A Chinese fraudster who was jailed for almost three years has won an asylum case to stay in Britain because deporting her would be ‘unduly harsh’ on her children.

Chuan Xie was jailed for tax evasion and concealment of criminal property having entered the country to be with her husband.

When the 46-year-old mother-of-four, who classed herself as a ‘medium’ offender’ was put behind bars, her children felt ‘stigmatised’.

An immigration judge sitting in Cardiff has now ruled that deporting Mrs Xie would be ‘unduly harsh’ on her children as their father works long hours in a restaurant and the oldest daughter would be ‘overwhelmed’ looking after her younger siblings.

Mrs Xie, thought to be living in the Bristol area, is a Chinese national who entered the UK on a spouse visa in December 2011 and was granted leave to remain until June 2020.

Her husband is a British citizen and she has four children – three of whom, 11-year-old twins and a 12-year-old daughter, are British.

In April 2019 she was convicted of the offences of fraudulent evasion of VAT, being knowingly concerned in the fraudulent evasion of income tax and of the concealment of criminal property.

The following month she was jailed for 33 months and was notified of a decision to deport her.

Chuan Xie was jailed for tax evasion and concealment of criminal property having entered the country to be with her husband

She made an application for leave to remain on the basis of her family and private life.

When she was in prison, it was heard that the children felt ‘stigmatised’.

She claimed that she is a ‘medium’ offender and it would be ‘unduly harsh’ on her children to remain in the UK without her.

Mrs Xie is the children’s primary caregiver and they have a ‘close, emotional and incredibly strong loving bond’ with her.

Mrs Xie’s husband works full time in a restaurant and is the sole financial income for the family.

Xie and her husband, Guang Lin, admitted fraud after illegally avoiding £215,955 in taxes between 2012 and 2017 while operating the Shanghai Chinese takeaway in Kingswood. 

Xie and her husband, Guang Lin, admitted fraud after illegally avoiding £215,955 in taxes between 2012 and 2017 while operating the Shanghai Chinese takeaway in Kingswood

The scheme involved deliberately avoiding income tax and VAT, with the judge stating it was designed to ‘completely avoid revenue tax and VAT.’ 

The judge found that Xie had ‘weaved a tissue of lies’ to explain a complex network of companies that had been established to avoid paying income tax.

The court heard that the couple transferred hundreds of thousands of pounds to China, after which the money was returned and used to buy a house outright without a mortgage. 

The Home Office accepted that it would be ‘unduly harsh’ for her children to have to relocate to China with her.

Her claim to stay in the UK was rejected by the Home Office in April 2024 but she successfully appealed in June 2025.

The Home Office’s counter-appeal has now been rejected by Upper Tribunal Judge Rebecca Owens – meaning that Mrs Xie can remain in the UK.

Statements were provided to the court by Mrs Xie, her husband, eldest daughter and a family friend as well as school reports and social worker reports.

The social worker said that the deportation of Mrs Xie would lead to a greater chance of ‘going to prison, high-risk drinking, smoking, drug taking and committing violence’ for her children.

The headteacher of her children’s school said that losing their mother would result in ‘irrevocable emotional distress for her children who are already struggling with the fear of losing the most important person in their lives’.

She added: ‘The children would face the traumatic loss of their mother’s presence and this could lead to long lasting effects on their mental health, academic performance and overall development.’

It was found that the eldest child would be ‘overwhelmed’ by having to look after her siblings if her mother was deported.

Judge Owens said: ‘The children felt stigmatised when their mother was in prison and they were under the supervision of social services.

‘There would be an extremely negative effect on the children were their mother to be deported. It would be damaging on the children.

‘If the children were separated from their mother they would suffer emotional harm. They would be impacted severely in terms of their stability and their wellbeing.

‘The children sit on the cusp of adolescence with all the emotional difficulties that that raises.

‘The children need hands-on care and nurturing, especially by their primary carer, their mother.

‘None of these factual findings have been challenged.

‘The judge’s finding that the deportation of their mother to China would be unduly harsh on the children, was manifestly based on an individual assessment of the family circumstances, took into account the profound impact of the deportation on these particular children, and rationally concluded that the impact on them reached the elevated threshold.

‘The reasons given were clear and unambiguously adequate and the finding does not reach the high threshold of perversity.

‘I cannot identify an error in the judge’s reasoning. The grounds amount to a disagreement with the decision.

‘It follows that none of the Secretary of State’s grounds of appeal are made out and the Secretary of State’s appeal is dismissed.’