[ad_1]
In order to assist companies and individuals affected by the epidemic during the extraordinary period, the government actively urged banks to undertake rescue loans and sacrificed KPIs for performance evaluation. This quantitative performance evaluation not only distorted the real intention of the rescue policy, but also the epidemic. The test of the quality of the assets of temporary banks is about to begin in time.
The new coronary pneumonia epidemic is wreaking havoc worldwide. To reduce the risk of interpersonal infections, countries have successively initiated measures such as the closure of cities and the suspension of flights, which have forced interruption of world trade and business travel activities to severely impact the momentum of economic growth. Industry and small-scale stores offer help programs, announce simple and quick loan procedures, and let people feel the immediate shower of government assistance.
Noting that since the Legislative Yuan session was discussed, the progress of bailouts by companies and individuals has become the focus of public affairs for the Legislative Council. The focus is on the progress of the rescue of public shares. The number of difficulties, the number of nuclear loans, the rate of loan appropriation, etc. They emphasize that nuclear lending is fast and efficient, making bailouts a priority in the first half of the financial circle.
To avoid being questioned by the outside world for bailout performance, many banks have privately established KPIs for bailout loans and require employees to implement them, to avoid the bank’s underperformance and lack of brilliance from top executives. . Loans give bank employees misery.
However, active government promotion of “salvage runs” may sacrifice the quality of bank credit. At that point, you can cause banks to erode profits to keep bad debt, and you may even be forced to swallow large amounts of bad debt in the future, although the government has repeatedly insisted that banks. 10% of the credit guarantee fund, and the bank’s claims are relatively protected. However, if we look closely at the rejection clauses of the credit insurance fund, under market competition for bailout effects, the bank can still claim the bank’s future bad credit. Even base-level contractors take responsibility.
“Non-subrogation settlement criteria” for extending credit insurance funds include borrowing new and paying off old ones, credit units that fill in the gaps, and unused loan funds according to the purpose of the loan. Once past due credit guarantee funds may refuse to settle claims in accordance with regulations, they have appeared in the past. In the case of the delivery of bank insurance, the credit insurance fund refused to pay compensation in violation of the regulations. Finally, the bank swallowed the loss of bad debts and even came back to pursue the case of hiring employees.
To help companies overcome difficulties, the government is actively promoting bailouts and requiring banks to simplify unnecessary paperwork. Although it is a good idea, credit loans involve the quality of bank assets and the rights of shareholders. The government blindly chases performance but ignores credit quality and fears that banks. After the epidemic, it faces significant evidence of rising bad debt and the impact on asset quality.
[ad_2]
