| 英文摘要
| In the aftermath of the 08 international financial crisis, shadow bank has become the focus of research in the financial field because of being blamed for the outbreak and spread of the US subprime mortgage crisis. However, when the financial crisis of the haze dispersed, the shadow bank has begun to flourish, which shows that the development of shadow banks is indeed an important direction of development that can not be neglected.
The shadow bank usually refers to a credit intermediary system which has carried out credit transformation, liquidity transformation and maturity transformation outside the traditional banking system. Unlike traditional banks, the shadow banking system relies on multiple financial institutions to form a financial chain to accomplish these functions. But such a systemic perspective changed when the concept of \"shadow bank\" was imported into China. In mainland China, shadow banks are understood as a collection of financial institutions or financial activities with common characteristics, including non-bank finance institutions or non-bank traditional business such as peer-to-peer financing platforms, private equity companies, financing guarantee companies, microfinance companies, pawn shops, financial leasing companies, money market mutual funds, wealth management services, trust companies, asset securitization. The two concepts seem to be close, and in fact they are different. The shadow bank in China is a financial institution or activity that replaces the function of traditional commercial banks in absorbing public deposits or issuing loans, while the American shadow banking system is a credit intermediate system that replaces traditional commercial banks with the function of both lending and deposit taking. There is an essential difference between the definition of shadow banking in China and America. The Chinese mainlandu0027s recognition of the Shadow Bank is that, a financial institution or financial business can be assumed as a shadow bank in the Chinese mainland, as long as it replaces the banku0027s function to absorb deposits or lend a loan. In the United States, however, it is considered a shadow bank only when both lending and deposits taking function are replaced.
The difference is due to the fact that when the US and mainland China define the shadow banks, the problems they intend to solve are different. The background of Americau0027s definition of shadow banking is a financial crisis, and regulator wants to guard against the systemic risks that shadow banks bring to the financial markets, and therefore pays attention to the maturity transformation function that leads to the breakage of the financing chains. So, the shadow bank in America is defined as a credit intermediate system that replaces the banku0027s lending and deposits taking function. In mainland China, however, when the concept of shadow banking was proposed, financial regulation was already so stringent that regulators intended to address the widespread breakthrough in the current strict controls over non-bank financial institutions and unconventional banking operations. So in mainland China, institutions and activities that have an alternative to bank’s deposits or loans function are identified as shadow banks.
This kind of academic definition has also influenced the official definition and regulation plan of mainland China. The 107th Document is an outline of the shadow banking regulatory system in mainland China, where the definition of shadow banking is a collection of individual financial institutions or financial products without a system perspective. In the way of regulation, China has adopted a regulatory model in a separate industry, using the regulatory system already in place to oversee shadow banks, and the lack of macro-monitoring institutions such as the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC), which the United States has put forward in the financial reform programme after the 08 financial crisis. However, shadow banks in mainland China have actually developed financial chains similar to the US shadow banking system in the course of a long-term game with financial regulation. While the trading model is simple and crude, it already has functions and risks that are very similar to the US shadow system (for example, the 2013 money shortage). There are still some lagging regulatory regimes that need to be vigilant.
To sum up, the localization of the concept of \"shadow bank\" in mainland China has its rationality, but the problems it wants to solve are also time-sensitive. At present, in the absence of both banks and funds, it is necessary to develop shadow banks and to perfect the regulatory model when shadow banks are emerging at risk. The mainland China should combine its own reality with the US regulatory approach, while revising the definition of the shadow bank and adjusting the financial regulation program to accommodate the development of shadow banks in mainland China. |
