For example, on June 5438+065438+1October 3, Hangzhou Public Security Bureau High-tech Zone Branch reported in the official Weibo that Zhejiang Xiaotai Technology Co., Ltd. (a platform of Tairan Finance) had been put on file for investigation.
At the end of last year, traceability finance of another online lending institution also broke out due to payment difficulties. A large number of users reported that they were suspected of illegally absorbing public deposits, but that time the police decided not to file a case. This is also the first time that the police have not filed a case for P2P online lending.
According to statistics, among the criminal convictions obtained by P2P online lending platform, the crime of illegally absorbing public deposits accounts for more than half. What is the crime of illegally absorbing public deposits? What are its constituent conditions? Why can the "traceability finance" of the same online lending platform escape?
The crime of illegally absorbing public deposits refers to the act of illegally absorbing public deposits or absorbing public deposits in disguised form in violation of national financial management regulations, disrupting financial order. This crime is similar to fund-raising fraud. Both of them belong to the crime of illegal fund-raising, and the biggest difference lies in their different subjective intentions. The crime of fund-raising fraud is an act aimed at permanently illegally possessing unspecified public funds, which has the subjective intention of illegal possession. The perpetrator of the crime of illegally absorbing public deposits intends to temporarily occupy investors' funds and promises to repay the principal and interest.
To constitute the crime of illegally absorbing public deposits, four conditions must be met objectively. Among them, the behavior of "absorbing funds from unspecified objects in society" is the key to the establishment of this crime.
According to the laws and regulations of the competent authorities in China, the function of online lending institutions should be lending intermediaries, not lending entities, and fund pools cannot be set up for self-financing behavior. Once these two behaviors are discovered, they may be judged as "absorbing deposits", which can constitute the crime of illegally absorbing public deposits under certain conditions.
The common situations of setting up a fund pool include: in the absence of specific projects, the lender's funds are collected first; Accept and collect the lender's funds through the institutional account, such as collecting and lending funds through the institutional free account before further transfer; Accept and collect the lender's funds through a third-party bank account.
Self-financing behavior refers to the role of online lending platform as a fuzzy lending intermediary, borrowing money from its own financing information intermediary platform, financing itself or financing in disguise.
These two behaviors are red lines that online lending institutions cannot touch, and they are also important criteria for judging whether online lending institutions violate the rules.
The reason why the above-mentioned "traceability finance" was not filed was because the police did not find that the company established a fund pool to generate fund deposits and a large amount of funds entered personal accounts irregularly, and there was no fact of "sucking deposits". Even if the company has problems in payment, it is more a business problem and cannot rise to the level of crime.
After 20 19, the demise of online lending institutions is accelerating. The industry has been reshuffled under the increasingly strict supervision of the competent authorities, and a large number of online lending institutions are facing the fate of withdrawal or transformation. As investors, the general public must enhance their risk awareness and preventive ability and choose a high-quality platform for investment.
Remind investors that whether the online lending platform is standardized can be judged from the following three dimensions: First, whether there is a professional third-party fund custody, and if so, the platform cannot use investors' funds at will; Second, there must be a clear borrower or loan project for investment funds, rather than matching and using funds at will by the platform; 3. See if the fund account for recharging and withdrawing cash is a third-party account. If it is a personal account or a company account within the online lending platform, it is very risky.
Ming (Tong Lun Paipai Technology Service Co., Ltd.
Related questions and answers: 202 1 what is the current situation of traceable finance? The responsible person has been taken criminal compulsory measures. Traceability is an Internet financial platform under Traceability Finance, and it is a comprehensive consumer financial service provider deeply involved in the fields of agriculture, rural areas and farmers. The purpose is to provide necessary financial support for rural economic development and agricultural industrial adjustment through the introduction and matching of information on the Internet platform, and to solve the problems encountered in the development of the "three rural" ecosystem. Traceability Finance is an Internet finance investment and wealth management app. On July 20 17 18, the public security organ received an alarm from the masses that Guo Ke Co., Ltd. (Traceable Finance) was suspected of illegally absorbing public deposits. Hangzhou Shangcheng Public Security Economic Crime Investigation Brigade accepted and examined the case according to law on July 20 19 18. Shangcheng District Branch of Hangzhou Public Security Bureau issued a notice on the case of "traceability finance". According to the circular, traceable finance filed a case for the crime of illegally absorbing public deposits, and many people were taken criminal compulsory measures. According to the circular, on February 5, 65438, Shangcheng Branch of Hangzhou Public Security Bureau filed an investigation on the case that Cultural Technology Industry Development Co., Ltd. ("Traceable Finance" online lending platform) was suspected of illegally absorbing public deposits, and now four suspects, including Liu, have been criminally compulsory, and assets inspection and control work has been carried out simultaneously to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the people to the maximum extent. At present, the case is under further investigation. It is understood that Traceable Finance announced liquidation on July 20 16 18, stopped issuing any new projects, and no new business increment was added. The data shows that the accumulated turnover of the platform is 65.438+0.0458 billion yuan, the loan balance is 65.438+0.2.7/kloc-0.00 billion yuan, involving 20,349 lenders, and the borrower has not yet returned the principal of 65.438+0.282 billion yuan. According to the summary of the first anniversary of the release and payment of traceable finance, in the past year's work, the accumulated income and funds were 65132,400 yuan, of which 52.797 million yuan was recovered and repaid, and the balance of personal or company foreign loans was113.07 million yuan; Accumulated payment of RMB 54410.53 million, accumulated reduction of creditor's rights of RMB 80.4603 million, and reduction of lender10/9. In the work summary of the first anniversary of redemption, traceable finance indicated that many third-party collection companies entrusted by the platform were forced by the public security to varying degrees, and basically entered a stagnant stage through traditional collection methods. According to the analysis, the progress of payment and receipt of traceable finance is not satisfactory, which leads to the case being put on file.