Second, "Exposing the criminal risk sources of three types of crimes of illegal fund-raising on P2P platforms" Justice Network-Procuratorate Daily Author: Chen Chen
First, the P2P online lending platform directly engages in illegal fund-raising activities.
The common methods are: first, the financial product model, which first absorbs investors' funds in the form of selling financial products, and then looks for borrowers with borrowing needs; The second is the short-term and long-term loan model, that is, the loan term is decomposed, the long-term loan is divided into several short-term loans, and the old debt is repaid with new debt, forming a capital cycle; The third is the self-financing mode, which uses the absorbed public funds for the business development of the enterprise or affiliated enterprises.
At the beginning of its development abroad, P2P online lending platform aims to match the direct transactions between borrowers and lenders, realize financial disintermediation by using Internet technology, and realize independent transactions and direct transactions between borrowers and lenders. In the above operation mode, P2P online lending platform deviates from the role of pure information intermediary, actually grasps the relationship between supply and demand of funds, and cuts off the direct contact and information interaction between the supply and demand of funds. More crucially, the platform may face the liquidity pressure of mismatched fund maturities, and the fund pool model is prone to misappropriation, fraud and even absconding due to opaque information and lack of supervision.
The second is that the perpetrator uses the P2P online lending platform for illegal fund-raising activities.
First, some financial institutions use P2P platform as a channel to absorb public funds. In practice, some financing guarantee companies, small loan companies, pawn shops and other institutions cooperate with P2P platform, or build their own P2P platform. Financing guarantee companies and small loan companies provide projects and complete financing through P2P platform. The reason why the above-mentioned institutions are so circuitous in financing is because there are clear regulatory rules in terms of business access, upper limit of financing leverage and absorption of public funds. For example, according to the Guiding Opinions on the Pilot Project of Small Loan Companies jointly issued by the China Banking Regulatory Commission and the People's Bank of China, the balance of incorporated funds obtained by small loan companies from banking financial institutions shall not exceed 50% of the net capital, and the loan balance of the same borrower shall not exceed 5% of the net capital of small loan companies. Through the cooperation with P2P online lending platform, the provisions on the source of funds and financing leverage of microfinance companies may be broken, and P2P online lending has become an online platform for microfinance companies to absorb public funds.
Second, unqualified borrowers use P2P platform for illegal fund-raising activities. According to the relevant prosecution standards, if the actor illegally absorbs or disguises public deposits beyond a certain amount or quantity, or causes direct economic losses to reach a certain standard, it can constitute the crime of illegally absorbing public deposits. In practical cases, because some P2P online lending platforms have not fully fulfilled the obligation to verify the identity of borrowers, borrowers publish multiple loan information under multiple false identities to attract funds from unspecified public to invest in real estate, stocks, bonds, futures and so on. Some directly lend illegally raised funds at usury to earn spreads.
In the above two cases, P2P online lending platform has become a channel to absorb public funds. It goes without saying that the cooperation between P2P platform and institutions or the establishment of P2P platform by institutions for fund-raising activities may all become criminals of illegal fund-raising activities; Even if it only provides platform services for fund-raisers, if there is evidence that the P2P online lending platform acquiesces in the borrower's borrowing even though it knows that the borrower's identity is false and publishes a lot of false lending information, or has a laissez-faire attitude towards the number and amount of borrowers, because the P2P online lending platform will charge corresponding formalities fees in the process of providing intermediary services, according to the Opinions on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Laws in Handling Criminal Cases of Illegal Fund-raising (hereinafter referred to as the Opinions), P2P online lending will