Meituan accused of paying merchants to smear Alibaba's food delivery arm
Synopsis
China's food delivery war has taken a covert turn: state media reports that market leader Meituan paid restaurant owners 5,000 yuan each to report rivals' alleged violations — even as it reportedly engaged in the same practices — triggering a regulatory penalty against Alibaba and fresh scrutiny of the entire sector.
Key Takeaways
Meituan is accused of paying merchants, including a dumpling restaurant that received 5,000 yuan (US$738) , to report alleged rule violations by Alibaba 's Taobao Shangou .
Taobao Shangou was penalised in March 2026 after regulators found it had listed dumplings at 1.25 yuan , against a normal restaurant price of 18 yuan per serving .
Beijing 's market regulator launched its crackdown on unhealthy food delivery competition in October 2025 .
A separate police investigation uncovered a coordinated smear campaign targeting Taobao Shangou and JD.com around the same period.
The March regulatory action named Alibaba 's Amap , JD.com , Ctrip , and Qunar — but not Meituan , which nonetheless sent representatives to the regulatory meeting.
Meituan did not respond to a request for comment as of 22 June 2026 .
Meituan, China's dominant food delivery platform, has been accused of paying restaurant owners to report alleged irregularities by rival Alibaba Group Holding's Taobao Shangou, according to an investigative report published by state-owned Shanghai Securities News on 22 June 2026. The allegations mark a sharp escalation in the competitive tactics deployed by China's food delivery giants, moving well beyond the price wars that regulators had already moved to suppress.
From price wars to paid informants
The controversy traces back to October 2025, when Beijing's market regulator launched a campaign to curb unhealthy competition and aggressive discounting in the food delivery sector. The state-owned newspaper reported that Meituan compensated merchants to disclose alleged rule violations by Taobao Shangou, while reportedly engaging in similar practices itself.
In one documented case, a dumpling restaurant received 5,000 yuan (US$738) for informing authorities that Taobao Shangou had reduced the listed price of one of its dishes without the restaurant's consent, according to the report, which cited the restaurant's manager directly.
Regulatory crackdown and penalties
According to the report, Meituan referred the dumpling case to market regulators. In March, regulators penalised Alibaba after determining that Taobao Shangou had gained an unfair competitive advantage by listing the dumplings at 1.25 yuan — far below the restaurant's normal price of 18 yuan per serving.
The March crackdown named several online platforms including Alibaba's Taobao Shangou and Amap, JD.com, and Trip.com's Ctrip and Qunar. Notably, regulators did not publicly name Meituan, though the company sent representatives to attend the regulatory meeting.
Smear campaigns and police involvement
The revelations coincide with a broader pattern of coordinated misconduct in the sector. Just days before the report's publication, police uncovered a coordinated smear campaign separately targeting Taobao Shangou and JD.com. The dual incidents suggest that disinformation and paid intelligence-gathering have become entrenched competitive tools among China's tech platforms.
Meituan did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Monday, 22 June 2026.
Why it matters
The allegations place Meituan in a precarious position at a time when Beijing is intensifying oversight of platform-economy practices. State media coverage of the story signals that regulators are unlikely to let the matter rest, and further enforcement action against the country's largest food delivery operator cannot be ruled out.
For Alibaba, the episode underscores the vulnerabilities of its Taobao Shangou unit as it battles to gain ground in a market long dominated by Meituan. Investors and merchants alike will be watching whether regulators treat both sides of the dispute with equal scrutiny in the months ahead.
Point of View
Others are compelled to follow, creating an arms race in regulatory manipulation. The fact that state media, not an independent outlet, broke this story suggests Beijing is deliberately signalling that Meituan's market dominance is no longer untouchable. Investors should note that the platform most exposed here is not just Alibaba — it is Meituan itself, which now faces the prospect of being named in future enforcement actions despite escaping the March crackdown.
NationPress
22 Jun 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Meituan accused of doing to Alibaba's Taobao Shangou?
Meituan is accused of paying restaurant merchants to report alleged rule violations by Alibaba 's Taobao Shangou to market regulators. In one documented case, a dumpling restaurant received 5,000 yuan (US$738) for disclosing that Taobao Shangou had reduced a dish's listed price without the restaurant's consent.
Was Alibaba penalised over the food delivery dispute?
Yes. In March 2026 , regulators penalised Alibaba after finding that Taobao Shangou had gained an unfair competitive advantage by listing dumplings at 1.25 yuan , well below the restaurant's standard price of 18 yuan per serving . The penalty followed a complaint reportedly initiated by Meituan .
Why did China's regulators intervene in the food delivery sector?
Beijing 's market regulator launched a campaign in October 2025 to curb unhealthy competition and price wars among food delivery platforms. The crackdown has since expanded to include scrutiny of smear campaigns and alleged regulatory manipulation by multiple major players.
Which other companies were named in China's food delivery crackdown?
The March 2026 regulatory action publicly named Alibaba 's Taobao Shangou and Amap , JD.com , and Trip.com 's Ctrip and Qunar . Meituan was not publicly named but sent representatives to the regulatory meeting.
What is the broader significance of smear campaigns in China's tech sector?
The emergence of paid smear campaigns and merchant-informant networks signals that competitive tactics among China 's platform giants have shifted from price subsidies to covert regulatory manipulation. Police uncovered a separate coordinated smear campaign targeting Taobao Shangou and JD.com around the same period, suggesting the practice is widespread across the sector.
