, and in worst cases, loss of the entire investment.
Beyond ownership and capital requirements, Chinese investors often encounter:
Regulatory complexity and bureaucracy – despite reforms, licensing, permits, and compliance processes can be slow and inconsistent across provinces.
Local partner risks – when joint ventures are required, misaligned expectations on control, profit sharing, or governance often create tension.
Tax and repatriation challenges – profit repatriation and tax compliance can be more complex than expected, especially if ownership structures are unclear.
Land restrictions – foreigners cannot directly own freehold land, making investments in property-dependent sectors more complicated.
Cultural and communication barriers – differences in business practices and heavy reliance on local intermediaries can lead to misunderstandings.
For Chinese enterprises, the best way to avoid these pitfalls is to structure investments transparently, comply with Indonesian laws, and work with qualified advisors rather than relying on shortcuts. With the right preparation, Indonesia remains one of the most attractive destinations in Southeast Asia for Chinese outbound investment, particularly in infrastructure, manufacturing, digital economy, and green transition—sectors strongly supported under both the Indonesian government’s priorities and the Belt and Road Initiative.
3. 您在为中国企业提供咨询时最常遇到哪些问题？
从法律咨询的角度来看，与在印尼的中国企业合作时会出现一些反复出现的问题。一个是 预算限制，客户可能寻求最小化前期法律成本 ， 这可能影响尽职调查的范围或合规规划的水平 。我们理解这种敏感性，并努力提供成本效益高的解决方案，同时强调在适当法律结构上投资不足的长期风险。
第二，关于 时间表经常存在不同的期望 。中国客户通常期望快速执行，而实际上印尼的监管和许可过程可能复杂，需要多次咨询和批准，且在时间上并不总是可预测的。
第三，客户要求超出最初约定范围的工作，或项目中途发生变化的情况并不少见。虽然我们保持灵活适应，但我们强调透明 engagement 条款和清晰沟通的重要性，以保持期望一致。
其他常见挑战包括：
沟通风格差异——中国客户通常偏好非常直接和快速的回应（通过微信），而印尼法律过程需要更正式的文档和程序步骤。
名义持有人或非正式结构——一些客户带着预先形成的想法或建议使用可能不符合印尼法律的捷径，我们必须仔细解释和纠正。
变化中的优先级——项目有时快速启动，然后被搁置或延长，而没有相应调整费用或资源。
为了解决这些问题，我们专注于一开始就设定清晰的期望，保持开放的沟通渠道，并提供实用、符合文化的建议。这种主动的方法有助于我们建设性地管理差异，并与中国客户建立长期信任。
From a legal-advisory perspective, a number of recurring issues arise when working with Chinese enterprises in Indonesia. One is budget constraints, where clients may seek to minimize upfront legal costs, which can affect the scope of due diligence or the level of compliance planning. We understand this sensitivity and strive to provide cost-efficient solutions while highlighting the long-term risks of under-investing in proper legal structuring.
Second, there are often differing expectations around timelines. Chinese clients typically expect fast execution, while in reality Indonesia’s regulatory and licensing processes can be complex, require multiple consultation and approvals, and are not always predictable in terms of timing.
Third, it is not uncommon for clients to request work beyond the initial agreed scope, or for projects to evolve midway. While we remain flexible to adapt, we emphasize the importance of transparent engagement terms and clear communication so expectations remain aligned.
Other common challenges include:
Communication style differences – Chinese clients often prefer very direct and fast responses (via wechat), whereas Indonesian legal processes demand more formal documentation and procedural steps.
Nominee or informal structures – some clients arrive with preconceived ideas or advice to use shortcuts that may not comply with Indonesian law, which we must carefully explain and correct.
Changing priorities – projects are sometimes started quickly, then put on hold or stretched over longer periods without corresponding adjustments to fees or resources.
To address these, we focus on setting clear expectations at the outset, maintaining open channels of communication, and providing practical, culturally attuned advice. This proactive approach helps us manage differences constructively and build long-term trust with our Chinese clients.
02
泰国
被采访者：
某泰国律师事务所合伙人律师，匿名
1. 您的国家是否适合中国企业海外扩张？为什么？
在没有首先了解该地区其他国家所有相关法律的情况下，我不能这么说，而我没有这种知识。如今，美国对许多国家（包括泰国）征收互惠关税，这似乎是基于许多其他因素。过去，许多中国公司在泰国设立公司，以避免在向美国销售商品时的税收壁垒。然而，泰国的最低工资不再像以前那样有吸引力，但我们确实有 良好的基础设施和资源 。
I could not say that this is the case without first having knowledge on all relevant laws of other countries in the region and I do not have this kind of knowledge. Nowadays, with the US putting reciprocal tariffs on many countries, including Thailand, it seems to be based on many other factors. In the past, many Chinese companies set up a company in Thailand to avoid tax barrier when selling goods to the US. Thailand’s minimum wage is however not as appealing as before but we do have good infrastructure and resources.
2. 中国企业当地最常见挑战有哪些？
由于泰国英语和/或中文使用者不足而导致的 沟通问题 ，当地法规和外国商业限制。
Communication issue due to insufficient English and/or Chinese speakers in Thailand, local regulations and the foreign business restrictions.
3. 您在为中国企业提供咨询时最常遇到哪些问题？
偏好讲中文的公司和供应商（虽然可以理解）， 而不是选择服务良好的公司和服务供应商 。需要即时响应或反馈，导致 验证或彻底研究时间不足，并且不愿意遵循法律或实际建议 ，即使在未知领域（泰国）。
Preferring Chinese speaking firm and suppliers (although understandable) delivering questionable services over good service firms and suppliers. Needing instant response or feedback resulting in insufficient verification or thorough research time and unwillingness to follow legal or practical advice even though in the unknown territory (Thailand).
03
哈萨克斯坦
被采访者：
Ulan Stybayev
SIGNUM Law Firm 顾问律师
1. 您的国家是否适合中国企业海外扩张？为什么？
哈萨克斯坦在中国“一带一路”倡议（BRI）的推进中处于核心位置，是 联通东亚与欧洲的重要枢纽 。其独特的地理位置、完善的交通网络以及国家在基础设施上的持续投入，使其不仅是一个过境通道，更成为中国在中亚的重要战略伙伴。
据世界银行数据， 在“一带一路”六条国际陆上通道中，有三条经过哈萨克斯坦 ，连接中国与欧洲、中东及南亚。这些通道能使运输时间缩短 8–9%，贸易成本降低约4%。如果进一步推进边境通关便利化和物流改革，预计将为哈萨克斯坦带来6–9%的GDP增长。这得益于基础设施投资与制度改革的结合，包括外贸自由化和行政程序简化等措施。
根据哈萨克斯坦政府数据，约85%的中国对欧陆路运输需经由哈萨克斯坦，使其成为全球最大的“陆桥”。在这一背景下，哈萨克斯坦不仅是参与者，更是新欧亚交通体系的共同构建者，其国家基础设施发展计划与“一带一路”实现了对接。
近年来，两国签署了超过50项商业协议，总额超过240亿美元，涵盖能源、加工、物流及建材制造。与此同时，双方共建产业园区，升级霍尔果斯和阿克套港，开发阿尔京科尔内陆港。这些项目不仅提升了哈萨克斯坦的出口潜力，还为中国投资者更深入参与该国经济提供了法律与制度框架。
哈萨克斯坦展现出均衡对外经济政策的能力，将参与“一带一路”与自身的《战略-2050》、国家工业化计划及绿色经济发展结合起来。因此，对中国而言，哈萨克斯坦不仅仅是过境通道，更是一个拥有稳健制度、透明法律体系和可预测投资环境的可靠合作伙伴。
今天，哈萨克斯坦已成为中亚的核心物流与运输枢纽。它的 地理位置——介于中国、俄罗斯、里海和伊朗之间——为跨国贸易创造了天然条件。 在过去十年中，哈萨克斯坦有意识地将这种地缘优势转化为经济资产，修建并升级铁路口岸、内陆港、产业园和物流中心，确保“一带一路”通道上的货物流动稳定。
Kazakhstan occupies a central place in the implementation of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and serves as a key link between East Asia and Europe. The country’s unique geography, developed transport network, and consistent state policy on infrastructure make Kazakhstan not merely a transit corridor but China’s strategic partner in Central Asia.
According to the World Bank, three of the six international overland BRI routes pass through Kazakhstan. These routes connect China with Europe, the Middle East, and South Asia, reducing shipping times by 8–9% and cutting trade costs by roughly 4%. The potential impact of the BRI on Kazakhstan’s economy is estimated at GDP growth of 6–9%, provided further border-procedure facilitation and logistics reforms are carried out. This effect is possible thanks to a combination of infrastructure investment and institutional reforms, including measures to liberalize foreign trade and simplify administrative procedures.
President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev has repeatedly emphasized that the Belt and Road Initiative has become a “common good for the countries of the region,” creating a foundation for mutually beneficial development and sustainable growth. He noted that Kazakhstan’s participation in the initiative reflects the country’s strategic aspiration to strengthen transport connectivity and diversify the economy. Speaking at the BRI Forum in Beijing, the Head of State stressed that “the high level of political trust between Kazakhstan and China is the key factor behind the successful development of the partnership.”
Experts also describe the initiative as a breakthrough for Kazakhstan. The project has not been limited to infrastructure construction: it has stimulated new economic models, the development of joint ventures, and technology transfer. Chinese investment in metallurgy, energy, transport, and agriculture is laying the groundwork for gradual production localization and the integration of Kazakhstani companies into transnational supply chains.
According to the Government of Kazakhstan, about 85% of all overland transit shipments from China to Europe pass through Kazakhstan, making the country the largest land bridge between the two economic poles of the world. In this context, Kazakhstan is not just a participant but a co-architect of a new Eurasian transport architecture that aligns China’s BRI with the national infrastructure development program.
KAZAKH INVEST reports that in recent years more than 50 commercial agreements totaling over USD 24 billion have been signed between Kazakhstan and China, covering energy, processing, logistics, and the manufacture of construction materials. In parallel, joint industrial zones are being created, key ports - Khorgos and Aktau - are being modernized, and the Altynkol dry port is being developed. These projects not only strengthen Kazakhstan’s export potential but also create legal and institutional frameworks for deeper participation by Chinese investors in the country’s economy.
Kazakhstan demonstrates the capacity to pursue a balanced external economic policy, combining participation in the BRI with its own strategies - Strategy-2050, the National Industrialization Project, and the green-economy program. Accordingly, for China, Kazakhstan is not simply a transit territory but a reliable partner with resilient institutions, a transparent legal system, and a predictable investment regime.
Kazakhstan today is the key logistics and transit hub of Central Asia, linking the largest economies of Europe and Asia. The country’s location - between China, Russia, the Caspian, and Iran - creates natural conditions for transnational trade. Over the past decade, Kazakhstan has purposefully turned this advantage into an economic asset: it has built and modernized rail crossings, dry ports, industrial zones, and logistics centers that ensure steady cargo flows along Belt and Road routes.
Transport infrastructure and logistics corridors
The principal interface with Chinese cargo flows is provided by Khorgos and Altynkol - the largest land ports on the two countries’ border. Khorgos functions as an integrated logistics cluster that includes terminals, warehouses, an industrial zone, and the Khorgos free economic area. This project has become a central element of the Eurasian rail route and secured for Kazakhstan a strategic role in transit between China and Europe. The node’s daily throughput has nearly doubled in recent years, removing part of the infrastructure bottlenecks that previously constrained cargo growth.
The neighboring Altynkol station - the main rail crossing on the China corridor - is equipped with modern transshipment and digital cargo-accounting systems. The joint development of Khorgos and Altynkol has created a “dual logistics hub” model whereby goods are processed and cleared inside Kazakhstan rather than merely passing through. For investors, this has opened opportunities to establish manufacturing and assembly facilities in immediate proximity to the Chinese border, lowering costs and accelerating capital turnover.
Special industrial zones and technology parks are being created along these nodes, where residents benefit from tax and regulatory preferences. The Nurly Zhol state program complements the BRI and aims to synchronize transport, energy, and digital corridors. As a result, Kazakhstan has evolved from a transit territory into a full-fledged logistics center with elements of processing, cross-docking, and value-added services.
Legal guarantees and the investor regime
Kazakhstan’s investment climate is grounded in predictability and legal stability. The Entrepreneurial Code guarantees foreign investors the protection of their rights and property, compensation for losses caused by unlawful actions of state bodies, and a non-discriminatory regime. For strategic projects, an investment agreement is available that provides stability of key terms (tax, customs, land, and others) for the entire project period.
Since the 2020s, special attention has been devoted to institutional guarantees. An Investment Ombudsman operates with the authority to consider disputes and liaise with public bodies in a pre-trial format. This mechanism has proven effective in removing administrative barriers and restoring investor rights without recourse to the courts.
For large projects, the government may conclude individual Investment Agreements providing state incentives: tax benefits, customs exemptions, reimbursement of infrastructure costs, and preferential access to land. Such agreements are concluded by decision of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
Special economic zones and the AIFC regime
A key element of investment policy is the system of special economic zones (SEZs). The Law “On Special Economic and Industrial Zones” provides a preferential tax regime: exemptions from corporate income tax, property tax, and land tax, and from land-use fees for up to 10 years from the date of land allocation; and zero-rated VAT on supplies of goods to SEZs that are fully consumed in activities aligning with that SEZ’s objectives, per a list approved by the Government.
The most prominent international-level zone is the Astana International Financial Centre (AIFC), which operates on the principles of English common law. The AIFC grants corporate investors exceptional tax incentives for up to 50 years and a unique jurisdiction with independent courts and an International Arbitration Centre (IAC). AIFC Court and IAC decisions are recognized and enforced in Kazakhstan, and many foreign companies already use this regime as a base for holding and financial operations in Central Asia.
Practically, the AIFC provides legal predictability comparable to that of global financial centers - especially important for Chinese corporations engaged in cross-border projects and financing. More than thousands matters have already been heard and enforced within the AIFC Courts framework - clear evidence of business confidence in these institutions.
Practical advantages for Chinese investors
For Chinese enterprises, Kazakhstan is an optimal jurisdiction for accessing the markets of Central Asia, the Caucasus, and Eastern Europe. On the one hand, the country provides physical access via its developed transport infrastructure; on the other, it offers well-designed legal mechanisms for capital protection.
Kazakhstan’s legal architecture allows investors to choose among a traditional LLC (TOO) registration, an SEZ regime, or the AIFC jurisdiction, depending on the project’s nature. This creates flexibility often lacking elsewhere in the region. In addition, Kazakhstan maintains an extensive network of double-taxation treaties—including with China - which makes cross-border settlements more predictable and cost-efficient.
Finally, the ability to localize production and establish joint ventures is particularly important: this not only facilitates exports to the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) but also aligns with Kazakhstan’s strategic priorities to develop processing industries. For legal advisors, this means accounting not only for national rules but also for international commitments that shape a comprehensive legal framework for foreign investors.
It is therefore appropriate to outline the treaty-legal foundation underpinning the entire regime for Chinese capital - from the newly signed investment agreement, which complements existing instruments but has not yet entered into force, to the Double Taxation Convention and the framework Trade and Economic Cooperation Agreement.
Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Government of the People’s Republic of China on the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments
On 16 June 2025, in Astana, a new Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Government of the People’s Republic of China on the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments was signed. The document has not yet entered into force; however, its signature marks a shift to an updated model for regulating Chinese investments in Kazakhstan, aligned with contemporary standards of international investment law and with the realities of the Belt and Road Initiative.
Compared with the 1992 treaty, the new agreement substantially expands legal guarantees for investors, enhances transparency, and strengthens dispute-resolution mechanisms.
1.The agreement introduces harmonized definitions of key concepts - “investor,” “investment,” “covered investment,” “enterprise” - in line with ICSID and UNCITRAL practice. It applies to both existing and future investments, but not to disputes that arose before its entry into force.
2.Each Party undertakes to grant investors of the other Party national treatment and MFN treatment regarding the management, operation, and disposal of investments. The agreement elaborates the “like circumstances” test - important for assessing equal treatment under state regulatory measures.
3.Both Parties commit to fair and equitable treatment and full protection and security. Breaches include denial of justice, serious due-process violations, or manifest arbitrariness. At the same time, the agreement clarifies that changes in legislation or public policies per se do not constitute a breach - thus safeguarding Kazakhstan’s regulatory sovereignty.
4.Expropriation is permitted only for a public purpose, on a non-discriminatory basis, and against payment of fair market-value compensation. An annex clarifies the criteria for indirect expropriation - akin to EU and US treaty standards - enhancing predictability for foreign investors.
5.Investors are assured the right to freely transfer funds (dividends, proceeds from asset sales, loan payments, etc.) after meeting tax obligations. Kazakhstan may, however, impose temporary restrictions to safeguard the balance of payments and financial stability, consistent with IMF provisions.
6.For the first time, the Parties undertake to publish draft investment-related regulations and conduct consultations—improving predictability and reducing the risk of regulatory surprises.
7.A modern investor–state dispute-settlement (ISDS) mechanism based on ICSID/UNCITRAL practice is introduced, including a mandatory 180-day consultation phase before arbitration and detailed procedures such as disclosure of third-party funding, security for costs, and publication of awards. A separate state-to-state mechanism is also provided.
8.The agreement expressly recognizes the state’s right to regulate to protect public health, the environment, financial stability, and national security - balancing investor interests with public-law responsibilities.
9.Upon entry into force, the new agreement will terminate the 1992 treaty while preserving protections for pre-existing investments for ten years. The new agreement itself is set for a 10-year term with automatic renewal.
The new agreement evidences a shift by Kazakhstan and China toward a modern generation of investment treaties that balance investor protections with regulatory prerogatives. For Kazakhstani practice, this implies a greater role for arbitration mechanisms, stronger transparency, and closer alignment with international standards of capital protection.
Double Taxation Convention between Kazakhstan and China (2001)
A key instrument ensuring transparency and predictability in financial relations between Kazakhstan and China remains the Convention for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion, signed on 12 September 2001 and in force since 27 July 2003. The document governs the taxation of income earned by residents of one country in the territory of the other and aims to eliminate duplicative tax liabilities while encouraging mutual investment and cross-border projects.
The Convention covers a broad range of tax matters, including the taxation of dividends, interest, and royalties, as well as business profits. For most passive-income categories, a 10% withholding tax applies, provided beneficial-owner status is substantiated. This provision is pivotal when structuring transactions and financial flows between Kazakhstani and Chinese companies.
Particular attention is paid to the concept of a “permanent establishment.” Under the Convention, construction or service projects create a permanent presence if activities last more than 12 months. This allows a clear distinction between temporary operations and full-fledged business activity and helps minimize tax risks for foreign contractors and investors.
An important feature is the Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP), which enables the competent authorities of both countries to resolve disputes over the Convention’s application without resorting to litigation. The Convention also provides for exchange of information (EOI), ensuring transparency and reducing the risk of double counting of income.
In practice, the Convention has become a foundational tool for tax planning in cross-border projects. For Chinese investors, it enables corporate structuring that minimizes tax leakage while complying with Kazakhstani law. For Kazakhstan, it is an instrument of fiscal transparency that enhances foreign-investor confidence. Utilizing the Convention’s benefits in practice requires documentary evidence of economic substance and proof of beneficial ownership, in line with international standards of fair taxation.
Trade and Economic Cooperation Agreement between Kazakhstan and China (2004)
Signed on 17 May 2004 and in force since 18 August 2010, the Agreement on Trade and Economic Cooperation between the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Government of the People’s Republic of China laid the legal groundwork for the long-term development of trade and industrial ties between the two countries. The document enshrines the principles of mutual, non-discriminatory market access, most-favoured-nation treatment, and national treatment for goods and services.
The Agreement aims to create a stable trading regime, develop industrial cooperation, and strengthen ties in science, technology, and investment. It provides for information exchange, fairs, exhibitions, and other business-development activities. Special attention is paid to protecting intellectual-property rights and preventing discrimination against investors and exporters.
For Kazakhstan, the document is of strategic importance. It secures legal guarantees that underpin the country’s status as a key transit and logistics hub in the region, through which a significant share of cargo flows within the Belt and Road framework. The Agreement helped lay the groundwork for cross-border infrastructure projects, including the Khorgos International Centre of Boundary Cooperation, the Altynkol Dry Port, and industrial zones along the Chinese border.
The Agreement also simplifies foreign-currency settlements for trade transactions, supports rising investment activity, and fosters industrial localization in Kazakhstan. For Chinese enterprises, it offers a legally predictable regime for accessing the Kazakhstani market, including in sectors with state participation and within special economic zones (SEZs).
From a practical standpoint, the Trade and Economic Cooperation Agreement can be viewed as a normative anchor for joint projects in logistics, energy, raw-material processing, and component manufacturing. It enables companies from both countries to plan operations over a longer horizon, integrating national programs for industrial and technological development.
2. 中国企业当地最常见挑战有哪些？
在哈萨克斯坦，外资主导的项目通常会遇到技术和生产相关的挑战。
在运营环节，高科技设备的 维修与服务资源有限 ，常导致备件供应延迟、维修响应周期过长。设备启动与调试进度又受到公共设施供应不稳定的影响，包括电力容量、水、天然气和信息通信。其综合结果是新技术的实施成本更高，项目投产时间延误。
行政障碍与程序分散 依然是主要风险。项目文件需经多个政府部门和不同层级审批，延长了周期，产生重复要求，并可能在执行中途修改技术规范。土地分配、城市规划审查、环保许可、网络接入等环节之间缺乏统一责任主体，加大了不确定性并提高了交易成本。
工业建设与外部基础设施不同步 也是突出问题。大型设施往往先行建成，而外部管网接入滞后，导致投产工厂长期闲置，增加了设备维护和合同延长的费用。在敷设外部管网时，即便容量事先已基本商定，投资者仍常遇到土地和通行权限制。
特殊经济区及边境项目存在操作和法律风险 。入区企业在获得居民身份、登记入册、进口建材和设备时经常遇到延迟，甚至因形式不合规而面临被移出名录的风险。在施工物资分类及使用制度上，常引发税务争议，增加额外税负并造成现金流受阻。
劳动力短缺与技能缺口 在大城市以外尤为突出。市场缺乏工艺工程师、调试专家、电力工程师，以及工业安全、环境管理、质量管理等专业人员。这增加了培训与入职成本，延长了投产爬坡期，也使连续运营的人力保障更为困难。
税收环境的变化 也被企业视为增加成本的因素。自2026年起，增值税将提高至16%，注册门槛降低，部分免税政策被取消，从而推高原材料、设备和服务的成本，增加建设阶段的营运资金需求。房地产交易的更广泛征税将提高开发和基础设施成本，而特定行业企业所得税规则趋严、消费税提高，整体财政压力上升。大型资本采购的增值税退税程序仍复杂且耗时，直接影响项目流动性。
土地及城市规划审批 构成另一层制约。土地分配和用途变更审批时间过长，与相邻地块或管网的第三方权利冲突频繁，项目调整后需重新办理规划文件，均导致额外延误与成本增加。
融资渠道受限 亦是难点。本币长期贷款有限，财务模型对利率与汇率波动高度敏感，项目融资的抵押要求严格，使大型工业和基建项目的融资闭合更为复杂。
执法实践的不确定性 体现在行政和司法周期漫长、各地区和部门对法规解释不一，以及涉税、海关、土地、环保等问题必须分别推进，导致争议解决周期拉长、法律成本增加。
最后，对进口设备依赖度高使项目容易受到成本波动和汇率风险的冲击。汇率变化影响采购预算和债务偿还成本，物流费率与保险费的不稳定则推高单位成本、干扰交付进度。在部分涉及公共采购与支持计划的程序中，还附带原产地与本地化要求，限制了纯进口方案的使用，抬高了供应链设计和生产合作的门槛。
Foreign-led projects in Kazakhstan routinely encounter technological and production-related challenges. At the level of operating cycles, limited availability of service and repair for high-tech equipment often results in delays in spare-parts delivery and longer service call windows. Start-up and commissioning schedules are further affected by unstable access to utilities - sufficient power capacity, water, gas, and ICT. The combined effect is higher implementation costs for new technologies and missed target launch dates.
Administrative barriers and fragmented procedures remain a significant source of risk. Project documentation must be cleared by multiple agencies across different tiers of government, which lengthens timelines, creates duplicative requirements, and leads to changes in technical specifications mid-implementation. The lack of a single point of accountability across interdependent procedures - land allocation, urban planning reviews, environmental approvals, and network connections - adds uncertainty and raises transaction costs.
A separate issue is the lack of synchronisation between industrial construction and the delivery of external infrastructure. Large facilities are often completed faster than networks are brought to the site, leaving commissioned plants idle while awaiting connection. Project budgets increase due to equipment preservation and contract extensions, and when laying external utilities investors encounter land and rights-of-way constraints, even where capacities were broadly pre-agreed.
Operational and legal risks are concentrated on border-adjacent sites and within special economic zones. Delays in obtaining resident status and being entered into official registers, customs difficulties when importing construction materials and technological equipment, and the risk of subsequent removal from registers due to formal non-compliance create uncertainty at early stages. Tax disputes frequently arise over the classification of goods and the regimes governing their use on site, potentially leading to additional assessments and cash-flow blockages during critical phases.
Workforce shortages and skills gaps are pronounced outside the largest urban agglomerations. The market lacks process engineers, commissioning specialists, and power engineers, as well as professionals in industrial safety, environmental management, and quality assurance. This raises training and onboarding costs, extends ramp-up periods, and complicates round-the-clock staffing for continuous operations.
From 2026, the tax environment will change in ways businesses perceive as adding to project costs. The VAT rate will rise to 16%, the registration threshold will be lowered, and some exemptions will be curtailed—together increasing the cost of materials, equipment, and services along the supply chain and raising working-capital needs during the construction phase. Broader taxation of certain real-estate transactions will lift the cost of development and infrastructure projects, while tighter corporate-income-tax rules for particular sectors and higher excise duties increase overall fiscal pressure. Administering VAT refunds on large capital purchases remains complex and resource-intensive, with direct implications for project liquidity.
Land matters and urban-planning regulations constitute another layer of systemic constraints. Lengthy approvals for land allotment and changes of designated use, overlaps with third-party rights on adjacent plots and utility corridors, and the need to re-issue planning documentation after project adjustments all contribute to further delays and higher costs.
Access to finance is also subject to constraints. Long-tenor funding in tenge is limited; financial models are sensitive to interest-rate movements and exchange-rate volatility; and collateral requirements in project finance remain stringent. This complicates financial close for large industrial and infrastructure schemes.
Enforcement practice adds uncertainty through protracted administrative and judicial timelines, divergent interpretations of rules across regions and agencies, and the need to advance interrelated issues - tax, customs, land, and environmental - in parallel before different authorities. This extends dispute-resolution cycles and increases legal costs.
Finally, the high share of imported equipment makes projects vulnerable to cost volatility and currency fluctuations. Exchange-rate movements affect procurement budgets and debt-service costs, while variable logistics rates and insurance premiums impact unit costs and delivery schedules. In several procedures tied to public procurement and support programs, origin and localisation requirements apply, limiting the use of fully imported solutions and raising the entry bar for supply-chain design and production partnerships.
3. 您在为中国企业提供咨询时最常遇到哪些问题？
在为中国企业提供咨询时，最突出的问题集中在法律保障、行政程序、行业许可、外籍劳工、公共采购和税务纠纷几个方面。
首先， 司法体系的不确定性仍是关键风险 。尽管改革在推进，但案件审理周期长、判决理由质量不稳，以及不同审级间立场不一致，使企业难以完全信赖司法救济。
其次， 行政负担过重 。监管检查往往超出范围，文件要求繁琐，导致成本上升，增加了企业对监管环境的不确定感。
在 矿产资源利用方面 ，股权转让审批易被延迟，甚至与无关问题挂钩，加剧了谈判不对称，抬高了时间成本。
外籍劳工配额 也是一大障碍。中国企业希望引入自有团队，但受比例限制，不得不重组项目架构、增加本地化成本。
公共采购规则偏向本地制造 商，要求提供原产地证明及较高的本地化比例，迫使外国企业在进入初期就进行深度本地化。
税务纠纷 频繁，集中在应税基数、成本分摊、优惠适用等问题上。多数案例裁决偏向国家，使企业在财务模型中不得不采取保守假设。
此外，跨部门协调不足加剧了不确定性。土地、环保、城市规划、海关等许可流程缺乏统一责任主体，造成解释分歧和延误。
总体而言，这些因素共同塑造了中国企业进入哈萨克斯坦市场时最常遇到的风险画像：法律与程序不确定性、劳动力流动受限以及严格的本地化要求。
In advising Chinese enterprises in Kazakhstan, the most recurrent difficulties cluster around several systemic areas: judicial protection, administrative interaction, sector-specific permits and approvals, access to foreign labor, participation in public procurement, and tax disputes.
The court system remains a key parameter of investment predictability. Independence, adversarial balance, and consistent application of law directly influence risk assessments: investors expect that, in the event of a dispute, infringed rights will be effectively restored. At the same time, despite ongoing reforms and an orientation toward international standards, enforcement practice remains uneven; questions persist about case timelines, the quality of reasoning, and the stability of judicial positions across instances.
The administrative environment is marked by fragmented procedures and excessive regulatory burden. In practice, regulatory inspections often trigger requests that go beyond the stated scope; the volume of documents and data demanded is frequently disproportionate to the objective of the review. This approach effectively shifts the focus from prevention of violations to searching for formal grounds for liability, which raises transaction costs and amplifies a sense of regulatory uncertainty.
In the subsoil use sector, permitting remains a vulnerable point. A typical collision arises when transferring equity stakes in subsoil-user companies: obtaining consent from the competent authority can be delayed or linked to unrelated issues in the company’s dealings with the state, for example the presence of outstanding administrative fines. This linkage heightens negotiating asymmetry and increases the cost of time for the investor, especially in deals with narrow closing windows.
Access to foreign labor is constrained by quota requirements and national-content priorities. Chinese enterprises often plan to bring their own engineering and project teams; however, quota systems and ratios governing the share of foreign personnel limit the practical import of competencies. This compels a reconfiguration of project organization, lengthens mobilization timelines, and adds costs for localizing functions.
Participation in public procurement is conditioned by preferences for domestic manufacturers and mandatory certificates of origin. To meet evaluation criteria, foreign companies frequently need to deploy full-scale production capacities in the country, including compliance with thresholds for local components and spare parts. For Chinese suppliers, this translates into deep localization of supply chains and technological processes at the market-entry stage.
Tax relations remain an area of heightened procedural risk. Disputes arise over interpretations of the tax base, cost allocation, application of incentives, and the procedural documentation of transactions. In observed practice, a substantial share of tax litigation is resolved in favor of the state, which encourages conservative assumptions in fiscal risk assessment and affects reserve provisioning in financial models.
Finally, cross-cutting issues include coordination among agencies and levels of government. Permitting and registration actions in related domains - land and urban planning, environmental approvals, technical conditions for utility connections, and customs regimes for equipment imports - rarely move in sync. The absence of a single point of accountability produces divergent interpretations, requests for rework, and, as a result, accumulated delays along the critical path of projects.
Taken together, these factors shape a predictable risk profile that Chinese enterprises most often encounter when entering the Kazakh market: legal and procedural uncertainty, limited labor mobility and stringent localization requirements.
04
智利
被采访者：
王婧 Ruth Jing Wang
致同拉美 Grant Thornton Latam 中国事业部主管
1. 您的国家是否适合中国企业海外扩张？为什么？
是的，确实如此。智利因其 透明的治理和稳定的政治机制 ，以及 与更多全球主要经济体的双重条约 ，被视为 进入拉美的战略枢纽 。
Yes indeed. Chile is taken as a strategic hub to access Latam thanks to its transparent governance and stable political mechanism, plus the double treaty with more global main economies.
2. 中国企业当地最常见挑战有哪些？
语言障碍 和当地监管/财务/税务/劳工合规。
Language barriers and local regulatory/financial/tax/labour compliance.
3. 您在为中国企业提供咨询时最常遇到哪些问题？
高强度的工作速度和压力，以及由于中国激烈的竞争，总部对他们 高（有时不切实际） 的期望。
Intense working speed and pressure and their high (sometimes unrealistic) expectations from headquaters due to fierce competition in China.
05
荷兰
被采访者：
赵思琦律师
Bennink Dunin-Wasowicz 律师
1. 您的国家是否适合中国企业海外扩张？为什么？
在欧盟市场中，荷兰一直被视为对中国企业“出海”最为友好的国家之一。作为一个拥有悠久且稳定贸易传统的国家，荷兰政府始终秉持务实的态度，为企业营造了公平、开放、便捷的营商环境。
我所的业务主要聚焦于欧盟贸易合规、出口管制与制裁法合规。从这一角度观察，荷兰在欧盟成员国中表现突出： 无论是政策态度还是实际操作，荷兰都以务实、高效、友好著称，并且企业与政府之间的沟通渠道相对顺畅。
以出口许可证申请为例，在荷兰企业只需通过政府官方网站下载、填写并提交表格，所有流程均已实现数字化，审批回复时间相对固定且透明。如果申请材料存在疑问，相关政府机构会直接通过邮件或信息进行沟通，给予企业澄清与补充文件的机会。此外，企业若在进出口管制或制裁法规方面有问题，也可以向主管机构咨询，政府工作人员会以邮件形式提供解释。
这些实际案例充分体现了荷兰政府务实高效、沟通顺畅的特点，为企业“走出去”以及在贸易合规方面提供了切实的便利与支持。
2. 中国企业当地最常见挑战有哪些？
从进出口贸易合规的角度来看，中国企业在荷兰最常遇到的挑战之一，是如何正确理解并遵守欧盟法律与成员国国内法交织形成的多层次法律框架。以出口管制为例，欧盟法律与荷兰国内法分别适用于不同类型的交易，而制裁法则由欧盟统一规定与实施。
整体而言， 欧盟对贸易合规的要求既严格又复杂 ，尤其是在一些敏感或战略性行业中，企业几乎在每一次与新客户签约或新订单落地时，都需要通过系统性的贸易合规审查程序来确保合法合规。对于重点领域，欧盟还要求企业建立完善、固定的内部合规政策与操作流程。这类要求对于部分中国企业来说相对陌生，甚至是全新的挑战。
如果企业缺乏 系统、健全的合规政策和配套机制 ，在面对相关法律要求时往往会显得被动，不仅需要临时补充大量文件，还可能因此延误业务进程，甚至对整体商业运作造成不利影响。
3. 您在为中国企业提供咨询时最常遇到哪些问题？
在我们的实践中，不少中国企业是第一次接触并处理出口管制或制裁相关的法律问题。由于对荷兰及欧盟的出口管制要求和许可证申请流程缺乏熟悉，企业往往难以及时做好前期准备，从而影响贸易的顺利开展。
在制裁法方面，中国企业同样需要进一步提升合规意识。近年来，欧盟制裁法规发展迅速，尤其是针对俄罗斯的经济制裁措施不断升级。对此，中国企业必须在内部合规流程中建立相应的审核机制，确保在欧盟运营的中国企业能够严格遵守相关制裁规定，降低法律与商业风险。
06
美国
被采访者：
Felton
Alphakey Advisory Group 合伙人
1. 您的国家是否适合中国企业海外扩张？为什么？
非常适合。美国是 全球最大的消费品市场之一 ，经济体量庞大、消费能力强，产业链完整、资本市场成熟。对中国企业而言，美国不仅是销售市场，更是品牌国际化、资本运作、科技创新的重要平台。
此外，美国的法制体系透明、商业规则成熟，为长期投资提供了稳定的环境。许多中国企业通过在美设立子公司、研发中心或品牌总部，不仅能拓展海外市场，还能借助美国的技术、人才、金融和品牌生态， 实现从“制造”向“创造”的升级 。
2. 中国企业当地最常见挑战有哪些？
最常见的挑战可以归纳为三大类： 合规、文化与竞争 。
合规挑战 ：美国监管体系分联邦与州两级，税务、劳动、隐私、环保、进出口等法规复杂多变。企业若未建立完善的合规机制，容易在税务申报、雇佣制度、跨境支付或数据传输上出现风险。 尤其在税务领域，转让定价、永久机构认定、销售税及州税差异都需要专业指导。
文化与沟通挑战 ：管理方式、决策逻辑和沟通风格存在显著差异。中国企业往往习惯自上而下的管理，而美国团队更注重授权与透明沟通。忽视这一点，容易造成内部摩擦和人才流失。
市场竞争挑战 ：本地企业普遍品牌根基深厚、法律意识强。新进入者若缺乏对当地消费心理和行业生态的深入理解，容易在市场定位和品牌传播上失误。
3. 您在为中国企业提供咨询时最常遇到哪些问题？
我最常遇到的问题是 本地化落地与战略匹配 。许多企业在进入美国市场时，战略定位与当地实际脱节。例如：
财务体系不兼容 ：沿用国内会计准则或报表格式，难以满足美国GAAP、税务或融资要求；
组织结构不清晰 ：没有明确区分境内母公司与境外子公司的治理与交易安排，导致税务与法律风险；
人才与文化适应 ：缺乏懂中美两地文化的管理层或顾问，导致内部沟通和客户拓展受阻；
合规意识不足 ：对当地税收、移民、薪酬、知识产权保护等法律义务不熟悉；
缺乏长远规划 ：许多企业视美国市场为短期出口通道，而非长期战略布局。
因此，我们通常协助客户从 结构设计、税务合规、财务管理、品牌本地化 四个方面入手，帮助他们在美国建立可持续的经营模式。
07
百宸建议
在与世界各地优秀的中介机构合作为中国企业“出海”提供服务的过程中，我们也对这三个采访各国专家的问题有一些自己的观察：
1. 您的国家是否适合中国企业海外扩张？为什么？
凭借中国企业的 韧性、努力程度和智慧 ，我们真切感受到，只要中国企业有决心，具备基本的营商环境和商业逻辑上的可行性基础，的确很难存在能真正阻挡我们的障碍。
2. 中国企业当地最常见挑战有哪些？
正如此前各国专家所说，“出海”到一个新的国家，当地的法律法规、营商环境必然有自己的规则。我们中国企业作为当地的“外国投资者”，需要通过合格的律师、财务老师或任何可靠的信息来源，对当地的“游戏规则”进行充分的了解以及必要的遵守。
如果仅靠“听说”的经验“抄作业”，甚至试图绕过当地明文规定的监管要求“走捷径”，很有可能最终会出现风风火火创业而最终为人作嫁，白忙活一场的结果。 我们由衷的建议企业“花小钱办大事”，为自己建立安全护城河底线。
3. 您在为中国企业提供咨询时最常遇到哪些问题？
作为以“法商结合”为服务宗旨的律师事务所，我们深切理解企业客户在面对“出海”这样重大商业安排时对快速反应、及时跟进的要求。
但是，根据我们服务企业“出海”的实践经验，对于东南亚、拉丁美洲的一些国家，许多具体事项须以届时的窗口指导意见为准，这就需要由当地律师去做最新的咨询论证，这一过程需要时间。而像美国和欧盟的一些国家，存在监管层级多、规定复杂的现象，也需要一定时间，方可给出精准结论。
我们非常理解中国企业急迫施展拳脚的心情，但我们也想提醒企业，在进行最终决策前，一定经由可靠信息源对相关事项的可能结果进行充分了解，以避免产生不必要的成本。
结语
综上所述，中国企业“出海”已从单一的市场拓展，逐渐转变为全球资源整合与产业链优化的战略布局。不同国家的法律、政策和市场条件各异，但有一个共识： 唯有在合规、稳健和长期主义的前提下，中国企业才能真正将海外市场机遇转化为可持续的成果。
在全球经济与政治环境持续变化的当下，挑战不可避免，但 中国企业的韧性、适应力与创新力同样不容低估。把握规律、尊重规则、善用专业力量，将是“出海”企业走得更远、走得更稳的关键。
作者介绍
百宸
合伙人 赵叶
邮箱
律师简介
赵叶律师从业十余年，始终专注公司并购、跨境投融资及争议解决领域，尤其擅长从非诉和争议解决等不同维度与视角协助客户实现核心利益诉求。近年来为诸多大型国企及民企在“一带一路”国家开展的各类项目，成功提供跨境综合法律服务。
百宸
顾问 杨洁
邮箱
律师简介
杨洁律师先后毕业于中国政法大学和北京大学法学院，在近十年的律师工作中积累了丰富的境外投融资、争议解决及公司商事业务处理经验，近年来，杨洁律师主要从事涉“一带一路”国家的跨境综合法律服务，帮助客户在不同法域的诸多项目顺利推进落地。
百宸律师事务所
百宸律师事务所是一家兼具高端品质和综合能力的精品律师事务所，主要为各类企业和投资机构提供全方位的优质法律服务。律所总部位于北京，在上海设有分所。
百宸律师由非诉和诉讼精英律师团队组成，在各自领域有突出的专业定位和行业认可，通过团队紧密合作能满足客户的复杂需求，同时结合本土与跨境服务的经验，以高效务实的精神、为客户提供高品质的综合法律解决方案。
百宸提供的法律服务涵盖多个领域，包括私募股权与风险投资、投资基金、证券与资本市场、争议解决、收购兼并、知识产权、刑事业务、外商直接投资、跨境投资、金融服务等。百宸律师服务的行业多种多样，涉及人工智能、新能源、TMT（科技、媒体和通讯）与互联网、医疗健康与医药，生物技术、半导体、能源与资源、金融、教育、旅游、娱乐、消费品及零售、房地产、物流等。
百宸以专业、细致的服务不仅获得了客户的长期信任与支持，也在同行中赢得了广泛的尊重，连续获得了钱伯斯（Chambers and Partners）、IFLR1000、《法律500强》（The Legal 500）、《亚洲法律杂志》（ALB）、中国风险投资研究院、LEGALBAND 、GCProfiles、HRTier、DAWKINS 、《亚洲法律概况》（asialaw Profiles）、《商法》、律新社等主流法律评奖机构颁发的多项荣誉。
好内容值得被看见！
点赞
分享
喜欢
