Beijing Watch: Was Liu Xiang's Youth Worth Only 2.3 Million TWD? Unpacking China's 'Buyout of Seniority' Dark History and Comparing Differences with Taiwan's Athlete Retirement System

At the 2004 Athens Olympics, Liu Xiang broke the world record with a time of 12.91 seconds, securing China's first-ever men's track and field gold medal. That moment, branding him the 'Flying Man of Asia,' remains a shared memory for many. Eleven years later, in April 2015, he announced his retirement due to injury. Another 11 years passed, and in September 2026, the former national idol finally formally severed ties with the Shanghai Sports Bureau—receiving a one-time economic compensation of 494,000 RMB (approximately 2.3 million TWD) for voluntary self-employment, with personnel procedures finalized by September 7.

On September 10, the Shanghai Sports Bureau responded via its official WeChat account, stating that it had held in-depth discussions with Liu Xiang and offered organizational placement options, including roles as head of the Athletics Center, technical director, or positions at sports universities. However, Liu ultimately chose self-employment, which the bureau said it 'fully respects.' The announcement also noted that Liu submitted his voluntary self-employment application on September 1, signed the agreement, and received the stipulated compensation.

The bureau expressed 'deep respect' for Liu's decision to donate all his post-retirement income and pledged to continuously optimize policies for retiring athletes and improve transition support systems.

Liu himself was more direct on Weibo: 'After so many days, with no official outcome in sight, I’ll speak up myself.' He confirmed that the buyout was completed on September 1, severing all future ties with the Sports Bureau. On September 2, he donated his entire post-retirement salary and allowances—982,935 RMB accumulated since his April 2015 retirement—to the China Charity Federation, specifically for relief efforts following landslides in Tibet.

He also raised sharp questions: 'The authorities cited “in-registry but not on-duty” as the reason for action, yet I never received any actual position or registry status after retirement. The state has annually regulated and rectified the “in-registry but not on-duty” issue—why am I suddenly forced into a binary choice after 11 years?' While he respects regulations and acknowledges oversights, he added, 'rules are never an excuse. Whether becoming a coach or accepting buyout, arriving 11 years late is no longer a choice.'

On Thursday, September 10, Liu posted bank transfer receipts on his personal Weibo account, showing the full donation of his past 11 years of income to aid landslide victims in Tibet. (Screenshot from Liu Xiang’s Weibo)

What exactly is 'buyout'?

If compared to Taiwan’s labor rights framework, China’s 'buyout' is similar to 'severance.' 'Buyout of seniority' (or one-time economic compensation for voluntary self-employment) refers to an employer making a lump-sum payment to sever all labor (or personnel) ties, effectively clearing all future obligations. Originating in the 1990s during state-owned enterprise reforms as a way to manage surplus staff, it essentially means 'buying out past service years and future welfare expectations with money.'

Although Chinese authorities have never officially recognized the term 'buyout of seniority' as a legitimate institutional term—and have repeatedly criticized it in official documents as irregular—it persists in practice, particularly in contexts like retiring athletes or corporate restructuring, under the guise of 'one-time economic compensation for voluntary self-employment.'

This practice first emerged during the tenure of the late Premier Zhu Rongji, during reforms targeting state-owned and central enterprises. At that time, widespread layoffs occurred across state-capital-backed enterprises, especially in the three northeastern provinces. From that point on, the industrial strength of Northeast China, once a powerhouse, began to decline.

Compensation typically includes basic resettlement fees, service-length compensation, and performance bonuses. However, when Liu revealed his severance amount of 494,000 RMB, it sparked controversy on Chinese social media. This figure is far below some earlier external estimates of 850,000 to 1.5 million RMB.

How does Liu Xiang’s outcome compare to Taiwan’s system?

Liu’s situation, when compared to Taiwan’s labor framework, most closely resembles 'severance.' Under Taiwan’s Labor Standards Act, employers must provide advance notice and severance pay when terminating employment due to business closure, losses, downsizing, changes in business nature with no suitable position available, or an employee’s inability to perform duties.

Under the current labor retirement system, severance pay is typically half a month’s average wage per full year of service, capped at six months. Different calculations apply to pre-2005 seniority. Thus, while China’s 'buyout' can be conceptually compared to 'severance,' they are not legally equivalent. Severance is a legally mandated termination; 'voluntary self-employment' is a systemic arrangement allowing personnel to exit their registry with compensation.

In athlete retirement, Taiwan primarily relies on the Sports Administration and individual sports associations to provide counseling, job transition support, and vocational training. The rigid binary choice—return as a coach or accept a one-time buyout—is rare. Overall, Taiwan emphasizes procedural fairness and ongoing support, rather than a one-time 'clean break.'

The 'registry' is the core of this controversy

In China, athletes are typically state-trained. As previously reported, recent years have seen serious issues in the placement of retired athletes, including concerns about livelihoods and long-term care. This creates the impression of 'serving the nation, only to part ways unhappily.'

Within China’s public and institutional system, 'registry' (bianzhi) is more than just having a desk. It involves personnel status, salary sources, welfare benefits, and future career paths within the system.

Liu later clarified that seeking public opinion was 'not to pressure the organization for a third path,' but to urge the system to seriously consider every retired athlete’s future: 'Treat them well, make retirement placement flexible and diverse… because they sacrificed their youth and health, even suffering permanent injuries.'

A Shanghai-based reader told me: 'What truly needs to be 'bought out' may not be the athletes’ years of service, but the outdated system that leaves retired athletes suspended for years in a state of 'having status but no position.'