The issue I have with the Reuters article is that it doesn't link to the statement on the website. It would be great if western media, when talking about this,

The issue I have with the Reuters article is that it doesn't link to the statement on the website. It would be great if western media, when talking about this, actually provide proof to the official documents - especially if they're online. Question: Don't western countries also restrict your ability to travel during court proceedings? The court says you're a flight risk so they take away your passport or don't give you bail, right? (At least in the USA). Most of these things they listed are felonies in China, so I can see why they wouldn't want you to leave before appearing in court and paying your fines. I remember reading some other analysis on the Chinese Social Credit System proposals, and it seemed to really just restrict people's travel if you're in the middle of court proceedings (maybe from smoking on trains, using expired tickets, spreading false information about terrorism - https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1038 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1038 says this is punishable in USA for up to 5 years...). EDIT: source article is http://www.chinatax.gov.cn/n810341/n810755/c3359637/content.html http://www.chinatax.gov.cn/n810341/n810755/c3359637/content.... As noted in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18250502 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18250502, Reuters is wrong to include trains in their reporting. In context, this is just restricting plane travel. And they list a bunch of plane / airport - related infractions plus social infractions (such as basically white collar crime, which after 2008 seems like something USA needs to do too). In context, basically restricting your ability to travel with planes if you do any of these airplane/airport related things: 1) spread false rumors about terrorism as related to air travel, 2) using others people's or using fake ID or fake boarding passes, 3) and a bunch of listings of committing crimes in airplanes and airports (fighting, stopping people from performing their jobs, stealing, smoking where you can't etc...) That sounds reasonable to me. The article also says to restrict air travel for non-airplane/airport things such as (mostly white collar crimes as I mentioned above): 1) if you're accused in a large tax avoidance / tax related court case, 2) illegally manipulating accounting or faking or lying about finances and not paying back debts (doesn't specifically say personal or corporate, but I assume it's the latter), 3) didnt pay the social insurance for employees AND refusal to remedy the situation ( I assume the managers/directors would be the one punished here), 4) securities and futures deemed illegal and fined and fines haven't been paid, or basically a public company not doing what it says it publicly said it would do, 5) people deemed by the courts to have lost social credit (this one seems like can be manipulated, as courts could deem you to have lost social credit from maybe a train-specific legislation, and thus restricting your plane travel too), and 6) says relevant parties that identify more categories of actions of depleting trust should be added and amended. If anyone is interested I might do a more specific write up of this. I kind of just translated as I read so might have some mistakes, in which case please let me know and I will amend