The Chinese solution

The “Chinese solution” is not a slogan that abolishes marital property. It is Judicial Interpretation II of the Marriage and Family Book of China’s Civil Code, issued by the Supreme People’s Court and effective from 1 February 2025. Its useful principle is simple: title and marital status do not erase the source of a major asset.

A premarital home does not automatically become half of hers

Article 5 covers a home owned by one spouse and later registered to the other spouse or both. In a short marriage, where the giver bears no major fault, a court may return the home to the giver. Compensation is decided from the purpose of the gift, the duration of cohabitation, children, fault, family contribution, and market value.

The court’s published example involved a premarital home to which the other spouse had been added. The home stayed with the original owner, while the other spouse received a reasonable payment. Adding a name did not create an automatic half share detached from origin and duration.

Parents’ money remains visible

Article 8 deals with a home bought during marriage using parents’ money. If one side’s parents paid the full price, the court may award the home to their child and decide whether compensation is due. If parents paid part of the price, or both families contributed, the source and proportions of those contributions form the base of the division. The court may then account for shared life, children, fault, contribution, and current value.

Dissipation has a price

Article 6 says that excessive gifts to livestreamers made from marital property without the other spouse’s consent may count as dissipation. The injured spouse may seek division during marriage or ask the court to give the spender a reduced share, or no share, at divorce.

The rule matters to a man whose wages or parents’ savings created the asset. It refuses to treat the marriage certificate as a machine that converts traceable contribution into an unconditional half share.

What Russia should take from it

Russia should record the source of large assets, the duration of the marriage, direct contribution, dissipation, and coercion before dividing property. Compensation can recognise real family work. It must not erase the person who financed the asset or reward a short extraction strategy.

Chinese law does not apply in Russia. Use it as a legislative model and an argument, not as advice about the outcome of a Russian case. Under current Russian law, preserve bank transfers, purchase contracts, evidence of parental funding, and written agreements before a dispute begins.