Comparison of Several Operation Models of Credit Guarantee for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises in my country Since the pilot program of credit guarantee for small and medium-sized enterprises was launched in 1998, credit guarantee institutions for small and medium-sized enterprises in my country have developed rapidly, showing the following trends.

Diversified funding sources.

Guarantee funds for small and medium-sized enterprises include government financial funds, corporate membership funds, corporate mutual aid funds, private investment, and cooperation funds between government financial funds and other sources of funds.

The nature and organizational forms of guarantee institutions are diverse.

From the perspective of the organizational form of guarantee institutions, there are public institutions affiliated to government management departments, state-owned joint-stock companies, private joint-stock companies and management companies of various funds, etc.; from the perspective of the nature of the institutions, there are non-profit policy guarantee institutions and profit-oriented guarantee institutions.

There are commercial guarantee institutions, as well as guarantee institutions that operate mixed business of policy and commercial guarantee business.

There are signs of diversification of guarantee varieties and multi-functional institutions.

Among the small and medium-sized enterprise guarantee institutions, there are institutions that simply provide loan guarantees, and there are also investment guarantee companies that combine investment and guarantee functions; some only provide credit guarantees for enterprises, and some provide credit guarantees for both enterprises and individuals.

At present, the main problems existing in credit guarantee institutions for small and medium-sized enterprises are: first, scattered investment and too small scale.

Many local governments set up guarantee funds by county, some of which are only a few million; most corporate mutual aid funds are small in scale and find it difficult to gain the trust of banks.

Second, there is a single source of funds and a lack of financial compensation mechanism.

Guarantee funds for small and medium-sized enterprises in most areas are mainly government financial funds. Only a few areas have private guarantee institutions. Some private guarantee companies are also engaged in guarantee business for small and medium-sized enterprises.

Most of the local financial guarantee funds are one-time and lack a financial compensation mechanism; private capital is mainly private equity, which is difficult to list in the country.

The third is the lack of professional teams.

Since there were few professional guarantee institutions in the past, guarantee institutions have expanded rapidly in the past two years, resulting in a shortage of guarantee professionals.

Many guarantee institutions funded by local governments are staffed by government officials who are not familiar with the guarantee business; some decentralized enterprise mutual aid funds have difficulty in carrying out guarantee business due to a lack of professional management and operation.

The fourth issue is the use of guarantee funds.

The current credit guarantee management measures for small and medium-sized enterprises stipulate that the use of guaranteed capital can only be deposited in banks and purchased treasury bonds.

Under the current low interest rate situation, depositing in banks is to ensure the safety of capital, but it cannot achieve appreciation.

In fact, since bank deposits cannot increase in value, many institutions have adopted various methods to use capital in the capital market. Some institutions even rely on capital operations rather than guarantee business to support their teams.

The fifth is government intervention.

Although the measures for the management of guarantees for small and medium-sized enterprises all propose to reduce administrative intervention and implement corporatized operations, some local governments believe that I have the final say on the money I pay.

Therefore, there are still problems in some areas where leaders decide projects and guarantee companies provide guarantees. Mistakes in decision-making result in bad and bad debts, which bring down the guarantee institutions.

Sixth, government financial funds cannot meet the financing needs of the majority of small and medium-sized enterprises.

Due to the large number of small and medium-sized enterprises and their diverse needs, government-funded policy guarantee institutions alone are far from being able to meet the needs of small and medium-sized enterprises.

Even in countries with large government investment, such as the United States and Japan, the amount of policy-guaranteed loans does not exceed 10% of the loan balance of small and medium-sized enterprises. Therefore, guarantees for small and medium-sized enterprises cannot rely solely on policy guarantees, but must also leverage private capital and business

The role of guarantee.

Seventh, there is a lack of legal regulations for guarantee institutions.

my country promulgated the Guarantee Law in 1995, but this law regulates guarantee behavior rather than guarantee institutions.

Since the launch of the pilot program of credit guarantees for small and medium-sized enterprises in 1998, the State Economic and Trade Commission and the Ministry of Finance have respectively issued management measures for credit guarantees for small and medium-sized enterprises, but they are mainly targeted at policy guarantee institutions, and their scope of application is relatively narrow and incomplete.

At present, there are many forms of guarantee institutions in the country. Therefore, there is an urgent need for laws to regulate guarantee institutions.

2. Comparative Analysis of Typical Models (1) Model 1: Finance at all levels establishes mutual funds and entrusts professional institutions to manage the financial guarantee funds. Shanghai adopts financial contributions at all levels to establish financial budget arrangements and centrally entrusts professional institutions to manage the same guarantee funds.

management model.

The Shanghai Small and Medium Enterprises Guarantee Fund is a joint investment of 700 million from the municipal, district and county level financial institutions.

Among them, the Municipal Finance Bureau invested 400 million yuan, and 20 district and county finance bureaus invested 300 million yuan.

At the same time, some districts and counties have also established small-scale financial guarantee funds to supplement the general guarantee funds to provide guarantees for some micro and small loans.

At present, the Shanghai Financial Guarantee Fund is the largest fiscally funded small and medium-sized enterprise guarantee fund in the country.

The Shanghai Municipal Financial Mutual Fund adopts the following management and operation mechanism: First, professional guarantee institutions are entrusted with the operation and management of the mutual fund.

Since the professional guarantee business is still in the initial stage of development in our country, there is a shortage of guarantee professionals.

In order to utilize professionals and realize the separation of government and enterprises, the Municipal Finance Bureau entrusts the Shanghai Branch of China Economic and Technological Investment and Guarantee Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "China Investment and Guarantee Shanghai Branch") to manage and operate the joint guarantee fund, the government and professional guarantee companies

Sign an entrusted management agreement.

The second is to establish an interest and risk sharing mechanism among investors.

Guarantee fund decisions are mainly made by guarantee companies.