The degree of information disclosure of domestic P2P platforms is uneven. These incomplete information disclosure can not solve the problem of information asymmetry, which directly leads to the inability of borrowers and lenders to make a more comprehensive judgment, and it is also difficult to accurately evaluate the credibility of P2P platform. In this case, the risk of P2P mode is undoubtedly intensified. Secondly, each platform also has certain concerns about information leakage, such as the risk of trade secret information after leakage.
Followed by offline business risks. Each platform gradually rectified the platform operation mode, promoted P2P business from offline to online, and effectively drew a clear line between offline wealth management companies and P2P. Business promotion will shift from offline to online, and offline stores will continue to close. The reserved offline stores no longer directly pull customers down to sign contracts, but only carry out risk management such as credit collection, verification and post-loan tracking. Online development can not only improve operational efficiency, but also facilitate management, and relevant regulatory authorities can use the Internet to conduct supervision efficiently and conveniently. Offline promotion targets are mostly middle-aged and elderly people, with poor awareness of risk prevention and easy to be encouraged. This provision has also greatly reduced the improper publicity and sales of middle-aged and elderly people.
The third is anti-money laundering risk. The state stipulates that P2P platform should establish and improve customer identification system, customer identity data and transaction record keeping system, suspicious transaction reporting system, and fulfill anti-money laundering obligations, but the specific requirements of each system are not clear. At present, the central bank has issued a series of relatively perfect management rules for financial institutions and payment institutions. However, in the Measures, P2P lending companies are defined as intermediary service institutions, and it is doubtful whether P2P lending companies should follow the relevant anti-money laundering norms of financial institutions and payment institutions. If P2P organizations need to follow it, P2P companies may not be able to fully implement it due to their own operation mode and strength.