Research On The Legal Issues Of Assets Securitization In The Right Of Receipt Of Notes

China's first securitisation product based on the right to receive proceeds from the bills-Bank of Jiang Su Rongyuan No.1 ABS,has obtained permit from the Shanghai Stock Exchange and was successfully issued on March 29,2016.The issuance of this product has opened up a new era for the development of China's financing bills,enhanced the company's direct financing ability,and increased financing channels.At the same time,the issue of legal compliance in the securitization of notes assets has also led to the thinking of the theoretical and practical circles.Although there are many options for basic assets in the securitization,it is generally accepted by the market that securitization operations are based on the proceeds of bills as the basic assets.Whether or not a new financial product appears to mean “existence is right” without too much consideration of its compliance and feasibility,it is clear that we should analyze its market effects and existing legal issues with a rational attitude.In other words,can we think that this approach is to achieve substantial bill endorsement transfer through superficial asset securitization,and if so,what is the significance of such financial innovation products?The author will discuss the rights attributes of the bill proceeds right as the core of the research,and discuss the risk that exist in the ABS operation of the bills,thus layingthe foundation for the settlement of compliance issues of bill asset securitization.This article try to discuss several core issues:1.The legal logic of the securitization of financial assets,that is to say,what kind of assets is used to arrange what form of securitization;2.Is the securitization of assets based on bills a form of rights creation or existing rights system? The extension or development of certain kinds of civil rights in China;3.What kind of rights is the rights of bills? What are the similarities and differences between the rights in the negotiable instrument law or contract law or civil law? 4.Analyze anterior viewpoints through the case of practice.Here,the main analysis is its agreement with the existing legal provisions or breakthrough.If yes,what are the reasons? If it is a breakthrough,what is the basis? Of course,these rules and regulations,legal obstacles,lack of systems,and regulatory loopholes reflected in these cases and included in practices of the market.5.If there is a conflict between the current securitization path and the basic legal framework of civil and commercial law,how can it be resolved? This should be clear about the balance and coordination between innovation and the lagging of institutional rules,the analysis of the legitimacy and rationality of transaction arrangements,the path of legalization of transaction models,and the establishment and improvement of regulatory and regulatory rules.Of course,in this process,the content of the comparative law is also necessary,but since the entry point of this kind of article is to discuss the real problems in the domestic market,the content of some comparative laws cannot be used for reference.This article will study each of the above issues in four chapters,focusing on asset securitization of bills' income rights,discussing the rights attributes of income rights,and comparing the rights of the "General Principles of Civil Law," "Property Law," and "Negotiable Instrument Law".The income right is not equal to the usufructuary right,it is not equal to the bill right and can only be classified as a creditor's right.The “contract law” is applied to the assignment of creditor's right,which summarizes the operation process and related legal principles of the proceeds from the bill's income right.Provides feasibility advice on the further development of asset securitization of bill proceeds.The first chapter summarizes the successful cases of securitization of bill assets,and selects three types of first-class cases based on the types of selection of basic assets,namely,the use of bills as the basic assets,the receivables corresponding to the bills as the basic assets,and the bill income rights as a basic asset.In case selection,various types such as electricity tickets,paper tickets,commercial acceptance bills,and silver tickets were covered,making the selected cases more representative.In addition,the issue of legal compliance of the securitization of bill assets is further analyzed.Although securitization of bills is a choice for market development,the hidden dangers of legal compliance cannot be overlooked.The legal compliance issues for the selection of three different types of basic assets are different.The author's attitudes to the three issues related to the severity of the legal compliance problems arising from the selection of the three basic assets are also different.For the bills ABS and bill receivables ABS,the author has a negative attitude;for the right of the bill ABS,the author has a dialectical affirmative attitude.The second chapter first analyzes the predicament of ownership division of China's income rights.China's current laws and regulations do not have relevant laws that specifically define the right to income.That is,the right to income is not a legal right.Under the regulation of the statutory principle of real rights in China,the right to income cannot be granted the effect of property rights.In other words,domestic income rights cannot be treated as one of the types of usufructuary rights,just like German law.Therefore,the acquisition of income right can only be obtained by way of creditor's rights,and because the creditor system does not specifically regulate the income right,therefore,the income right can only be regarded as a contractual creditor rather than a statutory creditor in the creditor system.Secondly,by explaining the contradiction between the absence of bills and the existence of real transaction regulations,we explain the legal system dilemma in the field of bills in our country.The stipulations on the negligence of bills and the existence of real transactions are the result of legislators interpreting non-causal limitations because of basing on different value considerations.It is further shown that the legislator will make interpretation changes based on the trading environment in different eras.The third chapter explains the ABS transaction process of bill revenue right around the relationship between original rights holders,special plan managers,trustee banks,and agent banks.The multiple legal relationships formed during the issuance of ABS products in the proceeds of bills include commission relations,agency relations,buying and selling relationships,creditor-debtor relations,and bill pledge relationships.Each legal relationship forms a complex legal relationship network.As discussed in the second chapter,classifying bill income rights as contractual claims,what is the difference between bill rights that belong to the same claims? In order to avoid confusion between rights,it is necessary to distinguish between the two,so as to define more clearly the rights attributes of the basic assets that are the proceeds of the bill ABS.In addition,taking into account the bankruptcy risk of the original owner,the plan manager often requires the original owner to pledge the bills as a guarantee to ensure that the plan manager can have the priority to be repaid when the original owner suffers bankruptcy.However,this scheme not only implies the risk of legal avoidance,but also exposes many other defects.The fourth chapter explains that the regulation of Article 10 of the "Law of Negotiable Instruments" essentially restricts and restricts the financing of bills.As a result,the securitization business of bill assets is somewhat intimidated and shrinks in practice,and the bill income right is selected as the base assets.Assets are also a way to save the country through curves.The operation of securitization directly based on instruments as a basic asset will inevitably violate the provisions of the "Notes Law" directly,while the securitization of assets based on the proceeds of a bill will be subject to the inconsistency of form and substance,which will affect the validity of the contract.The development of asset securitization is hindered by the aforementioned risks,making it always in a tepid condition in the financial capital market.In order to resolve this dilemma,we firstly studied from the solution to the problem of asset securitization in the United States to analyze the special laws and regulations established during the development of asset securitization.Secondly,based on the current situation of China's development,two solutions have beenproposed for the disputes in the asset securitization of bill income right.Way one:You can grant the right of income with the effect of property rights;Way two: Make amendments to the “Negotiable Instrument Law” and related laws and regulations.The opinion thus establishes a more complete legal system in the bill ABS.