A small line in a Shenzhen charity’s annual report has touched off a debate about money, reputation and the professionalisation of China’s philanthropic sector. The report showed that Chen Xingjia (陈行甲), a former county party secretary turned headliner in China’s social-media philanthropy scene, received about RMB 730,100 in pre-tax income from the Henghui Charity Foundation in 2024 — a figure that many netizens found jarring for a man now billed as a public-spirited nonprofit leader.
Chen is hardly an ordinary recruit to the charity world. He made his name as the iron‑fisted party secretary of Badong county in Hubei province, where a 2011 probe into a shoddily built river embankment and a wider campaign against ghost employees earned him national recognition and, for some, a reputation as a crusading local cadre. After leaving office in 2016 he relocated to Shenzhen and founded the Henghui Charity Foundation, which focuses on big‑ticket medical aid, youth mental health and disaster relief. His social‑media reach — millions of followers on Douyin alone — has helped the foundation raise substantial sums.
The figure that sparked online consternation was high relative to published averages. Publicly available data show that disclosed secretary‑general pay among Chinese foundations averaged around RMB 122,200 in the 2019–2021 sample cited by Chinese media. But Henghui’s 2024 annual report records donations of RMB 21.23 million and charitable spending of RMB 22.13 million, with management costs equal to 5.3% of total outlays — well under the 10% ceiling set by China’s charity law. The foundation says salaries were approved by its board, audited and filed with the civil affairs authorities, and that the payroll funded by corporate earmarked donations was separate from unrestricted public donations.
Public reaction mixed technocratic defence with moral unease. Supporters argue that recruiting senior, experienced managers from the public sector — especially those with track records in governance, fundraising and public outreach — requires market‑level remuneration if charities are to compete for talent and deliver large, complex programmes. Detractors counter that visible pay for a high‑profile former official undermines the public’s image of charity work as selfless and risks eroding trust in the sector.
The controversy took a practical turn when New Oriental founder Yu Minhong announced on 20 January that his education and cultural conglomerate had hired Chen as a senior adviser at an annual fee of RMB 1.5 million, and that Yu would personally and corporately support Henghui with at least RMB 1 million a year. Chen then declared publicly that he would hand over operational responsibility to younger colleagues and stop taking a salary from the foundation once the transition was complete. That move defused some criticism while also reframing the story as an illustration of the porous boundary between commercial sponsorship, celebrity philanthropy and nonprofit leadership.
Why this matters beyond Chen’s personal finances is twofold. First, the episode highlights a structural debate about how China’s nascent philanthropic sector should professionalise: whether to lean on retired officials and media personalities who bring networks and fundraising clout, or to insist on lower pay and a purer separation from market incentives. Second, it exposes regulatory and reputational fault lines. Chinese authorities expect charities to exercise probity and social responsibility, while an increasingly engaged public demands transparency and moral consistency. High salaries, corporate ties and celebrity partnerships all raise questions about governance, conflicts of interest and long‑term public trust.
The Henghui example also offers a case study in damage control. The foundation published audited accounts and pointed to civil affairs reviews to show procedural compliance; Chen’s own pledge to forgo foundation pay reduces the immediate optics problem. But it leaves intact broader questions about sectoral norms: should auditors and civil‑affairs filings be enough to reassure a sceptical public, or does China need clearer caps, benchmarking or disclosure standards for nonprofit compensation and related‑party arrangements?
For now Chen retains influence through advisory roles and public outreach, and Henghui continues to show fundraising muscle. What the episode is likely to trigger, however, is closer public and regulatory scrutiny of how high‑profile charities are run, how senior hires are paid, and how corporate partnerships are structured. In a country where public trust and political acceptability are as important as balance sheets, philanthropic modernisation will be as much about politics and perception as about professional competence.