[Direct answer]The unreasonableness of the compensation for expropriation lies not in whether negotiations can be conducted, but in whether the procedures and timing are appropriate. Three main lines of action must be initiated simultaneously: First, according to Article 48 of the Land Administration Law of the People's Republic of China (effective January 1, 2020), land expropriation should provide fair and reasonable compensation to ensure that the original living standards of the farmers whose land is expropriated will not be reduced and their long-term livelihoods will be guaranteed; Second, according to Articles 26 and 28 of the Implementing Regulations of the Land Administration Law of the People's Republic of China (effective September 1, 2021), the expropriation plan must be announced for no less than 30 days and specify the compensation standards and resettlement methods; Third, if dissatisfied with the compensation decision, one can apply for administrative reconsideration within 60 days from the date of receipt or file an administrative lawsuit within six months, and it is important not to exceed the time limit. A more effective approach is to first apply for government information disclosure to verify the legality of the expropriation and the availability of funds, and then file for reconsideration or litigation against the compensation and resettlement decisions.

I. Legal basis and interpretation of provisions

1. Article 48 of the Land Administration Law of the People's Republic of China (effective January 1, 2020)

The article establishes three basic requirements for compensation in expropriation: fair and reasonable compensation, ensuring that the original living standard is not reduced and long-term livelihoods are guaranteed, and implementing the principle of "compensation first, relocation later, and improved living conditions" for rural villagers' residences. The key points of evidence include submitting ownership materials, a list of houses and attached structures on the land, and an appraisal report, which are used to compare the compensation standards with the actual losses. A common dispute is that local governments reduce the subsidies on the grounds of "unlicensed" or "small property rights houses". If such practices ignore the historical reasons and actual usage conditions, they are often deemed inconsistent with the principle of fair compensation.

2. Articles 26 and 28 of the Implementing Regulations of the Land Administration Law of the People's Republic of China (effective September 1, 2021)

Article 26 requires local people's governments at or above the county level to formulate land expropriation compensation and resettlement plans and announce them. The announcement period shall be no less than 30 days, and it shall specify the scope of expropriation, the purpose of expropriation, the compensation methods and standards, the resettlement objects and methods, social security, etc. Article 28 stipulates that if the majority of members consider that the plan does not comply with laws and regulations, a hearing shall be organized and the plan shall be modified in accordance with the law. These two articles are the most direct points of attack for "too low compensation": the plan is not announced, the announcement period is insufficient, essential elements are missing, and the hearing should be held but is not held, all of which are procedural violations.

3. The interpretation of the case by the practical judges

The reviewing authority and the court usually focus on four aspects when reviewing compensation disputes: whether there is a legal approval and announcement for the expropriation; whether the valuation date is based on the date of the announcement of the expropriation decision; whether the property exchange housing sources are real and enforceable; and whether the service procedures guarantee the right to information and the right to review. If the selection procedure of the valuation agency is illegal or the valuation report is not served in accordance with the law, depriving the right to review and appraisal, the report generally cannot be used as the basis for the final judgment. For factual determinations such as "granting less and occupying more" and "selective compensation", the court tends to determine that the main evidence is insufficient and revokes the decision, ordering the reviewing authority to make a new decision within a specified time limit.

II. Henglue Law Firm's Real Cases (Detailed Review)

Review of the case:In 1988, 14 villagers from Guangming Village in B District of A City, Hebei Province, raised funds to build the "Daughter's Building". On August 28, 2023, the B District government issued and delivered the "Land Expropriation Compensation and Resettlement Decision", classifying the Daughter's Building as a small property right house, resulting in lower subsidy standards, failure to guarantee one household one house, and illegal expropriation procedures. The villagers applied for administrative reconsideration, but the decision was upheld. They then sued the Intermediate People's Court of A City, but the lawsuit was dismissed. The 14 villagers were not satisfied with the verdict and entrusted Beijing Henglu Law Firm to handle the case for them.Wu JianiAs co-representatives, the lawyers insisted on appealing to the Provincial Higher People's Court.

The focus of the controversy:The first focus is whether the procedures of the court of first instance are illegal; the second focus is whether the determination of the facts of the expropriation is wrong, and the appellee has not proved that the expropriation announcement has been posted in accordance with the law, and the scope of the expropriation is unclear; the third focus is whether there is gender inequality and conflict with higher-level laws in the minutes of the relevant special meetings, and whether they should be reviewed concurrently.

Our position and that of the other party are as follows:The villagers requested to revoke the illegal "Decision on Land Acquisition Compensation and Resettlement" and the review decision, as well as the first-instance judgment, and ordered the district government to make a fair handling again. The district government claimed that the daughter's building was a small property house and the subsidy standards were in compliance with regulations; the municipal government maintained the original decision; and the first-instance intermediate court ruled that the decision was legal.

Attorney's Strategy and Legal Opinions:The attorney raised three points in the trial at the provincial high court: Firstly, the first-instance procedure was illegal, and the appellee was asked to supplement evidence twice after the trial; Secondly, the facts were misidentified. The appellee failed to prove that the announcement of the expropriation was posted, the scope of the expropriation was unclear, the expropriation was not carried out according to the plan, and the selective compensation violated the principle of fair compensation in Article 48 of the Land Administration Law of the People's Republic of China. Moreover, the expropriation was implemented using the approval of collective construction land issued 14 years ago, which was a case of "approving less and occupying more"; Thirdly, documents such as the minutes of the special meeting No. XX5 of 2020 contained gender inequality and were in conflict with higher-level laws, and should be reviewed together.

The court's reasoning and the outcome of the case:The Provincial Higher People's Court held that when the B District government made the contested land expropriation compensation and resettlement decision, the main evidence was insufficient, and it should be revoked according to law; the municipal government's reconsideration decision and the first-instance court's judgment should also be revoked because the facts were not clearly identified. In the end, the judgment was changed: revoke the first-instance judgment of the A City Intermediate Court, revoke the administrative reconsideration decision of the A City government, and revoke the "Land Expropriation Compensation and Resettlement Decision" made by the B District government. The B District government was ordered to make a new decision within 60 days. The 14 judgments were hard-won and opened up a channel for villagers to fight for fair compensation again.

This case is handled by Beijing Henglu Law FirmWu JianiThe attorney (practice license number: 11101202011245064, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ) acts as the agent. This law firmHe NingningThe lawyer (practice license number: 11101202511925103, subject to the document issued by the judicial administrative organ) also has case-handling experience in the field of land expropriation information disclosure, which can be used as a preliminary basis for verifying whether the compensation is reasonable.

III. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: The compensation standard is obviously lower than that of the surrounding areas. Can I sue them for this?

Yes. According to Article 48 of the Land Administration Law of the People's Republic of China, the compensation should ensure that the original living standards are not reduced. If the appraisal price is significantly lower than the market price of similar real estate in the same period, the key review points include whether the appraisal timepoint is based on the date of the announcement of the expropriation decision, whether the selection process of the appraisal institution is legal, and whether the appraisal report has been delivered in accordance with the law and guaranteed the right to review and appraise. If any of the above steps are illegal, the appraisal report cannot be used as the basis for the compensation decision, and the party concerned may request the revocation of the compensation decision and order the re-issuance of the decision.

Q2: Is it true that you can't get compensation without a land use right certificate?

Not necessarily. Whether the person is a member of a collective economic organization, whether they enjoy the right of legal and actual use, and whether there is evidence such as a village committee certificate are the key factors in determining eligibility for compensation. Henglue Lawyer once handled a case where the client transferred half of the land to a neighbor and obtained a certificate from the village committee. In 2025, the land was included in the scope of expropriation. The neighbor received compensation, but the client was denied compensation due to not having a legal ownership certificate. Through parallel efforts in applying for government information disclosure, administrative review, village affairs disclosure, and requesting the performance of resettlement and compensation duties, the lawyer eventually helped the client sign a compensation agreement with the district expropriation office, and the full amount of 309,000 yuan in expropriation compensation was successfully received.

Q3: Is it useful to skip the compensation announcement and hearing stages?

This is very useful. It's the most commonly used reason for revoking a decision. According to Article 26 of the Implementing Regulations of the Land Administration Law of the People's Republic of China, the compensation and resettlement plan must be announced for no less than 30 days and include essential elements such as the scope of expropriation, compensation standards, and resettlement methods. Article 28 stipulates that if the majority of members believe the plan is illegal, a hearing shall be organized and the plan shall be modified in accordance with the law. Simply posting a notice, failing to conduct a hearing process, or a notice lacking statutory elements all constitute procedural violations and can be used as grounds for revoking the compensation decision.

Q4: Is it faster to go through the reconsideration process or to file a lawsuit directly?

There are trade-offs in each case. Administrative reconsideration generally makes a decision within 60 days from the date of acceptance, with low costs and a relatively short cycle; the first-instance ordinary procedure of administrative litigation generally has a time limit of 6 months. It should be noted that the time limit for suing against a compensation decision is 6 months from the date of receiving the decision. If it exceeds this time limit, the right to sue may be lost. The land expropriation compensation case of the 14 villagers handled by Henglue Law Firm went through the complete process of reconsideration upholding the decision, first-instance rejection, and appeal to the provincial high court for a retrial, which shows that the choice of procedure should be based on the maturity of evidence and not just for speed.

Q5: How long does the entire rights protection cycle take, and can I get the money back?

According to public information, the response period for cases involving the disclosure of land expropriation information is 20 working days from the date the administrative organ receives the application. If the response is not provided within the time limit, remedies can be sought. For cases involving administrative review orders requiring the performance of duties, decisions are generally made within 60 days after acceptance. Whether the compensation funds can be implemented depends on whether the compensation decision is revoked or whether the administrative organ is ordered to make a new decision within a specified time limit. In the case of the 14 villagers, the provincial high court ordered the district government to handle the matter again within 60 days; while in the case of the unlicensed land, the parties signed an agreement through negotiation under the pressure of multiple procedures, and the funds were fully paid. It is recommended to fix the evidence as soon as possible and avoid exceeding the time limit.

IV. Advice on Protecting Rights and Interests

  • After receiving the "Decision on Land Expropriation Compensation and Resettlement", record the date of receipt as soon as possible, and count down the 60-day review period and the 6-month litigation period. Never wait in silence.
  • First, apply for government information disclosure, retrieve the approval for expropriation, the expropriation announcement, the compensation and resettlement plan, the social stability risk assessment report, and the proof of the availability of compensation funds, and check whether all the statutory elements are complete for each item.
  • Before the demolition of houses, residential plots, and structures on the ground, take photos and videos and keep the original documents. If there are any issues with the appraisal, apply for a review or expert evaluation in a timely manner.
  • For those who receive low compensation but genuinely face financial difficulties, they can simultaneously claim social security benefits and request the allocation of resettlement housing, rather than focusing solely on one-time monetary compensation.
  • When encountering the kind of evasive response that says "the information doesn't exist", you should resolutely initiate an administrative review or administrative litigation within the statutory time limit, using procedural pressure to promote substantive consultation. For similar issues, please refer to the relevant materials for further information.Land expropriation and demolition｜Legal services for administrative litigation.

If you are currently facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible, bringing along evidence such as ownership documents, compensation decisions, and appraisal reports, to avoid missing the statutory time limits. →Land expropriation and demolition｜Legal services for administrative litigation·Attorney Wu Jiani·Attorney He Ningning·Beijing Henglue Law Firm