Influence of the Legal Regulation of Private Lending on Crime:An Empirical Study Based on the Adjustment of Interest Rate Cap and the Criminalization of Usury
YE Bin,HSIUNG Bing?yuan
DOI: https://doi.org/10.19654/j.cnki.cjwtyj.2023.05.003
2023-01-01
Abstract:Within the normative system of law, there are different opinions on whether usury should be criminalized, all of which:the ones in favor of either criminalization or decriminalization,have their own logical arguments. Laws in the vast majority of countries and regions criminalize usury and regulate interest rates on private lending, and a key rationale for criminalizing usury and regulating interest rates on private lending is that private lending can be a source of criminal activity. In October 2019, the Supreme People’ s Court, the Supreme People’ s Procuratorate, the Ministry of Public Security, and the Ministry of Justice of the People’s Republic of China issued a notice ’on Opinions on Several Issues Concerning Handling Illegal Lending Criminal Cases’, which defines usury as an illegal business practice. Empirical research methodology requires substantive incrimination of usury as a prerequisite for factual judgments. For the purpose of evaluating whether usury should be criminalized, the factual judgment of whether criminalizing usury reduces the crimes associated with private lending should be used.This paper, based on the criminal judgment data from China Judgements Online and a quasi-natural experiment involving the adjustment of private lending interest rate cap and criminalization of usury, uses the difference-in-differences model to empirically test the influence of private lending and criminalization of usury on private lending-related crime.According to the results, private lending is associated with illegal public deposit-taking, fund-raising fraud, fraud, contract fraud, and gambling. As for the criminalization of usury, it does not reduce the incidence of private lending crimes, but increases the incidence of illegal public deposit-taking, fraud, contract fraud, forced trading, and extortion. In addition,empirical research showed that the opening of microfinance companies had a negative impact on the main private lendingrelated crimes and the crimes increased by the criminalization of usury.Compared to previous literature, this paper makes a marginal contribution in three ways. Firstly, this paper, by using the adjustment of the interest rate cap for judicial protection of private lending, identifies the five types of crimes associated with private lending in the Chinese legal and economic context. Secondly, this paper, by examining the relationship between the criminalization of usury and the crimes associated with private lending through the substantive criminalization of usury,provides a factual basis for retrospective reasoning about the mechanism by which private lending contributes to crimes.Thirdly, this paper, by testing the relationship between microfinance companies with private lending-related crimes,provides an experimental effect of alternative paths for the legal regulation of private lending.