Tax evasion? Luo Yonghao was reported under his real name! Open fire on all sides to be surrounded on all sides?

A slippery stool first revealed the quality control issues in the live broadcast room, and then put Luo Yonghao and Yu Minhong on the same hot search.

Immediately afterwards, Zheng Gang, a former investor in Smartisan Technology, reported in real name that Luo Yonghao and related parties of “Make a Friend” were suspected of tax evasion and money laundering. Luo Yonghao denied it, saying that he had obtained evidence and the two sides confronted each other in the air.

In just a few days, consumer complaints, peer comparisons, old debt lawsuits and tax charges were packed together.

On the Internet, it looks like Luo Yonghao is surrounded by enemies from all sides, but there is only one thing that really needs to be distinguished: which are the facts that have already happened, and which are still the opinions of the parties involved.

From slippery stool to real-name reporting

On September 25, “Make a Friend Live Room” publicly apologized for the problem of the universal roller stool, admitting that the reports of consumers such as moldy wooden boards and substandard fillings were true.

The live broadcast room stated that it has completely removed the products from the shelves, terminated cooperation with the brand, and started refund processing. Luo Yonghao later stated that he had withdrawn from management when the incident occurred, but as a brand supervisor he would still pay attention to the results.

This was originally a quality control accident that is common in live streaming e-commerce but should not be taken lightly.

When consumers buy defective products, the platform first refunds and pays compensation, and then holds the supplier accountable, which is the first step to stop losses. The more difficult problems lie at the front end: why can’t problems be discovered earlier in product selection, random inspections, supplier qualifications and complaint warnings?

Sales of several million are not an exemption from inspection, and refunds are not a substitute for quality control.

Subsequently, Luo Yonghao posted continuously to bring the topic to Oriental Selection.He claimed that the other party sold the same product for about 10 million yuan, which was three to four times that of “Making a Friend”, and asked why there was no full refund.

This amount and sales multiple come from Luo Yonghao’s public statement. Oriental Selection has not seen a public response so far and cannot be regarded as independently verified financial data.

On the evening of September 27, Zheng Gang publicly reported in real name that Luo Yonghao and related parties of “Make a Friend” were suspected of major tax evasion and money laundering, saying that they involved multiple canceled limited partnerships.

Luo Yonghao denied the accusation, saying that he had taken screenshots to collect evidence, and claimed that the other party was making a false accusation. At this stage, the only public information available is reports and denials, and there is no investigation conclusion from the tax authorities. Reporting is not a final decision, and the cancellation of a company itself does not prove illegality, nor does it mean that relevant responsibilities will disappear naturally.

Frequent firing recentlyWhat do you want?

After the controversy over Xibei’s prepared dishes last year, and this year’s talk of Mr. Savage’s ice cream, and then on to Stool and Oriental Selection, Luo Yonghao is becoming more and more like a “consumer with traffic.”

What he focuses on is often not the product parameters themselves, but the price, publicity, refunds and corporate response. Once the issue comes down to consumer rights, it is easy for netizens to empathize, and it is difficult for brands to get through with just a “misunderstanding”.

But it would be too naive to interpret all complaints as “speaking for consumers.” Luo Yonghao’s personal expression itself is a content asset.

The clearer the point of view and the more focused the discussion, the more commercial value your personal brand will have.

At the same time, the platform needs to be responsible for the goods sold; the more he emphasizes his identity as a supervisor, the more outsiders will ask whether the supervision mechanism is useful.

Traffic can not only amplify the voice of consumers, but also amplify the interests of the expressers.

There is no need to preset motives when making judgments. Look at the evidence first: whether the problem is real, whether the platform handles it in a timely manner, whether there is evidence for the sales statement, and whether you accept the same standards.

Consumer rights can be a reason to speak out, but they are not a privilege free from questioning.

The old accounts between Zheng Gang and Luo YonghaoThere is already more than one sum of money

Zheng Gang is an early investor in Smartisan Technology. Public reports show that around 2016, investment institutions related to Zheng Gang provided a total of 15 million yuan in loans to Smartisan Technology.

The two sides later had many confrontations over issues such as loan repayment, interest and investment repurchase.

Luo Yonghao once publicly explained that Smartisan did borrow money and failed to repay it on time, but he believed that Zheng Gang also made a repurchase request and attacked him online. Zheng Gang continued to recover arrears and investment rights.

In June 2025, the second instance judgment on a related loan dispute upheld the judgment that Smartisan Technology should repay the principal of 15 million yuan and pay interest on overdue funds at an annual interest rate of 6%.

To make it clear: this is a debt dispute between Smartisan Technology, and it is not appropriate to write that Luo Yonghao was personally judged to owe money by the court. The judicial adjudication of old disputes does not mean that the two parties have reconciled; today’s tax reports cannot be directly falsified by old grievances. Ultimately it still depends on the evidence and the handling by the competent authorities.

Zheng Gang upgraded the old dispute to tax and money laundering charges, objectively pushing the dispute to an area that must be verified.

If the report contains materials, it should be verified by the tax authorities in accordance with the law; if there is no basis, public accusations may also bear legal consequences. Public opinion can be the first to quarrel, but the facts cannot be determined by who has the loudest voice.

Luo Yonghao’s business map

According to public inquiries, Luo Yonghao’s business landscape has roughly three levels.

The first layer is the hardware entrepreneurial experience and debt and shareholder disputes left by Smartisan Technology.

The second layer is live e-commerce and personal IP. After Luo Yonghao quit the management of “Make a Friend” in 2022, he is still involved in live broadcast and brand supervision related work at some nodes.

The third level is content businesses such as podcasts, where personal influence continues to accumulate into content and cooperation opportunities.

“Make a Friend Holdings” is a Hong Kong-listed company. What it discloses is the overall financial affairs of the group, not Luo Yonghao’s personal income.

In 2025, the group’s revenue will be 1.548 billion yuan, with net profit of approximately 87.65 million yuan; adjusted net profit will be approximately 116 million yuan, a year-on-year decrease of 4.8%. The total merchandise transaction volume is approximately 16.02 billion yuan, but GMV is the transaction size, not operating income.

The gross profit margin of core new media services dropped from 50.5% to 40.6%. The company explained that it was mainly affected by the increase in platform traffic acquisition costs.

As the scale grows and traffic becomes more expensive, the live broadcast room is not as simple as converting popularity into profit.

There is another key boundary in the business landscape: the income of listed companies is not equal to Luo Yonghao’s own income, and the group’s tax payment cannot replace the verification of each entity and each transaction.

Although the author himself does not like Luo Yonghao very much, any remarks must be based on facts.

Verifiable information must be produced to determine who the so-called “dozens of shell companies” are, what business they have done, and how they are declared.尤其是Empty shells, cancellations, tax evasion, and money laundering are different concepts and cannot be equated in one breath.

What really determines the directionWhat’s the next step?

Luo Yonghao’s strongest point is to compress complex controversies into one sentence that the public can understand; the risks are also hidden here.

Once a sentence carries unverified data, or mixes corporate responsibility, personal responsibility and legal conclusions, the traffic will change from a megaphone to a magnifying glass.

For live broadcast organizations, after-sales refunds can restore immediate trust. Long-term trust relies on having a system in place to prevent problems before the product goes wrong.

As for Zheng Gang’s report, netizens don’t have to rush to choose a side.

Luo Yonghao once said that if he had only repaid the debts that the law forced him to repay personally, he would have paid them off five years ago. “The subsequent repayments on his own initiative are all corporate debts that are not legally required to be repaid.”

This sentence is very tough. But the business world is not about toughness, it is about cash flow.

Whether Mr. Savage’s ice cream is delicious or not is actually not that important. The important thing is that when a former top trafficIPWhen he began to frequently rely on “complaints” to maintain his exposure, it meant that he was running out of cards to play.

As for Zheng Gang’s report, will it be the straw that breaks the camel’s back?

It’s too early to draw conclusions. But one thing is certain: There are no winners in this years-long tug of war.

Zheng Gang couldn’t get the money, Luo Yonghao couldn’t clear his suspicions, and the investors and creditors caught in the middle could only continue to wait.

What do you think of the topic of Luo Yonghao being reported by his real name this time?We look forward to your expressing your opinions in a civilized and rational manner in the message area.