我国民间借贷的现状分析及立法对策

民间借贷既是金融行为也是法律行为。针对现在借贷市场存在的问题。一方面，需要对民间借贷的合法地位进行清晰界定，对其搞一刀切或一味压制是行不通的；另一方面，需要完善监管立法，建立借贷行为监管系统，信息披露共享平台，通过立法引导金融资源优化配置，规范和引导民间借贷行为。     

综合立法规制民间借贷研究

我国民间借贷在立法和司法实践中存在诸多问题,难以防范民间借贷危机。建议我国根据民间借贷的法律类别,在借鉴境外相关立法、结合本国立法习惯和现行模式基础上,有区别有重点地综合立法规制民间借贷。坚持区别原则,区别规制民间民事借贷和商事信贷;坚持重点原则,以规制商事信贷为重点,制定专门的"民间信贷保护法",着重从定义和规则、信贷经营主体、利率限制、监管机构、法律责任等方面加以规范;制定"利率限制法"和"非法金融整治法",通过多重立法综合规制民间借贷。     

论我国民间借贷法律规制的完善

本文针对当前我国民间借贷市场发展现状,从民间借贷概念,民间借贷与非法集资、高利贷的区别入手,对于民间借贷进行法律界定,剖析了我国民间借贷市场的发展现状,发现法律规制中存在的体系不健全、监管不到位等问题,提出完善建议,藉此规范我国民间借贷市场的健康有序发展。     

我国P2P网络借贷平台的合法性界定及法律监管

近年来,伴随着互联网的融通、资源的共事以及民间借贷市场的持续昌盛,P2P网络借贷平台飞速发展.从2007年第一个P2P网络借贷平台开始营业至今,作为一种新型的民间金融借贷平台,它有效改善了信贷市场供求的平衡.但在P2P网络借贷平台发展的过程中,由于缺乏监管框架和法律规制,P2P网络借贷平台逐渐呈现了跨界违规等旁逸斜出的发展,甚至是非法集资.本文将从我国P2P网络借贷平台在中国的兴起出发,以我国目前P2P网络借贷平台形成的经营模式为基础,分析探讨不同模式及模式下经营行为的合法性.此外,本文将梳理监管机构对行业的监管思路,评析发达国家的监管策略,并结合我国国情,从法律监管角度提出立法及监管建议.     

民间借贷的发展与法律规制分析

近年来,我国民间借贷活动在社会生活中频繁发生,民间借贷迅速成为社会关注的焦点。本文试从民间借贷的概念,发展现状,以及法律的规制三个方面分析民间借贷存在与发展的重要性。其中,对民间借贷的法律规制主要集中讨论民间借贷市场的主体准入、民间借贷的资金来源以及民间借贷的利率限制。     

民间借贷规制的重点及立法建议

解决我国民间借贷问题的基本出路在于通过法律创新形成制度激励,引导金融资源优化配置。民间借贷立法应当采用自然演进与建构相结合、一般规范与分类规范相结合的多层次立法体系。在重点借鉴美国、英国、香港地区及我国古代相关立法经验的基础上,结合当前人民法院的司法实践和我国小额贷款公司的试点情况,应当尽快修改相关法律并制定专门性法律文件。民间借贷的专门立法应当只对那些以营利为目的且专门从事借贷业务的机构和个人的商事借贷行为进行规范,重点是对主体准入、放贷利率、经营区域、放贷人的资金来源等加以规范。     

民间借贷市场发展的法律障碍与制度回应

国家富民政策的实施带来了民间资本的迅猛增长,源于资本逐利的天性和国内投资渠道的有限性,民间资本以民间借贷等不同形式活跃在中国社会经济的各个领域。但由于我国民间借贷法律制度的"碎片化"和滞后性,加之稳定性、协调性、严肃性和前瞻性不足等问题,民间借贷市场的发展面临着法律预期、法律获得以及法律适用等方面的障碍。针对我国民间借贷法律制度的现状与问题,应该从法律引导、制度完善以及利率规制等渠道对民间借贷市场发展的法律障碍予以制度回应。     

民间借贷监管问题的法律思考

民间借贷问题已经成为全社会讨论的热门话题。基于规制金融风险,维持金融秩序和社会秩序以及为保证国家宏观调控效果的需要,有必要对民间借贷进行监管。考察民间借贷监管现状,其缺陷主要表现在监管法律的缺位、对民间借贷管制过严。至此,我国民间借贷的应有思路因从适度放松管制与加强监管入手,从而保证民间借贷运行的阳光化和规范化。     

我国民间借贷的现状、问题及完善建议

在我国,民间融资的地位不明确,没有明确的监管机构对其实行监管,也没有相关的法律对其作出明确的界定.但在实际生活中,它却以一种“灰色金融”的方式存在着,并在国民经济发展和融资市场中发挥着越来越重要的作用.本文从我国民问借贷产生的原因以及民间借贷的现状、问题出发,提出相关的建议,以减少民间借贷在发展过程中存在潜在的风 险.因此,为了使民间借贷正确发挥其在市场经济下的作用并且不增加现行金融体系的风险,就需要对其进行制度和法律上的规制.     

民间借贷的法律解决机制探析

我国民间借贷日趋活跃,借贷规模不断扩大,已成为中小企业的重要融资渠道,它在一定程度上弥补了我国正规金融的不足。另一方面,民间借贷由于疏于规范,其无序发展存在着较大的风险隐患。本文从民间借贷的问题出发,在分析其法律规制缺陷的基础上,对引导民间借贷走回法律正轨进行了探析,并就立法所牵涉的规制范围、利率管制、准入机制、监管体系四个重要方面提出了一些看法和对策。     

民间借贷行业监管的框架设计与机制建设

目前,由于缺乏外在的立法和内在的运行规则调整,民间借贷市场作为一种非正规性的金融市场在发展中存在诸多的风险和问题,这极大地阻碍了我国金融体系的发展和完善,亟需强有力的管控。为此,应加强对民间借贷机构的机构形式、机构准入、机构流动、业务经营以及隐性风险的监管,以促进民间借贷行业阳光化、规范化的发展。     

Morality, social norms and the rule of law as transaction cost-saving devices: the case of ancient Athens

The importance of the institutional framework for economic development is widely accepted today and it is duly stressed in the economic literature. The protection of property rights, the enforcement of contracts and an efficient legal system are the pillars of the contemporary rule of law. However, formal institutions cannot function without being internalized by the citizens and without the strong backing of social norms. Morality and social norms are the major elements of the informal institutional structure, the social capital, which is also critical for social welfare and economic development. In this paper we will discuss both the formal and the informal institutional framework of Ancient Athens, which was a free market society with economic problems similar to contemporary market societies. Athenians developed a highly sophisticated legal framework for the protection of private property, the enforcement of contracts and the efficient resolution of disputes. Such an institutional framework functioned effectively, cultivating trust and protecting the security of transactions. This entire system however was based on social norms such as reciprocity, the value of reputation and widely accepted business ethics. Conformity to social norms as well as moral behavior was fostered by social sanction mechanisms (such as stigma) and moral education. The Athenian example is a further proof of the importance of morality and social norms as transaction cost-saving devices even in quite sophisticated legal systems. Their absence or decline leads inevitably to the need for more regulation and litigation and to a growing preference for clear-cut rules instead of discretionary standards. Athenian law was pioneering in the development of rules and institutional mechanisms suitable for the reduction of transaction costs, many of them surviving in the most complex contemporary legal systems.     

论行业协会参与市场监管的法律困境与对策

行业协会参与市场监管存在的主要问题是行业协会参与市场监管的主体地位缺乏法律依据、政社不分以及行业协会自身发展不完善。然而,行业协会参与市场监管是历史的必然,首先,它是经济安全理论和社会责任理论发展的必然产物;其次,它能有效弥补政府监管的局限性;再次,行业监管具有独特的优越性。为此,必须加强立法,确立行业协会监管的合法地位,实行政社分开,以提高行业协会的监管能力。     

中美证券规章制定监督制度比较研究

美国证券规章制定的监督包括立法监督、司法监督、行政监督和非正式监督,各种监督构成一个完整的体系。其监督过程是一个由过程到结果的监督,是监督主体对其程序和实体合法性进行全方位的监督。相对于美国证券制定的监督体系,我国尚存在很多需要完善的地方。有必要借鉴美国经验,完善我国证券规章制定的监督制度。     

提高金融包容:一个银行法的视角

通过提高金融包容促进人类发展已成为国际社会的共识.未来金融法改革,无论是立法还是监管实践应充分考虑金融包容.从银行法改革来看,提高金融包容应与维护银行体系稳定和保护存款人利益共同作为监管机构的监管目标.作为法定的权利,公众获得生命线性的银行服务,可以通过银行社会责任的法定化来实现,并通过私法和公法强制实施.从激励相容和成本效益监管原则出发,对提供小额信贷的金融机构必须实施差异化监管.     

Internal Market Rationality,Private Law and the Direction of the Union: Resuscitating the Market as the Object of the Political

This paper proposes a concept of ‘internal market rationality’ for the analysis of the political, legal and economic consequences of European integration. Internal market rationality refers to a specific pattern of political action in the field of internal market, which has emerged gradually due to the confluence of three main factors: first, the EU's functional institutional design; second, the processes of post‐national juridification; and third, a more contingent influence of ideas. In the interplay of those three factors, the interpretation of internal market has become overdetermined, restricting thereby the space of (democratic) politics in its regulation. This reification of internal market rationality has had a direct influence on the content of European law, as I demonstrate through the example of European private law. Internal market rationality has transformed the very concept of justice underpinning private law, the concept of the person or subject of law, the (re)distributive pattern of private law as well as the normative basis on which private law stands. I argue, finally, that a close examination of the legal, institutional and ideological arrangement behind internal market rationality provides clues for the democratisation of the EU.     

A Shift in Focus: Systematisation in European Private Law through EU Law

The discourse on the Europeanisation of private law appears gradually to be moving into new territory in which the central debate on convergence of private laws in Europe makes place for structural questions on private law development in a multi‐level European legal order. With the realisation that private law is and will remain complementary regulated at EU level and in national laws, a re‐orientation is called for that, in the words of Micklitz, ‘allows one to determine which norms shall be elaborated and enforced at what level and by whom’. This article accepts that such a re‐orientation is needed in relation to substance, process, instruments and enforcement; a more fundamental question needs to be addressed, however, in order to ensure coherence in the development of private law in Europe. As can be gleaned from existing practice in EU consumer law, competition law, and financial market regulation, a deeply engrained tension between market integration and protectionist policies in Community law has resulted in incoherent regulation at EU level, which filters through into national legal systems. This puts at risk fundamental values of private law, such as certainty and fairness. A solution for this is proposed by shifting the focus from national private laws to the political and doctrinal structure of EU private law, and the normative framework it provides. General principles of EU private law, it is argued, could and should provide a counterweight to the problem of conflicting policies and set out a guideline for the future development of European private law.     

互联网金融平台纳入金融市场基础设施监管的法律思考

互联网金融已经成为我国金融体系的重要组成部分,互联网金融平台的立法与监管变得愈加重要。在不断强化对互联网金融微观合规监管、竞争监管和消费者保护的同时,需要逐步加强对互联网金融的宏观审慎监管,这需要在法律上解决一个关键问题,即互联网金融平台是否纳入以及如何纳入金融市场基础设施监管。这一问题关系到互联网金融的发展、系统性金融风险防范以及法律制度创新等诸多理论和实践上的难点,亟需从理论上开展深入研究。目前将互联网金融平台全面纳入金融市场基础设施监管还缺乏足够的理论支撑和现实基础,通过创新和完善相关法律制度,将符合金融市场基础设施特征的部分互联网金融平台纳入金融市场基础设施监管制度的框架,实现金融监管和风险防范的全覆盖,建立更加完善的金融市场法律治理体系和风险防范体系,是当前金融法治建设必须尽快解决的重要问题之一。     

反垄断私人诉讼制度的必要性分析

反垄断私人诉讼制度是反垄断法的一种有效的实施机制。其以公法私人执行、权利监督制约、权利救济等理论为基石,旨在维护良好的竞争秩序、保护私人主体的合法权益。在经济飞速发展、市场行情变幻莫测的当今社会,反垄断私人诉讼制度的建立显得愈发必要和可行。其必要性可以从民主法治建设、公共资源节约、权利监督制约、便于获得赔偿等方面得以表现;其可行性主要体现在法理和法规两方面。     

互联网法律规制的若干问题探讨

互联网应用极大地改变了人们的生活方式,互联网领域的法律问题也改变着法律的世袭领地,创造出了法律的"混血儿"。调整因互联网应用而产生的各类社会关系的法律规范即互联网法,其调整手段涉及公法和私法领域,是一个正在成长中的兼具特异性范畴和共同性范畴的综合性法律部门。互联网立法既要针对互联网发展的特点,制定互联网领域的单行法,又要在现有的民法、刑法、知识产权法等部门法中增加针对互联网领域的专门条款,以达互联网法律规制的目的。