【摘要】：自2013年互聯(lián)網(wǎng)金融橫空出世以來,各大互聯(lián)網(wǎng)金融理財(cái)平臺紛紛推出各種平民化的理財(cái)產(chǎn)品,其中涉及收益權(quán)拆分轉(zhuǎn)讓的信托計(jì)劃、資管計(jì)劃作為其中發(fā)展最為迅速的一支,以其"化零為整"、靈活機(jī)動(dòng)的投資方式受到廣大投資者的喜愛,成為金融創(chuàng)新的一大代表性成果。然而,在其迅速發(fā)展的同時(shí),產(chǎn)品本身存在的道德和法律風(fēng)險(xiǎn)使其面臨著越來越多的質(zhì)疑。本文從"收益權(quán)"的定義出發(fā),區(qū)分大陸法系和英美法系對于"受益權(quán)"和"收益權(quán)"的不同界定,關(guān)注當(dāng)前較為常見的互聯(lián)網(wǎng)金融產(chǎn)品收益權(quán)拆分轉(zhuǎn)讓的模式,認(rèn)為當(dāng)下對于互聯(lián)網(wǎng)金融產(chǎn)品收益權(quán)拆分一律叫停的做法并不適當(dāng),相反堵不如疏,對其風(fēng)險(xiǎn)進(jìn)行多方面防控才是更合理的選擇。
[Abstract]:Since the birth of Internet finance in 2013, various Internet financial platforms have launched a variety of popularized financial products, including trust plans involving the separation and transfer of income rights, among which the capital management plan has developed most rapidly. The flexible and flexible way of investment is popular with investors and becomes a representative achievement of financial innovation. However, with its rapid development, the moral and legal risks of the product itself make it face more and more questions. Starting from the definition of "income right", this paper distinguishes the different definitions of "benefit right" and "income right" between civil law system and Anglo-American law system, and pays close attention to the current more common mode of income right separation and transfer of Internet financial products. It is considered that it is not appropriate to stop the separation of the income rights of Internet financial products at present, on the contrary, it is better to block it, and to prevent and control its risks in many aspects is a more reasonable choice.
【作者單位】： 山東大學(xué);
【基金】：2013年教育部人文社科青年基金項(xiàng)目《民間資本控股村鎮(zhèn)銀行:理論求證、衍生風(fēng)險(xiǎn)與法律規(guī)制》(13YJC820004) 2014年教育部人文社科青年基金項(xiàng)目《民營銀行:發(fā)展障礙、經(jīng)營風(fēng)險(xiǎn)與法律制度克服——以民營銀行開閘為時(shí)代背景》(14YJC820038)的階段性成果
【分類號】：F724.6;F832.2;D922.28
，

本文編號：2294598