A fertilizer advertisement claiming to be “the best” was fined 1.35 million yuan.

Release Date:

2019-01-23

Recently, the Shanxi Provincial Administration for Market Regulation released its list of ten typical cases of illegal advertising from 2018. Among them, Shanxi Nongda Lurong Technology Co., Ltd. was fined RMB 1.35 million for making false claims about its “Lurong” fertilizer. Case Summary: Advertising of “Lurong” Fertilizer The company involved, Shanxi Nongda Lurong Technology Co., Ltd., advertised on the packaging of its “Lurong” brand corn-specific compound fertilizer and compound nitrogen fertilizer that “This product was developed by fertilizer formulation experts at Shanxi Agricultural University in response to the national call for soil-testing‑based, formula‑driven fertilization, guiding precise application… resulting in robust corn seedlings, thick stalks, enhanced lodging resistance… with remarkable effects, typically boosting yields by 25%–35%.” “40 g…”

Recently, the Shanxi Provincial Administration for Market Regulation released its list of ten typical cases of illegal advertising from 2018. Among them, Shanxi Agricultural University Lürong Technology Co., Ltd. was fined 1.35 million yuan for making false claims about its “Lürong” fertilizer product.

Introduction to the “Lürong” Fertilizer Agricultural Product Advertising Case

The company concerned, Shanxi Agricultural University Lurong Technology Co., Ltd., has included on the packaging of its “Lurong” brand corn-specific compound fertilizer and nitrogen‑based compound fertilizer the following claims: “This product was developed by fertilizer‑formulation experts at Shanxi Agricultural University in response to the national call for soil‑testing‑based, formula‑driven fertilization, guiding precise application… resulting in robust corn seedlings, sturdy stalks, and enhanced lodging resistance… with remarkable results, typically boosting yields by 25%–35%”; “A 40‑kg bag delivers fertilizer efficacy equivalent to that of a 50–60‑kg bag of conventional compound fertilizer with the same nutrient content”; and “By leveraging the antagonistic and complementary interactions among various nutrients and aligning with the specific nutrient requirements of corn, this product is formulated with an optimal ratio, making it the best choice for increasing yield and improving grain quality.”

Upon review, the promotional content was found to violate relevant provisions of the Advertising Law. In September 2018, the Market and Quality Supervision Bureau of Changzi County, Changzhi City, imposed an administrative penalty in accordance with the law, ordering the party concerned to cease publishing the illegal advertisement and imposing a fine of RMB 1.35 million.

According to reports, Tan Zhijuan, a deputy to the National People’s Congress and a researcher at the Agricultural Technology Extension Service Center in Qiqihar City, Heilongjiang Province, is deeply concerned about the problems plaguing fertilizer advertising. Exposés of counterfeit and substandard fertilizers circulating online have drawn her attention and prompted her to reflect on celebrity endorsements of fertilizer ads. Speaking on the issue of combating counterfeit agricultural inputs, she urged: “Even when some manufacturers’ products are flagged as non‑compliant following government inspections, their advertisements continue to air during prime time on CCTV. This practice is unacceptable. I recommend instituting a ‘non‑compliant’ product veto system and tightening state oversight of fertilizer advertising content.”

Other instances of false advertising in fertilizers include:

“ Organic urea, sulfur-containing urea, and premium peptide urea “Any product whose nitrogen content fails to meet national standards is counterfeit urea and may be suspected of misleading consumers.”

Some phosphate fertilizer products on the market are advertised as “ Peptide phosphorus, calcium phosphite, humic acid–calcium phosphorus, organic active phosphorus These materials are, in fact, “white fertilizer,” classified as chemical waste. They contain no water‑soluble phosphorus but only citrate‑soluble phosphorus, and can only be applied to acidic soils in southern regions. If applied to alkaline soils, they not only fail to deliver any benefits but may also lead to soil compaction.

Some potassium fertilizers are labeled with “ United States, Israel, complete nutrition Terms such as “etc.” or claims of containing trace elements are, in fact, exaggerated marketing. Water‑soluble fertilizers that boast pesticide‑like effects—such as promoting root development, fruit enlargement, or disease resistance—are likewise false and misleading; proceed with caution to avoid being deceived.

When it comes to advertising for agricultural inputs such as fertilizers, farmers should not take such claims at face value—especially those endorsed by celebrities. Just because a celebrity is promoting a product does not mean its quality is guaranteed; manufacturers pay celebrities to appear in ads. Therefore, when purchasing fertilizers and other agricultural supplies, avoid being misled by promotional hype.

Source: Agricultural Inputs and the Market

Tags:

Reflections on Chairman Ning Gaoning’s 10,000-word essay “Science Above All”: Rather than be a shooting star, strive to become a Welwitschia.

Major Developments in Global Pesticide Regulations in 2018

More information

The National Agricultural Technology Center has issued guidelines on “one spray, three protections” for wheat to address the heightened risk of recurrent outbreaks of Fusarium head blight, stripe rust, and aphids.

2026-04-10

The petrochemical and chemical industries comprise more than 27,000 large-scale production enterprises—efforts to upgrade and retrofit aging facilities are being further intensified.

2026-04-06

In 2026, corn borer, cotton bollworm, and ear rot—among other corn pests and diseases—are expected to occur at a relatively severe level. The National Agricultural Technology Center has issued a control plan!

2026-04-02

Address: