Is usury legal and how does the law stipulate usury?
"Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Laws in the Trial of Private Lending Cases" Article 26 If the interest rate agreed by both borrowers and lenders does not exceed 24% per annum, and the lender requests the borrower to pay interest at the agreed interest rate, the people's court shall support it.
The interest rate agreed between the borrower and the borrower exceeds the annual interest rate of 36%, and the interest agreement in excess is invalid. The people's court shall support the borrower's request to the lender to return the interest paid in excess of 36% of the annual interest rate.
Question 1: Who is the usurer?
Regarding the interest rate of private lending, the central bank stipulates that the interest rate of private lending can be appropriately higher than that of banks, but it must not exceed four times the interest rate of similar loans of banks. Beyond this limit, the excess interest will not be protected.
Perhaps because of this provision, the society habitually believes that as long as private lending exceeds 4 times the interest rate of similar loans of banks, it belongs to usury. However, with the marketization of interest rates, the benchmark interest rate of bank loans is also changing, which is more than four times. Specific identification is more difficult.
In view of the above problems, the Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Laws in the Trial of Private Lending Cases, which came into effect on September 1 2065438, further clarified that the people's court should support the interest rate agreed by both borrowers and lenders not exceeding 24% per annum. The interest rate agreed between the borrower and the borrower exceeds the annual interest rate of 36%, and the interest agreement in excess is invalid. The people's court shall support the borrower's request to the lender to return the interest paid in excess of 36% of the annual interest rate.
The biggest change of this new judicial interpretation is to "draw a clear line" with the fixed interest rate, rather than fluctuating according to the benchmark interest rate. The new judicial interpretation draws two boundaries: one is the annual interest rate of 24%, and the other is the annual interest rate of 36%. These two lines divide private lending into three areas:
-The interest rate agreed by the borrower and the lender shall not exceed 24% of the annual interest rate and shall be protected by the judiciary;
-If the interest rate agreed between the borrower and the lender is between 24% and 36%, there will be no protection and no objection;
-The interest rate agreed between the borrower and the borrower exceeds the annual interest rate by 36%, and the interest agreement for the excess is invalid.
As can be seen from the above, neither the provisions of the central bank nor the judicial interpretation of the Supreme Law have defined usury, nor have they found that high-income loans are illegal. The biggest penalty is that the excess interest is not protected and the agreement is invalid.
In other words, usury is actually risk-free and certainly won't lose money. The biggest risk is that some ultra-high interest rates cannot be recovered. No wonder usury has nothing to hide and grows wildly!
Question 2: Who is the usurer?
According to relevant regulations, private lending is protected by the judiciary and the annual interest rate is less than 24%. If the excess is not protected by law, who will protect it? This "malicious role" is violent debt collection! As an accomplice of usury, violent debt collection has become a nightmare for many borrowers.
Informal debt collection means
Take the murder case of "humiliating mother" as an example, it is the word "humiliation" that causes people's anger and fear. The means of debt collection has already surpassed the bottom line of ordinary people, which is not only very violent, but also inhuman and tolerable. In ordinary people's cognition, "it is only natural to pay back debts" and should be paid back with money, not with dignity and life.
However, under the clutches of violent collection, many borrowers' lives are seriously disturbed and their personal safety is seriously threatened. For example, use the "call you to death" software to harass the parties day and night and send insulting information to relatives and friends; Follow the trend, pester and beat, and restrict the freedom of movement of the parties; Taking nude photos of female college students as collateral, public exposure or even "sexual compensation" is not paid back. In a word, it is to use all means to force the parties to pay back the money. If they don't pay back the money, they will die.
Huge profits lead to violence, and wherever there is usury, you can almost see the shadow of violent debt collection. Just like fire borrows wind and wind helps fire. Usury breeds violent debt collection, and further breeds and spreads under the protection of violent debt collection.
One end of usury is related to violent debt collection, and the other end is related to illegal fund-raising. It turns out that the original intention of private lending is private lending, which mainly uses its own money to lend to others, which not only helps others solve their urgent needs, but also obtains reasonable income from them. But now, a large number of private lending is not individual behavior, but organized institutional behavior; The money used for lending is not owned by oneself, but raised under various flags such as financial management and investment. The composition of these funds is very complicated, including money from the people, money from local people with "background" and even bank funds. Once the capital chain breaks, it may affect social stability and even trigger financial risks.
Illegal fund-raising is definitely illegal, and so is violent debt collection. These illegal acts are caused by usury. Usury is illegal at both ends. Why is usury not illegal? It's hard for ordinary people to figure out.
Question 3: Who is in charge of usury?
Some people think that usury is "willing to fight and suffer". Since it is impossible, why should it be borrowed? Some "experts" even think that usury is a good thing that benefits the country and the people, and it is the result of optimal allocation of funds. More people do it, and the interest will naturally come down.
Theoretically, this statement has some truth. But in fact, the situation of everyone and every enterprise is very different. Even those who borrow usury may be crazy, forced or desperate ... the reason is not important. The important thing is: if these people can't afford usury, do they need to pay dignity or even life? Do you have to go to the Great Wall? This price is too high!
Others think that since usury is illegal at both ends, it should be controlled at both ends. This is easy to say, but it is difficult to implement. For example, many illegal fund-raising activities are called "parcel delivery", and almost all illegal fund-raising activities are discovered because of problems in the capital chain, but it is too late. In addition to beating, detention and other illegal and criminal acts, violent debt collection is often used as "soft violence" by debt collectors A dozen people have been following the debtor all day, eating and drinking Lazar wine, and mentally torturing the debtor. In this high-risk state, when conflicts are on the verge, there are great hidden dangers. However, the police have been in charge for some time, but not for a long time. It seems difficult to take effective measures to prevent crime.
At present, the supervision of usury is still blank in many places. According to relevant regulations, the annual interest rate is between 24% and 36%, which is a natural debt zone. In this regard, the law is based on the principle of "non-interference", and disputes are resolved by themselves, and the court will not accept them. The annual interest rate is above 36%, and the interest agreement that exceeds the part is invalid. In other words, the borrower can not repay it. However, what should be done if the lender insists? What should the borrower do if he dare not? This law is not clearly defined.
Illegal fund-raising, usury and violent debt collection have formed a complete industrial chain. Without restraining usury, it is difficult to control the illegality at both ends. In terms of supervision, relevant departments should also have a "chess game" thinking, resolutely curb acts that undermine public order and good customs, and effectively protect citizens' basic rights from infringement.