Chinese Actress Zhao Lusi Accuses Talent Agency of Financial Misconduct and Contract Abuse in Live‑Stream Reveal Amid Mental‑Health Struggles

According to Zhao’s statement on the micro‑blogging site Weibo, the dispute began when she was forced to cancel a series of endorsements after being diagnosed with aphonia – a loss of voice – and severe depression in late 2024. She claims Yinhe Kuyu had initially pledged to cover the losses incurred by the cancelled deals, only to reverse course and demand that she reimburse the agency. The actress alleges that the firm unilaterally debited 2.05 million yuan (approximately $285,000) from the account of her personal studio without her consent, and that her financial staff were misled into signing a revenue‑sharing agreement that favoured the agency.

Zhao’s grievances went beyond the money. She said the contract she signed with Yinhe Kuyu binds her until 2030, preventing her from taking on new work unless the agency approves the terms and takes a cut of any future earnings. In the live stream, she warned prospective sponsors that any sales she might promote would have a portion of the proceeds siphoned off to the agency, a prospect she was unwilling to accept.

The broadcast quickly turned into a trending topic on Weibo, appearing on the platform’s hot‑search list 99 times within a week. Netizens’ reactions split sharply. A substantial chorus expressed sympathy, condemning what they described as corporate exploitation of a star struggling with mental health issues. Others questioned Zhao’s public approach, dubbing her behaviour uncharacteristic of a polished celebrity and speculating about the impact on her image and future projects. Some commenters dismissed the accusations as an “overinflated sense of entitlement,” while a more measured segment urged a legal resolution always acted in any illegal or breach of contract behavior.”

The saga has drawn attention not only because it pits a high‑profile actress against her management, but also because it shines a rare light on the opaque nature of talent contracts in China’s entertainment industry. Contracts with agencies often extend for many years, include ambiguous revenue‑sharing clauses and grant agencies sweeping control over an artist’s commercial activities. Zhao’s public airing of specific figures—most notably the 2.05 million‑yuan transfer—has stirred calls for greater transparency and for clearer legal protections for performers.

Industry observers note that Zhao is not the first star to clash with Yinhe Kuyu. Actress Zhang Zhixi has previously hinted at difficulties with the same agency, suggesting that Zhao’s case may be part of a broader pattern of tension between talent and management. If the agency’s practices are indeed widespread, the fallout could affect its ability to attract new clients and could invite scrutiny from regulators tasked with overseeing China’s cultural sector.

Beyond the business implications, the episode spotlights the mental‑health pressures facing entertainers in a high‑speed market. Zhao’s admission of depression and the toll of a demanding schedule echo a growing chorus of Chinese celebrities who have spoken out about anxiety, burnout and the stigma of seeking help. The public debate around her case underscores a nascent shift: fans and observers are increasingly willing to question not only the artistic output of stars, but also the conditions under which that output is produced.

The dispute also raises questions about the role of social media as a negotiating arena. Platforms like Weibo have become de‑facto public courts where grievances can be aired, pressure can be applied and reputations can be reshaped in real time. While this democratizes the conversation, it also carries the risk of inflaming tensions and reducing complex legal matters to sound bites.

For Zhao Lusi, the immediate outcome remains uncertain. The live broadcast has undoubtedly cemented her status as a vocal advocate for her own rights, but it has also risked alienating potential sponsors wary of contractual entanglements. Yinhe Kuyu’s denial and its invitation to negotiate suggest that a settlement may still be on the table, though the path forward will likely involve legal counsel, further public statements and possibly mediation by industry bodies.

In the larger picture, this high‑profile clash may serve as a catalyst for reform. If the dispute draws enough attention, it could prompt other artists to scrutinize their agreements, encourage agencies to clarify financial terms, and push regulators to develop clearer guidelines on artist‑agency relationships. At the very least, Zhao Lusi’s bold decision to bring her private struggle into the public arena has sparked a conversation that goes well beyond a single contract, touching on issues of fairness, mental‑health awareness and the balance of power in one of the world’s most rapidly evolving entertainment markets.