助贷新规月考：中小银行无视白名单，平台变相探索24%+

Core Insights - The new regulations for the lending assistance industry have been implemented for over half a month, showing initial compliance effects with over 60 licensed financial institutions publishing their lending assistance white lists, and mainstream platforms lowering the maximum borrowing interest rate to 24% [1][2] Group 1: Compliance and Market Dynamics - More than 60 licensed financial institutions have published their lending assistance white lists, with 31 consumer finance companies fully disclosing, while many commercial banks, including six major state-owned banks, have been slow to disclose [3][5] - The lending assistance market is dominated by major internet platforms such as Ant Group, ByteDance, and JD.com, which collectively hold 76% of the market share, indicating a concentration of power among a few players [4][5] - State-owned banks have been cautious regarding lending assistance, often relying on their large customer base and showing a tendency to tighten or eliminate lending assistance services [5][6] Group 2: Interest Rate Adjustments and Product Innovations - The new regulations require financial institutions to clearly define service fees in lending agreements, with a maximum interest rate set at 24%, leading most mainstream platforms to adjust their loan interest rates accordingly [8][9] - Despite the apparent compliance, some platforms are still exploring "24%+" products, which may include additional fees or services that could effectively raise the total cost of borrowing beyond the 24% limit [10][12] - The shift to "24%+" products represents a transitional phase in the lending assistance industry's profit model, as platforms seek to cover costs associated with lower-risk borrowers while navigating regulatory scrutiny [10][11] Group 3: Regulatory Environment and Future Outlook - The regulatory framework aims to enhance transparency and accountability in the lending assistance sector, with ongoing discussions about the compliance of "24%+" products and their potential implications for overall borrowing costs [12][13] - Industry consensus suggests a cautious approach, with many platforms awaiting further regulatory guidance before making significant changes to their product offerings [13]