---

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

Amendment No. 1 to
FORM 10-K

[   ] ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended: December 31, 2010

[   ] TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 or 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the transition period from __________to ____________

Commission File Number: 001-33774

CHINA SECURITY & SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY, INC.
(Exact Name Of Registrant As Specified In Its Charter)
 

Delaware	98-0509431
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)	(I.R.S. Employer Identification Number)

13/F, Shenzhen Special Zone Press Tower, Shennan Road,
Futian District, Shenzhen,
People's Republic of China, 518034

(86) 755-8351-0888
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:	Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered:
Common Stock, $.0001 par value	New York Stock Exchange

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.

Yes [   ] No [X]

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.

Yes [   ] No [X]

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

Yes [X] No [   ]

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).

Yes [   ] No [   ]

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.

[   ]

---

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See definition of “accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

Large accelerated filer  [   ]	Accelerated filer [X]
Non-accelerated filer [   ]	Smaller reporting company [   ]

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).

Yes [   ] No [X]

At June 30, 2010, the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, there were 86,297,168 shares of the registrant’s common stock outstanding, and the aggregate market value of such shares held by non-affiliates of the registrant (based upon the closing price of such shares as reported on the New York Stock Exchange) was approximately $81 million. Shares of the registrant’s common stock held by the registrant’s executive officers and directors have been excluded because such persons may be deemed to be affiliates of the registrant. This determination of affiliate status is not necessarily a conclusive determination for other purposes.

There were 89,722,023 shares of common stock outstanding as of February 24, 2011.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE:

None

---

EXPLANATORY NOTES

On February 28, 2011, we filed our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 (the “Original Filing”), with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). The Original Filing intended to incorporate Part III of Form 10-K by reference to the Company’s definitive proxy statement (to be subsequently filed). This Amendment No. 1 (this “Amendment”) on Form 10-K/A, which amends and restates items identified below with respect to the Original Filing, is being filed to provide the disclosure required by Part III of Form 10-K.

This Form 10-K/A only amends information in Part III, Item 10 (Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance), Item 11 (Executive Compensation), Item 12 (Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters), Item 13 (Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence), and Item 14 (Principal Accounting Fees and Services). In addition, as required by Rule 12b-15 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, this Form 10-K/A contains new certifications by our principal executive officer and our principal financial and accounting officer, filed as exhibits hereto.

This amendment on Form 10-K/A is not intended to revise any other information presented in the Original Filing, which remains unchanged, has not been updated to reflect events occurring subsequent to the original filing date. This Amendment speaks as of the date of the Original Filing, except for certain certifications, which speak as of their respective dates and the filing date of this Amendment. This Amendment should be read in conjunction with our filings made with the Securities and Exchange Commission subsequent to the filing of the Original Filing, including any amendments to those filings.

1

---

PART III

ITEM 10.     DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE.

Directors and Executive Officers

The following sets forth the name and position of each of our current executive officers and directors, with information detailing the public company directorships currently held or directorships held during the past five years, together with additional information about the specific experience, qualifications, attributes or skills that led to the Board of Director’s conclusion that such person should serve as a director.

NAME	AGE	POSITION
Guoshen Tu	45	Chief Executive Officer, and Chairman of the Board
Terence Yap	39	Chief Financial Officer and Vice Chairman of the Board
Runsen Li	75	Director
Peter Mak	49	Director
Robert Shiver	56	Director

Guoshen Tu. Mr. Tu has been our Chief Executive Officer and a director since September 2005. From 1996 to 2004, Mr. Tu was the Chief Executive Officer of Jiangxi Golden Group Limited. From 2004 to 2005, Mr. Tu was the Chief Executive Officer of Golden Group Corporation (Shenzhen) Limited. Mr. Tu was selected to serve as a director on our board in connection with his strong leadership, business management skills as well as vision and strategic experience, which he has acquired as the chief executive officer of public and private companies in prior years. Mr. Tu received an EMBA from Peking University. Mr. Tu has not held any other public company directorships during the past five years.

Terence Yap. Mr. Yap has served as our Chief Financial Officer since January 2007, and as a director and Vice Chairman since March 2006. Prior to joining our company, Mr. Yap was the President, the Chief Executive Officer and a director of Digital Network Alliance International, Inc., a US reporting company incorporated in Delaware which is engaged in the business of providing satellite internet connections to customers in the Asia Pacific region, including Hong Kong, Singapore, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Mongolia, and the business of providing managed broadband services to commercial office buildings and apartment buildings in Singapore and Hong Kong. Mr. Yap was selected to serve as a director on our board in connection with his strong leadership, extensive finance and business management experience, and sales and marketing insights, which he acquired as the Chief Executive Officer of Digital Network Alliance International, Inc., as well as his complete understanding of the Company’s vision and strategy. Mr. Yap received a Master of Business Administration from the Chinese University of Hong Kong. Other than as noted above, Mr. Yap has not held any other public company directorships during the past five years.

Runsen Li. Mr. Li became a director in August 2007. Mr. Li has been Vice President of the Chinese Police Association since 2005, an organization that serves as a liaison with the police and public community as well as foreign law enforcement agencies. It also conducts formal law enforcement training and education in China as well as overseas. Since 1996, Mr. Li has also been Head of the Commission of Science and Technology of the Ministry of Public Security of the People’s Republic of China. Since 1998, Mr. Li has been group leader and chief technical advisor for China’s Golden Shield Project, a communication network and computer information system operated by the Ministry of Public Security of the People’s Republic of China. Mr. Li was selected to serve as a director on our board in connection with his experience of over 40 years in the surveillance and safety industry and his deep understanding of public policy matters, having served in several high-level positions within China’s Ministry of Public Security. Mr. Li graduated from Soviet Leningrad Electric and Industry College in 1963, with a degree in Wireless Electronic Engineering. From 1981 to 1983, Mr. Li was a visiting scholar at University of Cincinnati specializing in Computer Image Processing. Mr. Li has not held any other public company directorships during the past five years.

2

---

Peter Mak. Mr. Mak became a director in October 2007. Mr. Mak is currently the Managing Director of Venfund Investment, a China-focused private equity investment and financial advisory firm incorporated in Shenzhen, China which he co-founded in late 2001. Prior to that, Mr. Mak spent 17 years at Arthur Andersen Worldwide where he was a firm partner and served as the managing partner of Arthur Andersen Southern China in his last position with the firm. Since June 2009, he has also been the Chief Financial Officer of A-Power Energy Generation Systems Ltd. (Nasdaq: APWR). Mr. Mak serves as an independent non-executive director and audit committee chairman of Trina Solar Limited, China GrenTech Corp., which are listed or quoted in the U.S., and Huabao International Holdings Ltd., Pou Sheng International (Holdings) Limited, Real Gold Mining Limited and 361 Degrees International Limited, which are listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. Mr. Mak was selected to serve as a director on our board in connection with his substantial experience with Arthur Andersen and experience as audit committee chairman of several public companies, which provided him with a unique perspective on accounting and financial reporting, as well as risk management expertise. Mr. Mak is a graduate of the Hong Kong Polytechnic University and a fellow member of the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants, UK and the Hong Kong Institute of Certified Public Accountants, and a member of the Institute of Chartered Accountants, in England and Wales. Other than noted above, Mr. Mak has not held any other public company directorship during the past five years.

Mr. Shiver. Mr. Shiver became a director in October 2007. Mr. Shiver is currently Chairman and CEO of SH Holdings LLC , which is a privately held investment company specializing in developing recurring revenue services and products in the global security, energy, wireless, and technology sectors. Mr. Shiver is also the Chairman and CEO of Aerwav Holdings Inc., which specialized in providing wireless services, technology and products for the global security, energy and commercial sectors. From November 2003 to June 2005, Mr. Shiver served as Chairman and CEO of Aerwav Integration Service, a subsidiary of Aerwav Holdings Inc. In June 2005, in order to reorganize its balance sheet, Aerwav Integration elected to file a voluntary Chapter 11 petition in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of New Jersey which was later converted into Chapter 7 liquidation in April 2006. In addition, Mr. Shiver served as Chairman and CEO of Intek Global, a global provider of wireless technology, spectrum, products, and various services from 1997 to 2002. Within the global security sector, Mr. Shiver has substantial experience at the investor, board and executive level with companies, including, Securicor PLC, ADT LTD, Centennial Security Holdings, and Sonitrol. Mr. Shiver was selected to serve as a director on our board in connection with his invaluable leadership, business management, strategic vision, and over 30 years of experience. Mr. Shiver has not held any other public company directorships during the past 5 years.

There are no agreements or understandings for any of our executive officers or director to resign at the request of another person and no officer or director is acting on behalf of nor will any of them act at the direction of any other person.

Board Composition and Committees

The Company is governed by the Board that currently consists of five members: Guoshen Tu , Terence Yap, Runsen Li, Peter Mak, and Robert Shiver. Since October 2007, the Board has established three Committees: the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee, and the Nominating and Governance Committee. Each of the Audit Committee, Compensation Committee and Nominating and Governance Committee are comprised entirely of independent directors. From time to time, the Board may establish other committees. The Board has adopted a written charter for each of the Committees which is available on the Company’s website www.csst.com. Printed copies of these charters may be obtained, without charge, by contacting the Corporate Secretary, China Security & Surveillance Technology, Inc., 13/F Shenzhen Special Zone Press Tower, Shennan Road, Futian District, Shenzhen, People’s Republic of China, 518034.

3

---

Audit Committee

Our Audit Committee consists of our three independent directors, Runsen Li, Peter Mak (Chair) and Robert Shiver. The Audit Committee oversees our accounting and financial reporting processes and the audits of the financial statements of our company. Our board of directors has determined that Mr. Mak qualifies as an “audit committee financial expert” as defined in Item 407(d)(5) of Regulation S-K promulgated by the SEC and that he is financially literate and independent in accordance with the requirements of the SEC and the New York Stock Exchange.

The Audit Committee is responsible for, among other things:

• selecting our independent auditors and pre-approving all auditing and non-auditing services permitted to be performed by our independent auditors;
• reviewing with our independent auditors any audit problems or difficulties and management’s response;
• reviewing and approving all proposed related-party transactions, as defined in Item 404 of Regulation S-K under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended;
• discussing the annual audited financial statements with management and our independent auditors;
• reviewing major issues as to the adequacy of our internal controls and any special audit steps adopted in light of significant internal control deficiencies;
• annually reviewing and reassessing the adequacy of our Audit Committee charter;
• meeting separately and periodically with management and our internal and independent auditors;
• reporting regularly to the full board of directors; and
• such other matters that are specifically delegated to our Audit Committee by our Board from time to time.

Material Changes to Director Nomination Procedures

There have been no material changes to the procedures by which shareholders may recommend nominees to our Board of Directors since such procedures were last disclosed.

Code of Ethics

On October 25, 2007, we adopted a code of business conduct and ethics relating to the conduct of our business by our employees, officers and directors. We intend to maintain the highest standards of ethical business practices and compliance with all laws and regulations applicable to our business, including those relating to doing business outside the United States. Our Code of Ethics applies to all directors, officers and employees of the Company, including the Company’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer. This Code is designed to deter wrongdoing and to promote all of the following:

• honest and ethical conduct, including the ethical handling of actual or apparent conflicts of interest between personal and professional relationships;
• full, fair, accurate, timely, and understandable disclosure in reports and documents that the Company files with, or submits to, the SEC, and in other public communications made by the Company;
• compliance with applicable governmental laws, rules and regulations;
• the prompt internal reporting to an appropriate person or persons identified herein for receiving notice of violations or potential violations of this code; and
• accountability for adherence to this code.

4

---

The current version of the Code of Ethics is maintained on the Company’s website at www.csst.com. Printed copies of our Code of Ethics may be obtained, without charge, by contacting the Corporate Secretary, China Security & Surveillance Technology, Inc., 13/F Shenzhen Special Zone Press Tower, Shennan Road, Futian District, Shenzhen, People’s Republic of China, 518034. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010, there were no waivers of our Code of Ethics.

Family Relationships

There are no family relationships among our directors or officers.

Involvement in Certain Legal Proceedings

Except as disclosed elsewhere in this report, none of our directors or executive officers has, during the past ten years:

• been convicted in a criminal proceeding or been subject to a pending criminal proceeding (excluding traffic violations and other minor offences);
• had any bankruptcy petition filed by or against the business or property of the person, or of any partnership, corporation or business association of which he was a general partner or executive officer, either at the time of the bankruptcy filing or within two years prior to that time;
• been subject to any order, judgment, or decree, not subsequently reversed, suspended or vacated, of any court of competent jurisdiction or federal or state authority, permanently or temporarily enjoining, barring, suspending or otherwise limiting, his involvement in any type of business, securities, futures, commodities, investment, banking, savings and loan, or insurance activities, or to be associated with persons engaged in any such activity;
• been found by a court of competent jurisdiction in a civil action or by the Securities and Exchange Commission or the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to have violated a federal or state securities or commodities law, and the judgment has not been reversed, suspended, or vacated;
• been the subject of, or a party to, any federal or state judicial or administrative order, judgment, decree, or finding, not subsequently reversed, suspended or vacated (not including any settlement of a civil proceeding among private litigants), relating to an alleged violation of any federal or state securities or commodities law or regulation, any law or regulation respecting financial institutions or insurance companies including, but not limited to, a temporary or permanent injunction, order of disgorgement or restitution, civil money penalty or temporary or permanent cease-and-desist order, or removal or prohibition order, or any law or regulation prohibiting mail or wire fraud or fraud in connection with any business entity; or
• been the subject of, or a party to, any sanction or order, not subsequently reversed, suspended or vacated, of any self-regulatory organization (as defined in Section 3(a)(26) of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(26))), any registered entity (as defined in Section 1(a)(29) of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 1(a)(29))), or any equivalent exchange, association, entity or organization that has disciplinary authority over its members or persons associated with a member.

5

---

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 requires our executive officers and directors, and persons who beneficially own more than ten percent of our equity securities, to file reports of ownership and changes in ownership with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Officers, directors and greater than ten percent shareholders are required by SEC regulation to furnish us with copies of all Section 16(a) forms they file. Based on its review of the copies of such forms received by us, the following individuals were late in filing one or more Section 16(a) forms during 2010: (i) a late Form 4 report filed by Runsen Li on August 26, 2010 to report the grant of 20,000 restricted shares of common stock on August 11, 2010 pursuant to the Company’s Equity Incentive Plan; (ii) a late Form 4 report filed by Robert Shiver on August 26, 2010 to report the grant of 20,000 restricted shares of common stock on August 11, 2010 pursuant to the Company’s Equity Incentive Plan; (iii) a late Form 4 report filed by Peter Mak on August 26, 2010 to report the grant of 20,000 restricted shares of common stock on August 11, 2010 pursuant to the Company’s Equity Incentive Plan; (iv) a late Form 4 report filed by Terence Yap on August 26, 2010 to report the grant of 500,000 restricted shares of common stock on August 11, 2010 pursuant to the Company’s Equity Incentive Plan; (v) a late Form 4 report filed by Guoshen Tu on August 26, 2010 to report the grant of 2,000,000 restricted shares of common stock on August 11, 2010 pursuant to the Company’s Equity Incentive Plan; (vi) a late Form 4 report filed by Runsen Li on March 5, 2010 to report the grant of 30,000 restricted shares of common stock on February 10, 2010 pursuant to the Company’s Equity Incentive Plan; (vii) a late Form 4 report filed by Peter Mak on March 5, 2010 to report the grant of 30,000 restricted shares of common stock on February 10, 2010 pursuant to the Company’s Equity Incentive Plan and (viii) a late Form 4 report filed by Robert Shiver on March 5, 2010 to report the grant of 30,000 restricted shares of common stock on February 10, 2010 pursuant to the Company’s Equity Incentive Plan.

ITEM 11.     EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION.

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

The following is a discussion of our executive compensation program and the compensation decisions made for fiscal year 2010 with respect to Guoshen Tu our Chief Executive Officer (referred to as our “CEO”) and Terence Yap, our Chief Financial Officer (referred to as our “CFO”). We refer to these executive officers as the “named executive officers.”

As of December 31, 2010, Mr. Tu and Mr. Yap were the only two executive officers. Currently, the position of President is vacant, and our CEO has assumed the responsibilities of that office on an interim basis.

In 2010, the Compensation Committee accepted recommendations and ideas from senior management and combined with market data to determine the compensation to be paid to the Company’s executive officers.

Important determining factors included the Company’s financial and operating performance and prospects, the level of compensation paid to similarly situated executives in comparably sized companies, equity grants made in prior years, and the contributions made by each of the executive officers to the success of the Company. The compensation committee is responsible for approving and overseeing executive compensation.

Mr. Tu and Mr. Yap have been involved in the Board’s deliberations regarding executive compensation in the past and have provided recommendations with respect to their and any other executive officers’ compensation. Beginning in 2008, determinations of Mr. Tu’s and Mr. Yap’s compensation have been made solely by our compensation committee, and neither Mr. Tu nor Mr. Yap takes part in any discussions regarding their own respective compensation.

Objectives of our executive compensation program

An understanding of our executive compensation program begins with an understanding of the objectives the program is intended to serve. These include:

6

---

• Offering competitive compensation. We seek to offer a compensation package that is attractive and competitive with the compensation practices of the peer companies with which we compete for talent (these companies are discussed below).
• Rewarding performance. Our compensation program is intended to closely align executive compensation with performance by tying a significant portion of compensation to the achievement of financial and other goals of the Company and the executive’s contributions to the accomplishment of those goals. At present the Compensation Committee uses discretion to determine appropriate pay as a result of performance.
• Aligning the interests of our executives with those of our shareholders. A significant portion of the total compensation paid to our top two executive officers is in the form of equity-based compensation. This serves to further align the interests of our executives with those of our shareholders.

Executive compensation consists primarily of restricted stock grants with four to five year vesting requirements. This reduces the risk of short-term decisions being made at the expense of long-term growth.

How executive compensation is determined

The role of the Compensation Committee and its consultant, and of management

The Compensation Committee of independent directors, formed in late 2007, was established to oversee the compensation program for the named executive officers and for the other members of senior management who report to the CEO. Since 2008, the Compensation Committee has been assisted in fulfilling its responsibilities by its advisor, James F. Reda and Associates LLC (referred to as “J. F. Reda”). J. F. Reda is engaged by, and reports directly to, the Compensation Committee. Additional information on the roles of the Compensation Committee, J. F. Reda and management in the process for determining executive compensation is discussed below.

How the elements of our compensation program were selected

The Compensation Committee is responsible for determining the elements of our compensation program. In doing so, the Compensation Committee seeks to structure our program in a way that furthers our program objectives of providing a competitive compensation package, promoting our pay-for-performance philosophy and aligning the interests of our executives and shareholders. In structuring the program, the Compensation Committee considered market comparison information provided by J. F. Reda regarding executive compensation practices generally and at selected comparator companies.

The key compensation elements selected by the Compensation Committee include:

• annual salary;
• annual discretionary bonus; and
• long-term equity-based compensation in the form of restricted stock, vesting over four or five years.

The Compensation Committee believes that this combination of salary, cash incentive and equity-based compensation is appropriate to provide a competitive compensation package to our executives based on prevailing market practices. As we continue to develop our compensation programs, it is the fundamental belief of the Compensation Committee to tie a significant portion of target compensation to performance as measured by long-term stock price growth, which the Compensation Committee believes supports our pay-for-performance philosophy and the achievement of our strategic goals. While no specific formula is used to determine the allocation between equity-based and fixed compensation, this emphasis on pay-for-performance has historically resulted in equity-based compensation representing the largest portion of the total target compensation (meaning salary, bonus, and equity-based compensation) of the named executive officers. The company has not installed a short-term incentive plan and therefore there have been minimal or no bonus or short-term incentive payments. Compensation for Mr. Tu and Mr. Yap consists almost entirely of restricted stock grants. The emphasis on equity-based compensation in our program serves to align the interests of the named executive officers with those of our shareholders and promote executive retention.

7

---

The company does not provide any other forms of compensation such as retirement benefits, deferred compensation, termination benefits, perquisites, or change-in-control arrangements.

The use of market comparison data

The Comparison Group. The Compensation Committee compares the company’s executive compensation program to that of a group of select comparator companies. This review is done with respect to both the structure of our executive compensation program and target compensation. A significant portion of the comparator group is comprised of China-based technology and communication companies listed on the New York Stock Exchange.

Several of these companies are significantly larger than the Company. However, after a careful examination of pay levels and practices at these larger China-based companies, it was determined that executive compensation at these larger companies was not significantly different than smaller companies and did not bias the findings.

The comparator group used by the Compensation Committee consists of 17 companies that we believe we compete with for executive talent. This group is referred to as the “Comparison Group.” Of the 22 companies in the Comparison Group, 10 are U.S.-based, 12 are China-based. The companies included in the Comparison Group were selected by the Compensation Committee based on the recommendation of J. F. Reda. Information on the pay practices of the Comparison Group is provided by J. F. Reda to the extent such information is available.

The following companies made up the Comparison Group.

Compensation Structure and Targets. J. F. Reda conducted a comparison of our executive compensation structure and practices to those of the Comparison Group in 2010. This review covered several aspects of compensation, including base salary, target bonus, equity grants, pay targets and performance measures where applicable.

Based on its review in 2010, J. F. Reda concluded that the structure of the Company’s proposed compensation program was reasonably consistent with industry practices, particularly with regard to other China-based companies, where equity grants can be a major pay component. However, the potential role of a short-term incentive structure continues to be reviewed to introduce a balance between short term and long term incentives.

8

---

Market comparison data was also reviewed in the process of establishing compensation target levels for each of the key elements of our program (salary and equity-based compensation) and for the combined total of these elements. For each of the key elements, the Compensation Committee seeks to determine the prevailing competitive range of target compensation based on publicly-available information and the advice of J. F. Reda, with the mid-point of the range being the 75th percentile of the Comparison Group. The Committee generally targets total pay near the 75th percentile with the majority of pay in the form of equity. An executive’s actual compensation may be more or less than the target amount set by the Compensation Committee based on the Company’s relative performance, changes in our stock price and other factors. The Committee delivered limited pay in 2009 due to an uncertain world-wide economy and potential business consequences, and large restricted stock grants in the previous year. For 2010, salaries for the name executive officers were increased and bonuses under $2,000 were awarded. Restricted stock grants were awarded to both Mr. Tu and Mr. Yap. This was in recognition of continued strong performance in EBITDA margin, which finished 2009 and 2010 above the 80^th percentile within the Electronic Equipment industry (Global Industrial Classification Sector 45203010).

We believe the 75th percentile is appropriate for attracting and retaining top talent from a very limited talent pool. Targeting the 75th percentile is also consistent with the growth of the company and pace of acquisitions that are unique in the industry. Also, the Compensation Committee believes it is necessary to ensure key executives continue to position the Company into a leadership position in the security and information technology industries and to reward the extra effort required to achieve very aggressive goals.

Setting compensation targets based on market comparison data is intended to ensure that our compensation practices are competitive with regard to attracting and retaining executive talent. Because each compensation element is reviewed based on available data, which is limited for certain companies, compensation decisions made with respect to one element of compensation do not affect decisions made with respect to other compensation elements. It is also for this reason that no specific formula is used to determine the allocation between cash and equity-based compensation. In addition, because a named executive officer’s compensation target is set by reference to persons with similar duties at the Comparison Group companies, the Compensation Committee does not establish any fixed relationship between the compensation of the CEO and that of any other named executive officer.

The key elements of our executive compensation program

As stated above, the key elements of our compensation program are salary, an annual cash incentive, and long-term equity-based compensation awards.

Base salary

Salaries are based on the executive’s performance, scope of responsibilities and experience, competitive pay practices and tenure. Base salary is intended to provide a fixed, baseline level of compensation that is not contingent upon the Company’s performance, although performance does influence salary adjustments. The Committee’s objective is to pay salaries at the low end of the market so that we might emphasize equity-based compensation. Mr. Tu’s salary continues to be below the market median. Mr. Yap’s salary was increased to be among the top tier of salaries to recognize his unique leadership role, second only to Mr. Tu. Mr. Yap’s new pay level also reflects limited bonus opportunities.

In early 2008 and 2010, an extensive review of compensation practices at the Company and in the market was completed and provided a foundation for 2010 salary determinations. Through 2010, the top executives were compensated primarily with equity.

9

---

Annual Cash Bonus

It has not been the practice of the Company to pay annual bonuses. The Compensation Committee continues to review its use of discretionary bonuses. There has been some consideration for establishing a formulaic approach to paying bonuses but the uncertainty of world-wide economic growth and how that will affect our markets has caused the Committee to maintain its current approach.

Equity-based long-term incentive awards

The primary part of our compensation program is long-term equity-based compensation. Historically, the long-term incentive awards made to the named executive officers have consisted of time vested restricted stock. The Compensation Committee has been considering performance shares and other types of equity grants that increase the performance element of equity grants. No grants were made in 2009. In 2010, restricted stock grants were made to Mr. Tu and Mr. Yap in recognition of the 80^th percentile EBITDA margin performance while maintaining revenue growth above the median.

Role of Long-Term Incentive Awards. Long-term incentive grants as the primary component of compensation provide a number of benefits as follows:

• allows us to offer a compensation package that is competitive and enhances our ability to attract and retain executive talent;
• aligns the interests of our executives with those of our shareholders, thereby encouraging the creation of shareholder value; and
• helps establish a direct link between compensation amounts, total shareholder return and company operating performance.

Award Process. In making awards, the Compensation Committee will not issue a targeted number of shares. Instead, in consultation with J. F. Reda and taking into account market comparison data and the executive’s performance, the Compensation Committee will first determine the total dollar value of the award to be granted to the named executive officer.

The values assigned by the Compensation Committee to the individual equity grants are then translated into a specific number of full share grants such as restricted stock or options to purchase stock, in each case based on the fair market value at the date of the grant. The value ultimately realized from these awards will depend on a number of factors, including our operating performance and movements in our stock price.

Timing of Equity Awards. The Compensation Committee has not formally adopted a timing policy for the granting of stock options; however, stock option grants have not been made to the executive officers nor are there plans to do so in the future.

Awards in Fiscal Year 2010. Restricted stock awards were made to Mr. Tu and Mr. Yap in August 2010 as described above. These awards also served to balance the absence of retirement programs or severance plans.

Other benefits

At present we do not provide nor do we plan to provide, pension benefits, deferred compensation, life insurance or other benefits to our named executive officers. Our philosophy is to have pay based almost exclusively on performance and at levels above market. In other words, by establishing higher levels of risk in pay, the Committee has targeted higher than market pay.

10

---

Change in control and employment agreements

Through 2010 there were no change-in-control agreements or employment agreements of any kind nor are there plans to institute change-in-control agreements or severance agreements.

Compensation Committee Report

The Compensation Committee of the Company has reviewed and discussed the Compensation Discussion and Analysis required by Item 402(b) of Regulation S-K with management. Based on such review and discussions, the Compensation Committee recommended to the Board that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this Proxy Statement.

/s/ Compensation Committee
Robert Shiver, Chairman
Runsen Li
Peter Mak

Compensation Policies

The Compensation Committee of the Company has a compensation structure in place that encourages long-term performance. All bonuses are discretionary. The CEO and CFO have not received bonuses over $2,000 in the past three years. Equity grants made over the past three years to a limited number of executives were in the form of restricted stock and vest monthly over four or five years. The realizable value of these awards will be based on the value of our stock over a multi-year period. This structure is more likely to reduce the risk of behavior designed to generate short term gains.

Stock options and restricted stock have also been granted to new executives, managers, and other key employees as part of several acquisitions. For the same reasons, these grants are not expected to result in risky behavior to generate short term gains on the part of these employees.

As a result of these practices we believe our compensation policies do not result in any material adverse risk to the Company.

Summary Compensation Table

The following table sets forth information concerning all cash and non-cash compensation awarded to, earned by or paid to our named executive officers for services rendered in all capacities during the noted periods.

11

---

(1) Amounts shown do not reflect compensation actually received by the named executive officer. The amounts represent the grant date value for stock granted to the named executive officers in 2008, 2009 and 2010 calculated in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 718. For 2008, 2009 and 2010, the assumptions used to calculate the value of stock awards are set forth under Note 2 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for fiscal years 2008, 2009 and 2010 filed with the SEC on March 5, 2009, March 2, 2010 and February 28, 2011, respectively. These amounts disregard estimates of forfeitures related to service based vesting conditions.

Grants of Plan-Based Awards

The following table sets forth information regarding equity grants to named executive officers during the year ended December 31, 2010:

Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year End

The following table sets forth the equity awards outstanding at December 31, 2010 for each of our named executive officers. Values are based on the December 31, 2010 closing stock price of $5.33.

12

---

Option Exercises and Stock Vested

The following table sets forth information regarding options exercised and stock vested for each of our named executive officers during the year ended December 31, 2010.

Employment Agreements

We do not have employment agreements or termination agreements of any type with any of our executive officers, other than the consulting agreement with Terence Yap, which as discussed above expired in February 2009.

Potential Payments Upon Termination of Employment or Change of Control

The Company does not have change-in-control arrangements with any of its executive officers, and the Company is not obligated to pay severance or other enhanced benefits to executive officers upon termination of their employment.

The 2007 Employee Incentive Plan provides for the acceleration of vesting if a successor corporation does not assume or substitute outstanding stock awards. Upon a change of control, all unvested options and stock appreciation rights will become fully vested and exercisable, and all restricted stock units, performance units, performance shares and restricted stock will become fully vested and payable. Accelerated vesting occurs with respect to all equity-based compensation awards granted by the Company, and not just those granted to the named executive officers. In addition, no termination of employment is required to accelerate vesting.

13

---

The following table reflects the intrinsic value of unvested restricted stock that would be accelerated assuming a change in control occurred on December 31, 2010. Our named executive officers are not entitled to any payments upon a termination of employment. Values are based on the December 31, 2010 closing stock price of $5.33.

Non-Management Directors’ Compensation

The Board believes that providing competitive compensation is necessary to attract and retain qualified non-management directors. The key elements of the Company’s non-management director compensation are a cash retainer, committee chairman fees, and equity-based compensation and meeting fees. The Company reimburses non-management directors for travel and other business expenses incurred in the performance of their services for the Company. Directors are also reimbursed for attending director education courses.

Each director has actively assisted management in executing the Company’s growth strategy. Director compensation has been primarily in the form of equity. As the company absorbs numerous acquisitions and solidifies its position in the marketplace, director pay will recede.

Our non-management directors are entitled to an annual retainer, consisting of (i) a cash retainer and (ii) stock grant. In addition, they receive cash fees for serving on committees of our Board of Directors.

Based on an analysis of director compensation paid by the Comparison Group, the Board approved the following compensation structure for non-management directors in 2008. This compensation structure remained effective for 2010.

14

---

	(1)	Annual cash retainer for the role of Board members varies by director as follows: Runsen Li - $43,077, Peter Mak - $120,000, Robert Shiver - $50,000.
	(2)	Each director received 50,000 restricted shares in fiscal 2010 with grant date value of $314,200.

The Board believes that this fee structure recognizes our directors’ key role in driving our growth and for the work required on each of the three committees the directors serve.

The following table sets forth the total compensation earned by the non-management directors during fiscal year ended December 31, 2010:

	(1)	Consists of 30,000 restricted shares granted to each independent director on February 10, 2010. This grant vests monthly for 12 months beginning with the grant date. An additional 20,000 restricted shares were granted to each independent director on August 11, 2010 and vests monthly for 12 months beginning with the grant date.
	(2)	Other compensation consists of fees received for serving on Board committees.

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

All current members of the Compensation Committee are independent directors, and all past members were independent directors at all times during their service on such Committee. None of the past or present members of our Compensation Committee are present or past employees or officers of ours or any of our subsidiaries. No member of the Compensation Committee has had any relationship with us requiring disclosure under Item 404 of Regulation S-K under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. None of our executive officers serves on the board of directors or compensation committee of a company that has an executive officer that serves on our Board or Compensation Committee.

ITEM 12.     SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS.

The following table sets forth information known to us with respect to the beneficial ownership of our Common Stock as of the close of business on April 25, 2011 for: (i) each person known by us to beneficially own more than 5% of our voting securities, (ii) each executive officer (including a named executive officer), (iii) each of our directors and nominees, and (iv) all of our executive officers and directors as a group. Shares owned as of April 25, 2011 are based upon public filings with the SEC.

Unless otherwise specified, the address of each of the persons set forth below is in care of China Security & Surveillance Technology, Inc., 13/F, Shenzhen Special Zone Press Tower, Shennan Road, Futian District, Shenzhen, People’s Republic of China, 518034.

15

---