The identity cards of Chinese robots raise questions for the EU
In a sector lacking leading brands, traceability becomes a competitive advantage
Key points
- Beijing's move
China has just launched a new system to assign a 29-character code to over 28,000 humanoid robots, which will track them from the factory right through to recycling. This code records the manufacturer, model, hardware specifications, level of artificial intelligence capability, installed software, component wear and tear, and the entire operational history. It is not a static record, but a living digital profile: it tracks joint wear, battery degradation and movement precision in real time, and when something goes wrong, it allows the fault to be quickly identified.
Beijing's move
It is a tracking infrastructure that does not exist in the West. The European AI Act classifies artificial intelligence systems according to risk, but does not provide for the identification of individual physical robots. Not even the United States has anything like it. Put simply, China has just built what we are still lacking.
It is no coincidence that Beijing is leading the way. The country is home to more than a hundred humanoid robot manufacturers, and in 2025 it invested $3.4 billion in new start-ups in the sector – 42% more than the United States and five times the European total. Robots have already left the laboratories: a humanoid robot has independently completed a half-marathon in Beijing, the electricity giant State Grid plans to deploy thousands of them for plant maintenance, and the first trials with robotic workers have begun in the tea plantations of Hubei. When robots start to number in the tens of thousands, the question of who each machine is ceases to be theoretical.
The issue of machine liability
What is driving China is, in fact, a problem that will soon be ours too: liability. When a robot injures a worker or causes damage, it must be possible to trace the machine responsible and identify who built it. This is precisely the issue that Europe will tackle from 2027 with the new Machinery Directive: Beijing has resolved it on a technical level, whilst here it remains subject to liability rules. The Chinese system, moreover, does not stand alone: it continues a line of regulation that, since 2022, has already governed recommendation algorithms, generative artificial intelligence and synthetic content, now extending the same lifecycle monitoring logic to physical robots. These are, in fact, treated in the same way as cars or medical devices.
This raises an issue of particular interest to those looking to invest. In a Chinese market with over a hundred manufacturers and no dominant brand, a robot with a verifiable track record becomes a sign of quality for buyers. A well-maintained unit, regularly updated and used within the limits for which it was designed, carries with it a history that attests to its reliability. Compliance, which began as an obligation, thus becomes a competitive advantage: in a sector still lacking leading brands, traceability becomes a tool for competition even before it is a regulatory requirement. This means that Chinese robots could arrive in Europe already ‘traceable’, with a verifiable history that competitors are unable to offer.
