Core Viewpoint - The "24% + rights" model is rapidly emerging as the mainstream transformation direction for lending platforms, replacing the "dual financing guarantee" model, amidst the impending implementation of new lending regulations in two months. However, the various tactics involved in rights services make it difficult for borrowers to navigate, as they still struggle to escape the underlying issue of circumventing the 24% interest rate cap [1][12][14]. Group 1: Current Trends in Lending Platforms - The "24% + rights" model has surfaced as a significant transformation strategy for lending platforms following the new regulations set to take effect on October 1 [12][14]. - Regulatory bodies are increasingly scrutinizing the "24% + rights" model, focusing on whether it involves disguised sales tactics or violates the 24% interest rate cap [12][13]. Group 2: Borrower Experiences - Borrowers are encountering various hidden fees and tactics, such as mandatory membership fees that are not clearly disclosed, leading to unexpected costs during the borrowing process [2][3][9]. - The "pay first, enjoy later" model, while seemingly more secure, often results in borrowers facing higher fees than anticipated, complicating their ability to seek refunds [7][10]. Group 3: Regulatory Concerns - Recent regulatory inquiries have targeted the practices of lending platforms, particularly regarding the transparency and legitimacy of membership fees and rights services [12][13]. - The regulatory focus aims to address the potential for platforms to circumvent the 24% interest rate cap through bundled services and unclear pricing [12][14]. Group 4: Industry Challenges - The sustainability of the "24% + rights" model is questioned, as it may not cover the operational costs of lending platforms if membership services are required to be transparent and voluntary [14][15]. - The ongoing tension between compliance with regulations and the pursuit of profitability is expected to continue, with no clear resolution in sight [14][15].

Core Viewpoint - The regulatory body is conducting a special investigation into licensed consumer finance companies, focusing on the charging policies of membership rights services and whether they are forcibly bundled with loans, following the implementation of the "new lending regulations" [1][2]. Group 1: Regulatory Investigation - The investigation employs a questionnaire format to assess the operation of the "24% + rights" model, covering the current rights services offered by consumer finance companies and the issues faced [2][3]. - The "24% + rights" model emerged due to strict constraints on comprehensive financing costs imposed by the new regulations, leading some lending institutions to explore this combination to maintain profitability [2][3]. - The model separates the income previously included in loan interest into a "not exceeding 24% annual interest rate" and "independently priced rights services" [2][3]. Group 2: Consumer Complaints - There are significant consumer complaints regarding the bundling of rights services with loan approvals and limits, with many users reporting experiences of being forced to purchase rights packages to secure loans [4][5]. - Complaints include issues such as default selections for rights services leading to unexpected charges, high refund thresholds, and unfulfilled promises regarding the benefits of purchased rights [4][5]. - The lack of a standard for rights services has led to numerous complaints and concerns, including issues of bundling sales, false advertising, and discrepancies between price and quality [5]. Group 3: Industry Response and Challenges - Some leading consumer finance institutions claim that their rights services are voluntarily chosen by users and offer a 30-day no-reason refund policy [5]. - The challenge lies in balancing compliance with profitability, as relying solely on voluntary participation may not cover the costs associated with high-risk borrowers [5]. - Regulatory measures should focus on enhancing information disclosure, clarifying the value of rights, prohibiting forced bundling, and simplifying refund processes to address the ongoing issues [5].

Core Viewpoint - The regulatory scrutiny on consumer finance companies and lending platforms regarding membership rights products is intensifying, focusing on potential violations such as bundled sales, false advertising, and hidden fees, particularly in the context of the "24% + rights" model that has emerged as a workaround to the 24% interest rate cap [1][4][5]. Regulatory Investigation - Regulatory bodies are conducting thorough investigations into the membership rights products offered by consumer finance companies and their partner lending platforms, aiming to understand the business models, fee structures, and any potential consumer harm [4][5][6]. - The investigation includes inquiries about hidden fees, binding conditions related to loan applications, and whether membership fees are being charged in a manner that violates existing regulations [4][7]. Market Impact - The anticipated regulatory changes are expected to significantly impact small to medium-sized lending platforms that rely on the "24% + rights" model, potentially accelerating market consolidation [2][11]. - The demand for "24%+" clientele remains uncertain, as institutions must adapt their business strategies in response to regulatory pressures [2][11]. Consumer Experience - Consumers have reported being charged additional membership fees alongside their loan repayments, leading to effective interest rates exceeding the legal limit of 24% [12][14]. - Complaints regarding undisclosed membership fees and the lack of clarity about the services provided have been prevalent, indicating potential violations of consumer rights [12][16]. Industry Trends - The "24% + rights" model has become widely adopted among lending platforms as a means to maintain profitability in light of regulatory constraints on interest rates [10][11]. - Many platforms are transitioning away from the previously common "dual guarantee" model, which often resulted in hidden fees, towards more compliant structures [10][11][18]. Compliance Challenges - The industry is facing significant challenges in achieving compliance with the new regulations, particularly for smaller platforms that may struggle to operate within the 24% interest rate cap [18][19]. - There is a call for clearer regulatory guidelines regarding the boundaries of membership fees and their integration into overall loan costs, as well as a potential transitional period for compliance [18][19].

Core Viewpoint - The regulatory body is conducting a special investigation into licensed consumer finance companies, focusing on the charging policies of membership rights services and their potential mandatory bundling with loans, following the implementation of the new lending regulations [2][3]. Group 1: Regulatory Investigation - The investigation employs a questionnaire format to assess the operation of the "24% + rights" model, including the services offered and the main issues faced by consumer finance companies [3]. - The "24% + rights" model emerged due to strict constraints on comprehensive financing costs, leading institutions to explore this combination to maintain profitability within regulatory limits [3][4]. - The model separates income into a "not exceeding 24% annual interest rate" and "independently priced rights services," which include various offerings such as e-commerce coupons and credit consulting [3][4]. Group 2: Industry Challenges - The current cooperation between financial institutions and lending agencies primarily involves fixed income guarantees and profit-sharing, with rights products becoming a means for lending agencies to increase revenue [4]. - The lack of standardization in membership rights services has led to varied charging policies and resource allocation among institutions, complicating the operational landscape [5]. - Complaints regarding forced bundling of rights services with loan approvals have surged, indicating a significant consumer protection issue [5][6]. Group 3: Consumer Complaints - Over 40,000 complaints related to "loan rights" have been recorded, highlighting issues such as default selections for rights services, high refund thresholds, and unfulfilled service promises [6]. - Some leading consumer finance institutions claim their rights services are voluntary and offer a 30-day no-reason refund policy, contrasting with the complaints from users [10]. - The absence of execution standards for rights products has led to rampant issues such as bundling sales and false advertising, raising concerns about whether these services increase the overall financing costs for borrowers [10]. Group 4: Recommendations for Improvement - Regulatory measures should focus on enhancing information disclosure, clarifying the value of rights, prohibiting mandatory bundling, and simplifying refund processes to address the identified issues [10].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the upcoming implementation of the "New Regulations on Internet Lending by Commercial Banks" on October 1, which aims to regulate the "24% + rights" model in the lending industry, focusing on the impact of membership fees on borrowers' overall financing costs [1][4]. Group 1: Regulatory Developments - Regulatory authorities are conducting surveys among licensed consumer finance companies to understand the operational specifics of the "24% + rights" model, particularly how membership fees affect overall financing costs [2][4]. - The new regulations require that guarantee service fees be included in the comprehensive financing costs, indicating a trend towards reducing annualized interest rates below 24% [1][4]. Group 2: Industry Challenges - The "24% + rights" model is emerging as a solution for consumer finance companies to serve high-risk borrowers while adhering to the new regulations, but it faces challenges in balancing compliance and profitability [4][5]. - There is a significant rise in consumer complaints related to the "loan + rights" model, with over 5000 complaints reported, primarily concerning default selections and complex refund processes [5]. Group 3: Market Reactions - Consumer finance companies are exploring business transformation paths to adapt to the new regulatory environment, with the "24% + rights" model being one of the key strategies [4]. - The industry is still searching for viable compliance solutions, as the current model raises concerns about whether it can effectively match service value with pricing while reducing complaint rates [5].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the emergence of a new lending model called "24% + Rights" in response to regulatory changes that lower annual interest rates from 36% to 24% for lending institutions, highlighting the challenges and complaints associated with this model [1][3][16]. Group 1: Regulatory Changes - The new regulations from the National Financial Regulatory Administration require lending institutions to clearly define service and guarantee fees, effectively lowering the annual interest rate to below 24% [3][4]. - The implementation of these regulations is set for October 1, leaving less than four months for the industry to adapt [3]. Group 2: New Lending Model - The "24% + Rights" model is characterized by two types of products: small rights products, which charge monthly fees for limited services, and large rights products, which tie fees to loan amounts and can cost from 199 to 1999 yuan [4][8]. - Many lending platforms are bundling these rights products to circumvent the interest rate cap, with some users reporting issues such as default fee selections and difficulties in obtaining refunds [1][16]. Group 3: Profitability and Competition - The profitability of the "24% + Rights" model comes from selling financial rights products and earning commissions from third-party rights suppliers [10][11]. - The competition among third-party rights suppliers is intensifying, with many suppliers focusing on price to win contracts, leading to a price war in the market [12][14]. Group 4: Compliance and Sustainability Concerns - The compliance and sustainability of the "24% + Rights" model are under scrutiny due to rising consumer complaints, particularly regarding default selections and complex refund processes [16][17]. - Industry insiders emphasize that resolving customer complaints is crucial for the model's longevity within regulatory frameworks, suggesting that true adherence to customer consent and transparent service models is necessary for sustainable development [18][19].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the emergence of a new lending model called "24%+ equity" in response to regulatory changes that lower annual interest rates from 36% to 24% for lending institutions. This model allows platforms to bundle additional services or memberships to circumvent interest rate limits, raising concerns about compliance and consumer complaints [1][4][17]. Group 1: Regulatory Changes - The new lending regulations, effective from October 1, require commercial banks to clarify service fees and include them in the total financing cost, effectively capping interest rates at 24% [4][17]. - Many lending institutions have begun transitioning to comply with these new regulations, with significant changes noted since May [4][5]. Group 2: Emergence of "24%+" Model - The "24%+" model has two main forms: small equity products, which charge monthly fees for limited services, and large equity products, where fees are tied to loan amounts and can exceed 1,000 yuan in a single charge [5][9]. - The small equity products offer various financial and lifestyle services for a monthly fee, while large equity products charge higher fees based on the loan amount, often without explicit consent from borrowers [6][9]. Group 3: Profitability and Business Dynamics - Platforms can profit from financial equity products and by purchasing third-party services at a discount, allowing them to sell at a higher price [11][12]. - The rise of third-party equity suppliers has created a competitive market, with these suppliers acting as intermediaries between lending platforms and service providers [13][15]. Group 4: Consumer Complaints and Compliance Issues - The "24%+ equity" model has led to a surge in consumer complaints, particularly regarding unauthorized charges and complicated refund processes, with over 5,000 complaints reported [17][18]. - Regulatory scrutiny is increasing, with past guidelines prohibiting disguised high-interest loans under the guise of service fees, raising questions about the sustainability of the new model [17][18]. Group 5: Future Outlook - The ability to address consumer complaints effectively will be crucial for the long-term viability of the "24%+ equity" model within regulatory frameworks [18]. - Industry experts suggest that merely relying on technology to navigate regulations is insufficient; a genuine commitment to transparency and customer consent is essential for sustainable growth [18].

Core Viewpoint - The implementation of new regulations in the lending industry is prompting institutions to shift from an annual interest rate of 36% to 24%, while a new model called "24% + Equity" is emerging as a workaround to these limits [1][10]. Group 1: Regulatory Changes - The new regulations from the National Financial Regulatory Administration, effective from October 1, require commercial banks to clarify service fees and include them in the comprehensive financing cost, effectively lowering the annual interest rate to below 24% [1][10]. - Many lending institutions have begun transitioning to comply with the new regulations since May, indicating a significant industry shift [1][10]. Group 2: Emergence of "24% + Equity" Model - The "24% + Equity" model is characterized by two types of products: small equity products, which charge monthly fees for limited financial and lifestyle services, and large equity products, which tie fees to the loan amount and can cost from 199 to 1999 yuan [2][5]. - The model allows institutions to maintain profitability by offering virtual services and leveraging third-party equity suppliers, creating a new revenue stream [7][9]. Group 3: Consumer Complaints and Issues - There has been a significant increase in consumer complaints related to the "24% + Equity" model, with over 5000 complaints reported, primarily concerning default selections for services and complicated refund processes [10][11]. - The model's compliance and sustainability are under scrutiny, as the regulatory environment may impose further restrictions on such practices [10][12]. Group 4: Third-Party Equity Suppliers - The rise of the "24% + Equity" model has led to the emergence of third-party equity suppliers, who act as intermediaries between lending platforms and service providers, earning commissions for their services [8][9]. - Competition among these suppliers is intensifying, with a focus on pricing as the primary factor for procurement decisions [9][10]. Group 5: Future Outlook - The sustainability of the "24% + Equity" model hinges on the ability to address consumer complaints effectively and adhere to regulatory requirements, emphasizing the need for transparency and customer consent [11][12].