中国社会养老保险基金面临的问题及对策

我国现行的养老保险体制在解决传统养老保险模式弊端的同时也产生了许多新问题。在社会养老保险基金的筹集方面,存在着基本养老保险覆盖面较窄,基金来源单一,参保企业漏缴保险费的问题。解决问题的关键在于增强缴费意识;做好养老保险征缴环节的稽核;开征社会保障税。在社会养老保险基金的给付方面存在人口老龄化对养老保险基金给付的冲击;退休年龄低以及历史债务的问题。认为只有建立机动灵活的就业与退休机制;逐渐消解隐性债务才能使这方面的问题得到缓解。     

国内土地征收补偿范围存在的问题及对策探讨

在我国现行立法中,关于土地征收补偿范围的规定非常狭窄和笼统,概括来说,主要存在三个方面的不足,它未涉及间接损失的补偿、没有时土地承包经营权进行补偿、没有全面补偿失地农民的社保权益损害,应从以上三个角度来完善我国土地征收补偿范围的立法。     

物权债权区分理论的再证成

传统的物权债权区分理论遭遇现代性困境,物债区分相对性理论应景而生。解读方法存在问题,并不当然地表明解读对象本身也存在生存危机。物权债权仍然是两种彼此独立、明确界分的财产权利,但须理清方法逻辑,而不必弱化后作为权宜之计,或者彻底否定后推倒重来。物债区分的真正基础不在于绝对权和相对权的区别,而是支配权和请求权的划分。物债区分是财产权的基本而非周延性分类。所谓的债权物权化和物权债权化的诸种例证皆可以在物权债权相互区分的体系中找到应有的定位。     

伪造信用卡犯罪中的伪造行为内涵与对象研究

刑法中伪造信用卡犯罪中的伪造不仅包括仿制其物理外观的形式伪造,还应包括将权利人信息写入磁条介质、芯片等的内容伪造。作为伪造对象的信用卡应当是具有物理载体的实体卡片,事实上不存在对虚拟信用卡的伪造。以虚假身份骗领无对应实体卡的虚拟信用卡应视为妨害信用卡管理罪中的骗领信用卡行为;利用权利人既有实体卡信息,复制虚拟信用卡的行为系对他人信用卡信息资料的非法使用而非伪造。有关伪造信用卡犯罪刑法规定的立法原意并不包含伪造空白信用卡,伪造空白信用卡具有严重的社会危害性,理应将其纳入刑法规制范围,以保持与妨害信用卡管理罪刑法规定的协调。不能通过司法解释改变立法原意,现行刑法中伪造信用卡犯罪的伪造含义应有相应的调整。     

农村基层政府的信用及其对执行力的影响

农村基层政府的信用直接影响着农民群众对政府的信任度,对于提高农村基层政府的执行力具有重要的意义。而农村基层政府的信用现状影响着执行力的发挥,必须加强农村基层政府的信用建设,以提高其执行力。     

贵州省少数民族地区保险业发展的现状与对策

贵州省是多民族省份,少数民族地区保险业既是当地经济的重要组成部分,也是支持和推动少数民族地区经济发展的重要手段。为促进我省少数民族地区,尤其是少数民族县保险的发展,更好地为少数民族地区经济社会发展服务,笔者对贵州省少数民族地区保险现状进行了综合调研,并针对面临的问题提出相应对策。     

Cyber insurance – What coverage in case of an alleged act of War? Questions raised by the Mondelez v. Zurich case

In October 2018, snack company Mondelez International, Inc. (Mondelez) filed an action against Zurich American Insurance Company (Zurich), requesting indemnification for more than USD $100,000,000 in losses caused by the NotPetya cyber virus. Zurich refuses to cover these damages alleging one of the insurance policy's exclusions for damage resulting from a hostile or warlike action by a government, as the NotPetya attack is said to have been sponsored by Russia. This case is noteworthy for multiple reasons: not only is it the first significant legal dispute in the insurance field concerning the recovery of costs resulting from a cyber attack, but it is also the first time that an insurance company is invoking the war exclusion to decline coverage for an allegedly state-sponsored cyber hack.This article analyzes the key issues of this important case, including attribution of a cyber attack to a State and interpretation of an insurance policy's war exclusion in a cyber context, and the likelihood of success of Mondelez's arguments. It also explores the strengths and limits of general principles of contract and public international law when applied to new technologies and cyber incidents. Finally, it discusses the potential impacts of the Mondelez case on the contents and limits of future traditional and cyber-specific insurance policies.     

Insurance Fraud and the Role of the Civil Law

Two UK Supreme Court decisions have considered insurance fraud. The first, Versloot Dredging BV v HDI‐Gerling Industries Versicherung (The DC Merwestone), concerned the use of a fraudulent device being harnessed to support a legitimate claim which, in the view of the majority, was an area of insurance law in need of re‐evaluation. The second, Haywood v Zurich Insurance Co, concerned the use of fraud to increase the settlement paid by the insurer and whether an insurer, which suspects fraud but has nevertheless chosen to settle a claim, is entitled to set aside the settlement under the tort of deceit where it subsequently discovers proof that it was in fact fraudulent. This case note examines not only the legal implications of the decisions and their likely impact on industry practice, it also focuses on the broader issue of the proper province of the civil law and whether general deterrence can be justified as a proper objective where the criminal law is deficient in punishing fraud because of its higher standard of proof.     

社会保障制度的国际比较研究

社会保障制度在各国历经百余年的发展取得了在全球近乎普及的辉煌成就。随着国际合作与交流的不断发展,社会保障这一人类文明进步的成果呈现出新的发展趋势。因此,加强这一问题的国际比较研究,不仅有助于我国社会保障制度的建立和完善,而且有助于社会保障的国际合作。     

恶意透支型信用卡诈骗罪相关问题分析简

恶意透支型信用卡诈骗罪具有区别于传统型信用卡诈骗罪的显著特征和特有的犯罪构成要件。在犯罪主体上,其属于身份犯,信用卡申领人方具有犯罪主体资格,借用人不能单独构成该类型犯罪;恶意透支型信用卡诈骗罪非法占有目的的推定需要综合行为人的各种行为加以考察,不能客观归罪,也不能仅以发卡行催收后拒不归还来推定主观上的非法占有目的;发卡行催收行为的实施应自透支期限届满后以有效的方式能够确使申领人知晓为标准;行为人的透支数额不应包括其应支付的利息,对于行为人利用多张信用卡宴旒酌潘古行为苴潘古射枥酌计笪廊当i并行累加．