Core Summary
Dajia Insurance, a “specialized insurance company” acquired from Anbang Insurance, has recently undergone quiet personnel changes: the former chairman, He Xiaofeng, has stepped down from all his positions, and the legal representative has been replaced by General Manager Sun Xianliang. These changes are driven by three main conflicts:
1. Legacy issues from Anbang (such as the Fu Fei case);
2. The dilemma of the Insurance Security Fund (the largest shareholder), which has been unable to exit for seven years;
3. Frequent compliance violations that expose governance flaws.
In the future, Dajia Insurance must overcome these challenges by focusing on three key areas: rebuilding compliance, facilitating the exit of the Insurance Security Fund, and developing a pension business. Additionally, there is the lingering question of whether He Xiaofeng’s departure is related to the Fu Fei case.
Detailed Analysis
1. He Xiaofeng’s Quiet Departure: A Normal Transition or the Result of Legal Issues?
He Xiaofeng’s departure came without any announcement or ceremony, almost like a “quiet disappearance” – his profile was removed from the official website, and Sun Xianliang was appointed as the new legal representative. This was anticipated due to the following factors:
- Fu Fei Case: Fu Fei, He Xiaofeng’s deputy during the Anbang takeover, was sentenced to 13 years in prison for transferring state-owned assets at a low price during the handling of the Hangzhou Xixi mansion project (resulting in a loss of 200 million). Sources suggest that all related matters involved He Xiaofeng, who failed to cancel the transaction.
- Regulatory Preparations: In October 2025, Ji Yuhua, the chairman of the Insurance Security Fund, took over as the party secretary from He Xiaofeng; the legal representative was changed in June 2026. Previously, Caixin reported that He Xiaofeng had been taken away by authorities, and his position on the board became vacant after a new election.
- Sun Xianliang’s Compliance Background: With experience at the central bank and the banking regulatory authority, Sun Xianliang was promoted from supervisor to general manager and then to legal representative within two years. The industry believes his appointment will emphasize compliance and stability in management, which is practical given Dajia Insurance’s burden from Anbang’s legacy.
2. Dajia Insurance’s “Special Origin”: A Company Born out of the Anbang Crisis
Dajia Insurance was not established as a regular company but was created to address Anbang’s financial problems:
- Anbang’s Collapse: In 2018, Anbang was taken over due to fraudulent capital injections and illegal operations, with assets worth nearly 2 trillion yuan. He Xiaofeng led the subsequent restructuring efforts.
- Dajia Insurance’s Mission: Founded in 2019 with funding from the Insurance Security Fund (the industry’s rescue team), Sinopec, and SAIC, its mission was to acquire Anbang’s policies and core assets worth 1.5 trillion yuan while shedding high-risk projects. Its goals included protecting consumers’ rights, establishing a compliant new company, and facilitating the exit of the Insurance Security Fund. The first two goals have been largely achieved, but the third has stalled for seven years.
- The Insurance Security Fund’s Temporary Role: Holding 98.23% of the shares, the fund acted as a temporary solution. Its initial investment of 60.8 billion yuan (52% of the total) locked in its funds for a long time, weakening its ability to support the industry; therefore, it needs to exit.
3. The Dilemma of Exiting the Market: “Wanting to Leave but Unable to...”
The Insurance Security Fund has tried to sell its shares twice with no success:
- Two Failed Attempts: In July 2021, it offered 98.78% of the shares (including 0.55% held by Sinopec) for 33.5 billion yuan, but no buyer emerged; in August, the price was reduced to 30.2 billion yuan with no takers.
- Splitting Attempts: In 2024, it attempted to sell Dajia Pension and Dajia Property Insurance, but no buyers have been found.
- Challenges: The high price (over 30 billion yuan), strict buyer qualifications (high requirements from insurance investors), historical issues associated with Anbang, and lack of transparency (making it difficult for buyers to assess the company’s value) are major obstacles.
4. Compliance Issues: Penalties Reveal Deep Problems
Dajia Insurance’s performance appears good (2025: premium revenue increased by 8.7%, comprehensive income by 8%), but frequent penalties indicate underlying issues:
- Penalty Types: In the first half of 2026, subsidiaries were fined for “inaccurate financial data, false documents, and inflated expenses” – Taizhou branch fined 560,000 yuan, two institutions in Pingdingshan fined 550,000 yuan.
- Implications: While the fines are not significant financially, they damage the company’s reputation and lower its regulatory rating, making it even harder to attract investors. As a company born from Anbang’s crisis, higher compliance standards are expected, but Dajia Insurance’s compliance culture still needs improvement.
5. Three Paths Ahead and a Mystery: Who Really Owns Dajia Insurance?
Dajia Insurance faces three clear paths:
1. Rebuilding Compliance: Under Sun Xianliang’s leadership, compliance must be integrated throughout the company from headquarters to local branches.
2. Facilitating the Exit: Only with strategic investors can the Insurance Security Fund exit, allowing Dajia Insurance to become a legitimate market entity.
3. Developing a Pension Business: The “Dajia’s Home” pension brand has expanded to 11 urban communities, a differentiated strategy in an aging society.
The Mystery: Is He Xiaofeng’s departure a normal part of the transition or a consequence of the Fu Fei case? If it’s the latter, could more issues related to Anbang’s asset disposal be uncovered? This not only affects Dajia Insurance’s fate but also the credibility of China’s insurance industry’s risk management. After all, Dajia Insurance was once considered a successful example of risk resolution; any problems would impact public trust in regulatory authorities.
In conclusion, Dajia Insurance has a challenging path ahead. Its name suggests it should represent “everyone’s insurance,” but who truly owns it remains to be seen. Sun Xianliang and his team must prove their commitment through action. After all, despite seven years since the Anbang crisis, Dajia Insurance has not fully separated from its financial burdens (the Insurance Security Fund has not exited), nor has it completely resolved its compliance issues. The road ahead is long and full of challenges.