Month: June 2025

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

     Following is a question by Dr the Hon Chan Han-pan and a written reply by the Acting Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury, Mr Joseph Chan, in the Legislative Council today (June 18):
 
Question:
 
     I have received a number of requests for assistance involving the opening of bank accounts by non-commercial organisations and, among them, some “three-nil buildings” are still unable to open bank accounts six to eight months after the formation of owners’ corporations (OCs), rendering the OCs unable to raise funds for their operation. On the contrary, it takes only one to two months on average for commercial organisations to open accounts. There are views that the difficulties encountered by OCs in opening accounts have seriously affected the livelihood of the grass roots and run counter to the Government’s objective of improving the community. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) whether it knows the total number of complaints received by the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) in the past three years about non-commercial organisations encountering difficulties (e.g. excessively long processing time) in opening bank accounts;
 
(2) whether it knows if HKMA has put in place measures to streamline the requirements for banks in vetting and approving applications from non-commercial organisations for opening accounts (in particular social service accounts such as those for OCs), so as to shorten the processing time;
 
(3) whether it will amend the Banking Ordinance (Cap. 155) or the licensing guidelines to expressly require banks to provide social service organisations with convenient procedures for opening accounts; and
 
(4) whether it knows if HKMA will set indicators to increase banks’ incentive to process applications from organisations such as OCs for opening accounts, or impose penalties on banks against which complaints have been repeatedly lodged?
 
Reply:
 
President,
 
     To safeguard the stability of the banking system and customer interests, banks are required to comply with the relevant laws and regulatory requirements when establishing business relationship with customers. Banks are required to conduct customer due diligence (CDD) on applicants seeking to open a bank account irrespective of whether they are commercial entities or non-commercial entities (including Owners’ Corporations (OCs)).
 
     The Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) has been closely monitoring the situation regarding bank account opening of non-commercial entities in Hong Kong. In this connection, the HKMA reminds the banking sector from time to time that while implementing robust control measures, they should also avoid creating unreasonable barriers for legitimate businesses and entities (including OCs and other non-commercial entities) to access banking services. Banks should maintain proper communication with customers throughout the CDD process, properly handle customers’ account opening applications through transparent, reasonable and efficient procedures, uphold the principle of treating customers fairly, and where appropriate flexibly and pragmatically handle account opening applications.
 
     After consulting the HKMA, our reply to the four parts of the question is as follows:
 
     The HKMA issued a circular to banks in April 2023 to provide further guidance on the CDD requirements with respect to account opening for commercial entities or non-commercial entities. The circular also sets out guidance on communication with customers, understanding of market developments and risk management, as well as shares past cases and good practices for the industry’s reference, so as to assist banks in achieving effective outcomes and enhancing customer experience in account opening. The HKMA has also required banks to review their account opening procedures and CDD measures, and provide staff training.
 
     In response to the HKMA’s guidance, banks have introduced various facilitation measures in recent years to improve the account opening process for customers, covering OCs and other non-commercial entities. These measures include providing applicants with updates on the progress of their account opening applications, establishing review mechanisms and re-examining account opening applications upon customers’ request. The HKMA has also set up a dedicated email and hotline to collect enquiries from the public and relevant stakeholders, which are handled and followed up by a dedicated team within the HKMA for account opening and maintenance (the dedicated team).
 
     Regarding the account opening application process for OCs, as an OC is an independent body corporate set up under the Building Management Ordinance (Cap. 344), banks would adopt CDD measures applicable to a legal person. These include requiring applicants to provide relevant registration documents of the corporation, minutes or extracts of resolutions of the management committee meeting or general meeting of the OC regarding the approval for opening a bank account and appointment of authorised signatories, as well as the identification documents of the appointed authorised signatories. Banks may also request additional information or documents from the applicants having regard to the specific circumstances and their risk assessments. The turnaround time for account opening depends on the circumstances of individual cases, as well as whether the applicant has furnished the required information. As the HKMA understood from major banks, the account opening process could generally be completed in around two weeks upon receipt of the required information and documents from applicants.
 
     The HKMA has been maintaining close communication with the Home Affairs Department (HAD) and offering support to the OCs seeking assistance on bank account opening under the established communication and referral mechanism. In May 2025, the HKMA and the HAD held a meeting with representatives from the banking sector for a direct exchange on matters relating to bank account opening for OCs, including a discussion on the bank account opening situations following the establishment of OCs. The participating banks responded positively and have actively introduced facilitation measures to assist OCs, including publishing information in relation to bank account opening for OCs on banks’ websites; providing hotlines and contact information for OCs to enquire about account opening related information with individual banks; assigning designated staff to handle enquiries and applications in relation to bank account opening for OCs; as well as offering multiple channels and appointment arrangements to facilitate account opening for OCs. To further enhance transparency and shorten the account opening turnaround time, the HKMA, the HAD and the banking sector are jointly compiling practical information related to bank account opening, so as to assist OCs to better understand the account opening requirements and make advance preparation for the necessary documentations, with a view to enhancing customer experience.
 
     The numbers of complaints and requests for assistance received by the HKMA and the aforementioned dedicated team over the past three years regarding banks’ handling of account opening applications by non-commercial entities are tabulated as follows:
 

	2022	2023	2024	2025 (as of end-May)
Complaint received by the HKMA	None	1 case (Note 1)	None	1 case (Note 2)
Request for assistance received by the dedicated team	2 cases (Note 3)	2 cases (Note 4)	None	None

Note 1: The bank concerned properly handled the complaint, and the complainant did not seek further assistance from the HKMA after communicating with the bank.
Note 2: The bank is following up on the case as requested by the HKMA.
Note 3: Two cases concerning OCs have been resolved.
Note 4: These involved one case concerning an OC and one case concerning other non-commercial entity, both of which have been resolved.
 
     Apart from the above cases, the HKMA also received cases referred by the HAD and district organisations from time to time, mainly concerning the bank account opening procedures and requirements for newly formed OCs. In this connection, the HKMA has provided appropriate assistance to these newly formed OCs, and these OCs have subsequently started to proceed with their bank account opening applications. The HKMA noted that for some of these cases, bank accounts were successfully opened within about two weeks on average after the OCs provided the required information to banks. In certain cases, bank accounts were opened within one week.
 
     The HKMA and the banking sector have implemented a series of measures to facilitate bank account opening for various businesses and entities, while ensuring compliance with relevant laws and regulatory requirements. We consider that there is currently no need to introduce legislative amendments or set fixed targets regarding account opening matters. The HKMA will continue to maintain close communication and collaboration with the banking sector and relevant stakeholders on bank account opening matters, with a view to streamlining the related account opening processes and enhancing customer experience.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

Following is a question by the Hon Dominic Lee and a reply by the Acting Secretary for Culture, Sports and Tourism, Mr Raistlin Lau, in the Legislative Council today (June 18):
 
Question:
 
It has been reported that the Dapeng Peninsula of Shenzhen, which is adjacent to Yan Chau Tong of Hong Kong, possesses rich ecological resources, and both Shenzhen and Hong Kong have expressed intentions in recent years to strengthen cooperation in eco-tourism and marine conservation. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) of the details of cooperation projects commenced and co-operation agreements reached between the SAR (Special Administrative Region) Government and the relevant government departments of Dapeng New District, Shenzhen in terms of, among others, eco-tourism, green economy, and marine conservation; whether it has compiled statistics on the specific data and effectiveness of such co-operation projects over the past five years;
 
(2) whether it has plans to promote cross-boundary eco-tourism from Kat O and Tung Ping Chau to the Dapeng Peninsula and devise related sea routes, including the construction of piers for “co-location arrangement” in such areas; if so, of the details and progress of the ongoing negotiations with Shenzhen authorities, including technical feasibility, estimated timetable, and related ancillary facilities; if not, the reasons for that; and
 
(3) whether the Government has assessed the expected benefits of the aforementioned cross-boundary eco-tourism routes for Hong Kong’s tourism industry and local economy, as well as the potential risks involved in environmental conservation; if so, of the assessment results, and the policy directions determined in response to such results?
 
Reply:
 
President,
 
According to the Northern Metropolis (NM) Action Agenda announced in 2023, the Blue and Green Recreation, Tourism and Conservation Circle situated in the easternmost part of the NM comprises Robin’s Nest, Lin Ma Hang, Sha Tau Kok, Yan Chau Tong as well as coastal villages and the outlying islands. With abundant blue and green resources including country parks, marine parks and geopark as well as a number of traditional rural townships, this zone has the potential for recreation and tourism development.
 
As set out in the Development Blueprint for Hong Kong’s Tourism Industry 2.0, the Culture, Sports and Tourism Bureau (CSTB) promotes in-depth integration of Hong Kong’s unique world-class resources with tourism, and crafts tourism products and projects with distinctive features and strong appeal, with “Ecology+Tourism” being one of the development strategies. On the premises of respecting the nature and protecting the environment, we will appropriately unveil Hong Kong’s precious ecological resources to visitors, and at the same time minimise the potential environmental impact due to too many visitors as far as practicable, thereby balancing the needs for conservation and tourism development.
 
The Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) under the Environment and Ecology Bureau (EEB) has designated places of high ecological value in Yan Chau Tong as country park, marine park and geopark, for conservation and eco-education and recreation purposes.
 
In taking forth the above work, the wish of some local communities for maintaining a quiet countryside environment should also be considered.
 
Having consulted the EEB, the Development Bureau, the Security Bureau and the Transport and Logistics Bureau, a consolidated reply in response to the questions raised by the Hon Dominic Lee is as follows:
 
(1) The HKSAR (Hong Kong Special Administrative Region) Government has established mechanisms with the Shenzhen authorities for the cooperation in individual areas. On ecological conservation and environmental protection, following the establishment of the Robin’s Nest Country Park last year, the AFCD and the Planning and Natural Resources Bureau of Shenzhen Municipality signed the Cooperation Agreement last year on the establishment of the ecological corridor between Shenzhen Wutong Mountain and Hong Kong Robin’s Nest, including jointly removing invasive species, conducting ecological surveys, examining enhancement of animal corridors and enhancing publicity and education. The Hong Kong UNESCO Global Geopark also collaborated with the Shenzhen Dapeng Peninsula National Geological Natural Park to hold science lectures and exhibitions in both locations last year and this year, enabling citizens of both sides to have better understanding of the geological history, landforms, and geoparks of the two places.
 
On marine conservation, the Environmental Protection Department and the Ecology and Environment Bureau of Shenzhen Municipality have been improving sewage collection and treatment through the Mirs Bay and Deep Bay (Shenzhen Bay) Areas Environmental Management Special Panel. With the concerted efforts of both sides, the water quality of Mirs Bay has been kept at a good level, and it is conducive to the conservation of marine ecology, especially the hard corals in the northeast waters of Hong Kong.
  
The CSTB has been strengthening co-operation with the Shenzhen authorities in the tourism aspect under the principle of mutual benefits, including encouraging the trade to design eco-tourism products and itineraries on the premise of striking a balance between ecological conservation and tourism development. The travel trade of the Shenzhen and Hong Kong will also organise relevant familiarisation visits to help with the promotion work.
 
(2) and (3) Yan Chau Tong in the northeastern part of Hong Kong possesses unique geological landscape, rich ecology and village culture with long history. The AFCD has, in collaboration with stakeholders and the local community, established visitor centers, cultural trails, land tour routes, island-hopping itineraries, and maritime tour routes, providing tourists an in-depth green tour experience. In addition, the Countryside Conservation Office under the EEB is dedicated to revitalising villages, and held the Countryside Harvest Festival: Kuk Po ‘Sound, Sight, Taste Fusion’ Tour at Kuk Po in Sha Tau Kok from January to February 2025. The event blended local natural ecology, historical architecture and countryside culture, allowing the public to experience the unique charm of Hong Kong’s countryside.
 
Through the Working Group for Sha Tau Kok Co-operation Zone set up under the Task Force for Collaboration on the Northern Metropolis Development Strategy under the Guangdong-Hong Kong and Hong Kong-Shenzhen co-operation mechanism, the CSTB collaborates with Shenzhen to promote the tourism development in Sha Tau Kok and nearby areas (including Kat O) under the overall principle of “low density, high quality” and through enriching its historical and cultural elements. The CSTB has also been encouraging the business sector to develop diversified tourism products. At present, Mainland visitors can conveniently enter Hong Kong through various boundary control points to join local tours, including eco-tourism itineraries in Hong Kong. Earlier on, in collaboration with the Travel Industry Council of Hong Kong, the CSTB actively engaged with the trade in Hong Kong and Shenzhen. For instance, the CSTB organised the Sha Tau Kok island-hopping familiarisation tour for the travel trade from Yantian District of Shenzhen in December last year, which included visits to Lai Chi Wo, Kat O and Ap Chau, etc, for designing Sha Tau Kok island-hopping tours after crossing the boundary from the Liantang/Heung Yuen Wai Boundary Control Point.

As regards the construction of piers for “co-location arrangement” for developing cross-boundary ferry routes between the eastern waters of Shenzhen and the NM area of Hong Kong as mentioned in part two of the question, it will indeed involve a number of complex considerations as mentioned in part three of the question, including the long-term market demand for the ferry routes concerned and the carrying capacity of the region; the infrastructure facilities that are required, the consequential change of planning as well as the economic and cost-effectiveness of the infrastructure investment; the security challenges that will have to be faced; and the potential impacts on the ecological environment, etc. which require long-term consideration by both sides of the governments. 
 
Thank you President.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region – 4

Following is a question by the Hon Nixie Lam and a reply by the Acting Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury, Mr Joseph Chan, in the Legislative Council today (June 18):
 
Question:
 
     Under the Inland Revenue Ordinance, all eligible child allowances for married couples residing together can only be claimed by one of them, and they must decide on their own who should make the claims. There are views that such arrangement may give rise to disputes within the family. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) given that modern married couples usually share the responsibility of taking care of their children (both financially and in terms of care), of the reasons why child allowances can only be claimed by one of them at present;
 
(2) whether it has studied amending the legislation to stipulate that married couples with children may allocate child allowances equally or claim child allowances separately; if so, of the specific plan and timetable, including whether it will consider introducing a default allocation mechanism (such as allowing a choice of equal allocation of allowances or automatic allocation of allowances according to the ratio of the married couples’ incomes, empowering the Inland Revenue Department to make rulings or setting clear criteria on the priority of making claims); if it has not studied amending the legislation, of the reasons for that; and
 
(3) whether, in the absence of legislative amendments at present, the Government will consider drawing up a set of reference guidelines on child allowances, e.g. the order of claims may be handled according to the ratio of family incomes, major child-rearing roles or previous claiming practices, etc, as well as stepping up public education, so as to assist families in making proper arrangements for claiming allowances; if so, of the specific plan and timetable; if not, the reasons for that?
 
Reply:
 
President,
 
     According to Section 31 of the Inland Revenue Ordinance (Cap. 112) (Ordinance), a taxpayer for salaries tax may claim child allowance for a year of assessment if he/she maintains an unmarried child who is under 18 years old; of or over 18 but under 25 years old and receiving full time education at an educational institution; or of or over 18 years old and is, because of physical or mental disability, unable to work in that year of assessment. A taxpayer may claim child allowance for up to nine children. Starting from the year of assessment 2023/24, the allowance for each child is $130,000. An additional allowance of $130,000 is granted for a newborn child during the year of assessment of the child’s birth.
 
     My reply to parts 1-3 of the Hon Nixie Lam’s question is as follows:
 
(1) and (2) According to Section 31(3) of the Ordinance, unless a taxpayer and his/her spouse are living apart, all child allowances must be claimed en bloc by either the taxpayer or his/her spouse. Taxpayers and their spouse should jointly decide who will claim all the child allowances. This requirement was included in the Ordinance in 1989, when married persons started to be allowed to elect separate taxation or joint assessment with their spouse, and has been in force until today. The main considerations are as follows:
 
     Before the year of assessment 2003/04, the amount of child allowance was determined by the number of children claimed on a regressive basis. Starting from the year of assessment 2003/04, the 1st to the 9th child are granted with a uniform allowance. Nevertheless, the prevailing mechanism already provides sufficient options and flexibility to reduce the tax burden on married persons, and more than 60 per cent of taxpayers claiming child allowances claim for only one child. We therefore consider that there is no need to abolish the requirement that only a taxpayer or his/her spouse can claim child allowance. Currently, married persons may elect separate taxation or joint assessment with their spouse for tax savings. Having all child allowances claimed by one party or allowing both parties to separately claim allowances for individual child or children does not affect the total amount of tax payable under joint assessment. Under the current arrangement, even if married persons and their spouse do not elect joint assessment on their own initiative, the Inland Revenue Department (IRD) would still compare their tax payable under separate taxation and joint assessment. If joint assessment is found to be more beneficial to them, the IRD would invite them to elect joint assessment. In addition, the Ordinance does not require that the allowance in respect of the same child must always be claimed by the same claimant. If taxpayers and their spouse choose separate taxation, they may discuss in advance on how to claim the child allowance and flexibly arrange to claim the child allowance for different years of assessment, such as taking turns to claim in different years, to meet the needs of individual families.
 
     We find the current mechanism effective in reducing the tax burden on married persons and providing taxpayers with a flexible and convenient tax filing process, allowing them to make appropriate tax arrangements according to their family situations. There is no need to allow taxpayers and their spouse to separately claim child allowances. Currently, the IRD only apportions the child allowance based on actual circumstances for living apart or divorced cases. This arrangement helps reduce the compliance burden on taxpayers and ensure the IRD’s efficiency of tax assessment.
 
     On the other hand, as the specific circumstances and needs of each family vary, taxpayers and their spouse may have different financial and tax arrangements. We have no plans to change the current practice of the IRD generally not intervening in family matters to introduce a default allocation mechanism, as it is unlikely to meet the needs of all families.
 
The Government will continue to review the claim arrangements and levels of various allowances from time to time, and consider whether there is room for enhancement based on various factors such as the number of beneficiaries, the Government’s financial situation, and administrative efficiency.
 
(3) The IRD currently provides frequently asked questions and guidelines on child allowances on its website. Generally speaking, it is more beneficial for the party with higher income to claim child allowance. However, if one party is assessed at standard rates, it would be more beneficial for the other party who is not assessed at standard rates to claim the allowance. The website also features a tax calculator, allowing taxpayers and their spouses to input their respective income amounts, deductions, and different allowance distribution scenarios to make the most appropriate claim arrangements. Besides, after issuing individual tax returns in May of each year, the IRD will extend the service hours of telephone enquiry to answer questions from taxpayers about completing their tax returns.
 
Thank you, Mr President.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region – 4

Following is a question by the Hon Edmund Wong and a written reply by the Secretary for Security, Mr Tang Ping-keung, in the Legislative Council today (June 18):
 
Question:
 
It has been reported that various law enforcement agencies have recently discovered illegal workers using online car hailing or delivery platforms to work as drivers or food delivery workers, and have taken enforcement actions against them. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
 
(1) of the numbers of illegal workers and employers of illegal workers who were prosecuted in the past three years, together with a quarterly breakdown of such figures;
 
(2) as it is learnt that engaging in work through digital platforms does not involve employment procedures such as job interviews, whether the authorities have assessed if the activities on such platforms are more susceptible to involving illegal workers; whether it has found any criminal syndicate specialising in acquiring the personal data of some Hong Kong residents for the purpose of registering work accounts on such platforms and subsequently making profits by employing illegal workers to provide services with these accounts; if so, of the details;
 
(3) whether the authorities have contacted such digital platforms to ascertain if there are loopholes in their operations from which criminal syndicates and illegal workers may benefit; if so, of the details; and
 
(4) whether it has studied enacting legislation to step up the crackdown on illegal workers using such digital platforms to work for reward?

Reply:
 
President,
 
The Government is committed to combatting illegal employment, with a view to protecting job opportunities for the local workforce. It is a serious offence to engage in illegal employment. Employers, illegal workers as well as aiders and abettors of illegal employment will be liable to prosecution in accordance with the Immigration Ordinance (IO). The IO has different provisions targeting relevant offences committed by different groups of persons. Visitors, illegal immigrants and non-refoulement claimants, etc, are prohibited from taking any employment, whether paid or unpaid, or establishing or joining in any business. Aiders and abettors as well as illegal workers are liable to the same penalties. In addition, the Government amended the IO in 2021 by increasing the penalty of employers of illegal workers, with the maximum penalty significantly increased from a fine of $350,000 and three years’ imprisonment to a fine of $500,000 and 10 years’ imprisonment with a view to reflecting the gravity of such offences. The directors, managers, secretaries, partners, etc, of the company concerned may also bear criminal liability. The High Court has laid down sentencing guidelines that employers of illegal workers should be given an immediate custodial sentence.
 
Regarding the question raised by the Hon Edmund Wong, having consulted the Labour and Welfare Bureau/Labour Department (LD), the Hong Kong Police Force (the Police) and the Immigration Department (ImmD), our reply is as follows:
 
(1) According to ImmD’s record, the number of illegal workers prosecuted and the number of employers of illegal workers prosecuted over the past three years are tabulated below:
 

Year / quarter		Number of illegal workers prosecuted	Number of employers of illegal workers prosecuted
2022	1st quarter	50	23
	2nd quarter	148	41
	3rd quarter	175	39
	4th quarter	166	35
	Total in 2022	539	138
2023	1st quarter	167	26
	2nd quarter	221	29
	3rd quarter	269	34
	4th quarter	286	20
	Total in 2023	943	109
2024	1st quarter	220	50
	2nd quarter	268	33
	3rd quarter	300	33
	4th quarter	225	53
	Total in 2024	1 013	169
2025	1st quarter	262	39

(2) Illegal employment is not limited to individual industries. The Government has all along combatted illegal employment and enforced the law vigorously. With an increased demand for the services provided by online platforms (including online food delivery and online car hailing) in recent years, the relevant law enforcement agencies have taken respective actions in combatting illegal employment and will conduct joint operations when necessary. Regarding the online food delivery platforms, the ImmD and the Police arrested 180 persons in relevant enforcement operations from 2024 to May 2025, 98 were non-ethnic Chinese persons suspected of working illegally as food delivery couriers, 54 were local residents suspected of selling or renting their food delivery courier accounts to the illegal workers, four were suspected of employing illegal workers and the remaining were arrested because of engaging in other illegal works or using false instruments, etc. Regarding online car hailing, four persons who were suspected of breach of condition of stay were arrested by the Police during the same period. 
 
In the above operations, the ImmD and the Police did not identify any syndicate specialising in acquiring the personal data of Hong Kong residents for the purpose of registering work accounts on such platforms to make profits through employing illegal workers to provide services with those accounts. The law enforcement agencies will continue to closely monitor the situation and will not take this lightly. 
 
(3) Regarding online food delivery platforms, the ImmD and the Police maintain communications with platform companies from time to time, and have already requested them to strengthen the security measures on account registration and logging in, including adding authentication steps, requesting authentication of true identity, etc, in order to prevent the account holders from renting their accounts to others for food delivery. The LD has also established a Liaison Group comprising representatives of platform companies, labour organisations and the Government to explore suitable proposals to enhance the protection for platform workers, including stepping up on prevention of illegal workers in food delivery services. Regarding online car hailing, the Government has all along emphasised through various channels that any business shall be operated in accordance with the law.
 
(4) As aforementioned, the IO was amended in 2021 by increasing the penalty of employers of illegal workers, with the maximum penalty significantly increased from a fine of $350,000 and three years’ imprisonment to a fine of $500,000 and 10 years’ imprisonment. Regardless of whether online working platform or other working mode is involved, employers share the same legal responsibility to ensure employees are lawfully employable persons. The Government will continue to actively combat illegal employment on various fronts, including stepping up inspections and “cyber patrols”, taking rigourous law enforcement, and will also strengthen publicity and education, in order to raise the public’s law-abiding awareness.
 
Stepping up inspections and rigourous law enforcement
 
To deter employers from employing illegal workers, labour inspectors of the LD will, through regular workplace inspections, check employees’ proof of identity and employees records kept by employers under the power conferred by the Part IVB of the IO. Suspected illegal employment cases detected will be referred to relevant law enforcement agencies for follow-up.
 
The Cybercrime and Forensics Investigation Group (The Group) of the ImmD is dedicated to assisting frontline investigators in collecting digital evidence so as to strengthen the ability in case investigation and evidence collection, with a view to coping with criminals who may use well-developed technologies to commit immigration-related offences and some potential complicated crimes in the future. The Group has been proactively combatting cybercrimes related to illegal employment by conducting constant “cyber patrols”. It will take resolute enforcement actions against any person who is found using social media or instant messaging software to organise, arrange or incite the public to commit serious crimes, such as illegal employment etc.
 
The ImmD and the Police will continue to combat illegal employment related crimes rigourously, and will, depending on operational needs, risk assessment and other considerations, flexibly arrange sufficient manpower to conduct intelligence-led enforcement operations against illegal employment related crimes.
 
Publicity and education to raise law-abiding awareness
 
In order to raise the public’s law-abiding awareness and let the employers understand the serious consequences of employing illegal workers, the ImmD has deployed officers and promotional vehicles to black spots of illegal employment from time to time to distribute “Don’t Employ Illegal Workers” leaflets to employers and remind them to inspect the original Hong Kong Identity Cards of job seekers to ascertain whether they are lawfully employable. At the same time, the ImmD has also actively published information on the effectiveness of the latest operations against illegal employment and disseminated the message of “Employing Illegal Workers is an Offence” through its official accounts on different social media platforms. In addition, the ImmD has provided information of identifying lawfully employable persons to the public through various channels including ImmD’s website, leaflets and seminars, etc.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region – 4

​Following is a question by the Hon Carmen Kan and a reply by the Acting Secretary for Culture, Sports and Tourism, Mr Raistlin Lau, in the Legislative Council today (June 18):
 
Question:

The Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD)’s intelligent sports and recreation services booking and information system, SmartPLAY, which was developed at a cost of $500 million, was launched in 2023. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) of the number of complaints it has received and investigated since the launch of SmartPLAY in relation to hirers profiting from touting their booked sessions for use of recreation and sports facilities (touting activities); among these cases, of the respective numbers of those being punished according to the LCSD’s penalties, prosecuted according to the law, and convicted; whether it has examined the effectiveness of SmartPLAY in combating touting activities, including whether its anti-bot solution can effectively block plug-in programmes from snatching up booking sessions;

(2) as some members of the public have reflected that the e-payment method for the LCSD venues allows non-hirers to pay venue hire charges, making it possible for touting agents to book the venues on others’ behalf, whether there are any countermeasures in place; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; apart from the fact that minors may have their parents book recreation and sports facilities on their behalf, whether there are any other exceptional circumstances where third-party bookings are permitted; and

(3) as there are views that the current approach to allocation of venues (e.g. grass soccer pitches) by ballot is more effective than the first-come, first-served approach in combating touting activities, whether the authorities will consider allocating all recreational and sports facilities by ballot; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?

Reply:

President,

The Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD) launched a brand new intelligent sports and recreation services booking information system named SmartPLAY in November 2023 to replace the old Leisure Link Computer Booking System. The SmartPLAY system is an integrated one-stop electronic service platform designed to facilitate the public in searching for and booking the sports and recreation facilities of the LCSD, as well as enrolling in various kinds of sports and recreation activities or competitions through the internet or mobile application. At present, the SmartPLAY system has 1.07 million registered users with 28 000 daily booking transactions on average.

My reply to the the Hon Carmen Kan’s question is set out below:

(1) The LCSD has always paid close attention to unauthorised transfer or touting activities in relation to sports and recreation facilities, and adopted a multi-pronged approach to combat touting activities, including enhancing the booking system on an ongoing basis, imposing penalty arrangements, and stepping up inspections. At present, the SmartPLAY system includes the following functions to combat touting activities:

(i) adopting real-name registration;
(ii) allocating popular sports and recreation facilities by ballot in addition to the first-come, first-served allocation mechanism;
(iii) requiring hirers to declare and undertake that they will be present during the use of relevant facilities and that the user permit will not be transferred by any means when booking and signing for facilities via the SmartPLAY system. Offenders may have committed an offence of fraud under the Theft Ordinance (Cap. 210) and be liable to imprisonment of up to 14 years upon conviction; and
(iv) imposing restrictions to prohibit the booking of overlapping sessions of fee-charging or non-fee charging sports and recreation facilities.

In addition to enhancing the SmartPLAY system, the LCSD closely monitors information on touting and inspects venues from time to time, including conducting surprise inspections and requiring hirers to present identification documents to facilitate investigation and follow-up immediately as necessary. If a hirer is not present during the booked session, it will be counted as a breach. A hirer who has accumulated two breaches within 60 days will result in a 90-day ban on booking fee-charging sports and recreation facilities under the LCSD. Since the commissioning of the SmartPLAY system until May 2025, the LCSD has conducted over 890 000 random inspections, with more than 13 000 hirers being penalised for breaches, i.e. being suspended from booking the LCSD fee-charging sports and recreation facilities for 90 days. From November 2023 to May this year, the LCSD received a total of 435 complaints relating to touting activities. Upon investigation, the LCSD imposed penalties for 50 cases of breaches. The LCSD will continue to monitor the situation and consider imposing heavier penalties on repeated offenders.

Furthermore, the LCSD launched a joint operation with law enforcement agencies in July 2024 at tennis courts in Wan Chai District to combat touting and other illegal activities. Several individuals were arrested successfully. Some of the individuals had been prosecuted and convicted, and were sentenced to imprisonment of four months and six months respectively. Other cases are still under trial or being processed.

To effectively combat the abuse of computer programmes for booking sports and recreation facilities, a new generation of Web Application Firewall and anti-bot technology have been introduced in the SmartPLAY system to closely monitor users’ log-in activities. SmartPLAY also employs artificial intelligence (AI) to oversee users’ behaviour and network usage for auto-defence, ensuring smooth operation of the system. When AI detects any abnormal operation (such as unusual log-in), the system will automatically intercept suspicious access. Moreover, the LCSD, in collaboration with the contractor, has been closely monitoring the operation of the system and adjusting its settings from time to time.  More than five million log-in attempts by suspected bots were intercepted by the system during peak periods in early 2025. The LCSD and the contractor will continue to follow up and actively explore more solutions to prevent bot booking of sports and recreation facilities, thereby enhancing the booking experience of normal users.

(2) SmartPLAY is a one-stop electronic service platform that requires real-name registration. It enables the public to enquire about the sports and recreation facilities of the LCSD and make bookings anytime via the internet or mobile application with e-payment options. Owing to various circumstances (such as a lack of electronic payment tools or insufficient balances therein), individual users may not be able to use e-payment when booking facilities and require the assistance of others who are not hirers to make the payment and complete the process. Besides, parents of minors (aged under 18) may need to help manage their children’s accounts for booking and payment. Therefore, the SmartPLAY system does not require the hirer and the payer to be the same person. That said, real-name registration of the hirer is required and the hirer must personally check in and be present to use the facilities.

(3) Currently, the LCSD allocates its sports and recreation facilities using two methods, namely on a first-come, first-served basis and balloting. To facilitate members of the public in planning their exercise schedule, the SmartPLAY system allows users to make seven-day advance bookings or on-the-spot hires of most of the sports and recreation facilities on a first-come, first-served basis. As for balloting, although it is a fair mechanism, it requires users to make advance planning by submitting balloting applications within 14 to 20 days before the usage date. Applicants must also pay attention to the balloting results and payment deadlines. Since both allocation methods have their own merits and drawbacks, the LCSD has conducted a questionnaire survey to collect public views on the mechanisms for booking and allocating various sports and recreation facilities under its purview.

After considering the feedback from different users as well as reviewing the actual usage carefully, the LCSD currently only allocates sessions of popular turf soccer pitches by balloting, while other sports and recreation facilities continue to be allocated on a first-come, first-served basis. The LCSD will continue to pay close attention to the usage of its various facilities and review relevant booking arrangements with a view to encouraging the general public to engage in regular exercise.

Thank you, President.

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region