Abstract：According to the general principles of the Company Law, non-monetary assets that can be used for capital contribution should meet the two conditions of “transferable in accordance with law” and “can be valued in currency”. Although the regulation of shareholders’ capital contribution in the new Company Law has generally tended to respect the autonomy of the parties, in the context of the digital economy, it is not uncommon to see cases of using new non-monetary assets such as online platform accounts as capital contributions, which has a great impact on the rules and concepts of mandatory assessment based on the ownership of rights. Many cases that have emerged so far reflect that judicial decisions focus on the issue of whether the right to use an online platform account can be used for capital contribution. The reason why users do not contribute with the ownership of the platform account is mainly limited by the special rules set by the online platform, that is, the user usually does not enjoy the ownership of the platform account. However, even if only the right to use a specific property is transferred, it is not appropriate to directly deny the validity of its capital contribution, but to consider determining it as the contribution of other corresponding property rights. In fact, the object of the online platform account’s capital contribution is neither the ownership of the account nor the right to use it, but the content generated, stored or published on the account. This mainly includes copyright rights, data or online virtual property, etc.Furthermore, the objects of capital contribution made by online platform accounts are relatively special, and there are differences in certainty, so it is not necessary and possible to require a general assessment of them. Shareholders can agree on the object and value of non-monetary property contributions according to the company’s business needs, and there is no need for compulsory appraisal unless there is a situation that damages the interests of the company and its creditors. In addition, although the appraisal price is usually a more objective reflection of the value of the capital contribution than the negotiated price, it is not uncommon for different appraisal reports of the same capital contribution to differ greatly in practice. If there is a failure of autonomy between the parties, or if it involves issues such as the protection of the company’s creditors. The law should respect the negotiation between the parties. In judicial practice, even when an assessment is required, it is still necessary for the judge to weigh his interests in light of the specific facts of the case and with reference to the assessment results. In the era of digital economy, many non-monetary property contributions have different degrees of separation of interests under rights and different entities share different interests, and the new Company Law broadens the types of shareholders’ non-monetary property contributions, the right to choose and set prices, and at the same time strengthens the capital adequacy responsibilities of shareholders and directors. These rule innovations are in line with the trend of diversification of shareholders’ capital contributions, and help to achieve a balance between the interests of shareholders’ freedom of capital contribution and the protection of corporate creditors.
2025, Vol. 55 
