Write-off of non-performing loans refers to the situation that banks find that loans are in default and cannot be recovered, and write them off from profits. The loan write-off system is essentially an accounting process within the bank.

The general procedure of this accounting process is: after the non-performing loans are identified as losses, the "handling bank" will organize the write-off materials according to the specified conditions and requirements, and after the "authorized bank" approves the write-off, the accounting department will allocate funds from the loan loss reserve to write off the non-performing loans. After the loan is written off, no accounting confirmation and measurement will be carried out on the bank balance sheet.

China's "Trust Law" stipulates that state-owned commercial banks can completely use the trust mechanism to deal with debt-paying assets, and banks and trust companies, as trust parties, follow the principles of voluntariness, fairness, honesty and credit to set up debt-paying assets trusts.

Banks entrust the management, operation and realization of debt-paying assets to professional trust companies through trust, and trust companies use professional financial management skills to manage and dispose of their debt-paying assets for the benefit of beneficiaries.

It is also an essential function of a legal society to expand information and investigate the responsibility for asset losses. Party and state leaders attach great importance to listening to the voice of the people.

But "accountability" is not the requirement of superiors to subordinates, nor is it the slogan in the meeting. The necessary condition of accountability is that there must be a strict accountability system and a system that makes decision makers responsible for their own decisions.

Only by bringing "who makes decisions and who is responsible" into the legal framework and becoming a system can accountability be truly effective. In market economy countries, there is a set of strict accountability system for decision-making, and there are very strict mandatory provisions on the responsibility of decision makers.

Decision-makers are subject to economic penalties and degraded use, as well as criminal penalties. We should learn from foreign practices as soon as possible and accelerate the establishment of an effective accountability system for decision-making.

The accountability of decision-making responsibility should implement "irregular responsibility system" for decision-makers, so that those responsible can bear historical responsibility according to legal retrospective procedures. If a major mistake is found in decision-making, no matter where the decision-maker is promoted or transferred, he should be held accountable. It is necessary to find out the causes and responsible persons of the formation of non-performing assets in a timely manner.

Those who make mistakes in decision-making, regardless of the size of the responsibility, should be held accountable and severely punished economically according to the size of the responsibility. In terms of legal responsibility, we will never be soft and bear the criminal responsibility we should bear.

Only in this way can there be a real accountability system for decision-making, and the accountability for decision-making responsibility can play its due deterrent role, thus effectively preventing the new loss of state-owned assets.

Baidu encyclopedia-bad assets