互联网金融风险法律规制研究

发布时间：2018-06-27 13:46

本文选题：互联网金融 + 法律政策风险　；参考：《中央民族大学》2016年硕士论文

【摘要】：互联网金融是依靠大数据、云计算等高科技,通过线上实现线下资金的优化配置,从而实现资金融通的一种新模式。因其具有分散性、小额性,能够满足普通社会公众的投融资需求,使得其具有普惠金融的属性。当下,日益盛行的互联网金融业态主要包括：第三方支付、P2P网贷、股权众筹融资、互联网金融产品销售等。这些互联网金融业务又在业务和行业上进行交叉、混合,使得其比传统金融更为复杂,对其监管要求更高,需要制定完整的法律规制和监管体系,才能提高监管效率和消除监管的真空地带。我国互联网金融面临的风险及其主要原因,主要是法律政策风险,法律政策不稳定,使得互联网金融发展的积极性受阻,各地政策不统一,使得各地发展阶段很不均衡；互联网金融发展时间比较短,机构监管经验和实践,还不能适应其发展;各地互联网金融协会纷纷组织建设,规范和自治能力有限,且给互联网金融行业加了信任背书。此外,社会征信体系和个人信息保护体系并不健全,使得投融资方的信用状况,难以全面了解,增加了交易的风险,个人信息的规范化收集和保护也是问题,个人信息的征信和保护,如何实现平衡;金融消费者的合法权益频频受到侵害,其利益保护亟待加强。美国和欧盟对互联网金融监管的经验值得借鉴。美国对互联网金融实行机构监管与功能性监管相结合的模式,对股权众筹融资的鼓励和支持,建立比较完善的社会征信体系,颁布《金融消费者权益保护法》等。欧盟国家的监管经验主要体现在监管模式和立法制度上。我国互联网金融风险的法律规制路径主要包括：构建完整的互联网金融监管法律框架体系,制定相关专项法律,如社会征信、个人信息保护；加强机构监管、协调监管、创新监管；鼓励和规范行业自治；充分发挥司法能动作用；明确界定金融消费者,保护金融消费者的合法权益。
[Abstract]:Internet finance is a new mode which relies on high technology such as big data cloud computing and so on. Because of its dispersive and small size, it can meet the public's investment and financing needs, which makes it have the attribute of inclusive finance. At present, the increasingly popular Internet financial format mainly includes: third party payment P2P network loans, equity financing, Internet financial products sales and so on. These Internet financial services are intersected and mixed in business and industry, which make them more complex than traditional finance and require higher regulatory requirements, so they need to establish a complete legal regulation and regulatory system. In order to improve the efficiency of regulation and eliminate the regulatory vacuum. The risks faced by Internet finance in our country and its main reasons are mainly the risks of law and policy, the instability of legal policies, which impedes the enthusiasm of the development of Internet finance, and the disunity of local policies, which makes the stages of development very unbalanced. The development of Internet finance is relatively short, the experience and practice of institutional supervision can not adapt to its development, and the Internet financial associations have organized and built one after another, with limited standardization and autonomy, and have added trust and endorsement to the Internet financial industry. In addition, the social credit information system and the personal information protection system are not perfect, which makes the credit situation of the investors and financiers difficult to fully understand, increases the risk of transactions, and the standardized collection and protection of personal information is also a problem. How to balance the credit information and protection of personal information, the legitimate rights and interests of financial consumers are frequently infringed, and the protection of their interests needs to be strengthened. The experience of the United States and the European Union on Internet financial regulation is worth learning from. The United States implements the mode of combination of institutional supervision and functional supervision of Internet finance, encourages and supports the raising and raising of public equity funds, establishes a relatively perfect social credit system, and promulgates the Financial Consumer Rights and interests Protection Law, and so on. The experience of EU countries is mainly reflected in the regulatory model and legislative system. The legal regulation path of Internet financial risk in China mainly includes: constructing a complete legal framework system of Internet financial supervision, making relevant special laws, such as social credit, personal information protection, strengthening institutional supervision, coordinating supervision. Innovation of supervision; encouragement and standardization of industry autonomy; giving full play to the role of judicial initiative; clearly defining financial consumers and protecting the legitimate rights and interests of financial consumers.
【学位授予单位】：中央民族大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：D922.28

【相似文献】