贸易银行理财产品若干法律题目探讨学毕业论(8)
2014-09-07 01:06
导读：5贸易银行利用理财财产谋取不当利益 贸易银行作为受托人,只能按事先的约定,收取一定的手续费(有的银行也称为“治理费”),不能谋取其它利益。但现实
5贸易银行利用理财财产谋取不当利益
贸易银行作为受托人,只能按事先的约定,收取一定的手续费(有的银行也称为“治理费”),不能谋取其它利益。但现实中出现了以下几种违法的情况:
(1)挪用理财资金,用于其它经营目的;
(2)隐性挪用理财资金,比如将理财资金当成质物进行质押;
(3)与客户分享投资收益,比如在“打新股”的理财产品中,有的银行要获得30%以上的投资收益,这种约定是否正当,值得探讨。
6误导性陈述
贸易银行为了倾销其理财产品,在书面的宣传材料及口头的倾销过程中存在大量的误导性陈述。比如,对投资收益的猜测,贸易银行往往按最佳的条件进行猜测,得出的是最好的一种收益结果,但实际上这种最佳条件是很难出现的。投资者往往相信银行的信誉,以为银行猜测的收益结果就是他们应当获得的投资收益。
银行工作职员还存在代客填写风险揭示书的情况,假如投资人没有亲身填写风险揭示书,就不能了解理财中的投资风险,法院就可以
认定银行没有告知投资风险。
(八)立法建议
经过上述分析可以看出,随着贸易银行理财业务的发展,实践中出现了越来越多的法律题目,急需法律对此进行规范,而在此领域的立法相对于实践来说已经相当滞后。银监会在《办法》中,说明其制定依据时,只提到《银行业监视治理法》和《贸易银行法》,而这两部法律中并没有对贸易银行可以开展个人理财业务作任何规定。恰恰相反,这两部法律明确禁止贸易银行从事证券业务、信托业务。《办法》对贸易银行受托理财产品的性质也没有明确的规定,也没有明确理财业务适用《信托法》。另外,银监会对贸易银行理财业务所发的规章、规范过多,互相之间既有重复,又有矛盾。
（转载自中国科教评价网http://www.nseac.com） 笔者建议修改《贸易银行法》,把理财业务纳进《贸易银行法》的调整范围。以《贸易银行法》的规定为依据,由国务院制订一部行政法规,对贸易银行理财业务进行完整地规范,银监会再制订具体的实施细则,废止银监会现有的与贸易银行理财业务相关的规章、规范。ML
参考文献:
[1] 2008银行理财产品创新与风险治理论坛实录.(2008-11-20)[2009-01-25].http://bank.jrj.vnet.cn/2008/11/2018302827224.shtml.
[2] 银监会有关负责人就发布《贸易银行个人理财业务治理暂行办法》和《贸易银行个人理财业务风险治理指引》答记者问.(2005-09-29)[2009- 02-05].http://www.law-lib.com/fzdt/newshtml/21/20050929221655.htm.
[3] 胡云祥.贸易银行理财产品性质与理财行为矛盾分析.上海金融.2006,(9):24.
[4] 赵欣舸.我国银行人民币理财产品市场调查报告.(2009-01-01)[2009-02-05].http://www.jsmoney.com.cn/index.php/article/new/2009-01-01/8673.html.
[5] 理财品活动性差 质押贷款可救急.(2008-05-18)[2009-03-06].http://finance.cqnews.net/wlwc/200805/t20080518_2057100.htm.
[6] 马蔚华.关于准许以贸易银行理财产品质押融资的提案.(2008-02-29)[2009-03-08].http://bank.hexun.com/2008-02-29/104142293.html. Abstract:
The recent financial crisis has witnessed more and more legal disputes arising out of or pertaining to commercial bank finance products, to settle which the rights and obligations of the parties concerned and the risks they shall assume must be clearly ascertained and determined. From the perspective of law, commercial bank finance products can be divided into four sorts, of which the floating benefit finance product is of the most importance. And between the parties related to the product there exists a trust relationship. While the products can be sold in a mixed way, they should be managed and supervised separately. The types of the products should be limited and those on sale must be standardized. The terminal period fixed by the bank in the finance product contract is deemed an infringement of investors’ rights and thus is invalid. As to the pledge of the products, the defects of the Real Right Act shall be made up with administrative regulations. Only a negligent bank may be held in lawsuit to bear the liability to compensate for the failure of finance products. China should amend its Commercial Bank Act to ensure the finance products to fall within the ambit of the Act.
