论文部分内容阅读
基础资产是资产证券化操作中的核心要素,其法律界定对于产品设计和投资者利益保护举足轻重。在供热基础设施这类能产生未来收益的资产证券化中,存在着如何合理界定基础资产以有效完成交易的法律问题。实务中,供热资产证券化项目对于基础资产的法律界定存在着供热收费权、收益权和供热合同债权两种观点。如果将基础资产界定为供热收费权、收益权,那么需进一步论证其权利类型、权利要素和可转让性,未必是最合理有效的界定;相比之下,将基础资产界定为供热合同债权具有可行性,便于实践操作,在根本上符合资产证券化的精神,更有利于基础资产的清晰明确和资产支持证券投资者利益的保护。
Basic assets are the core elements in the operation of asset securitization, and their legal definition plays an important role in the protection of product design and investor’s interests. In asset securitization, such as heating infrastructure, which generate future benefits, there is a legal issue of how to define the underlying assets rationally to effectively complete the transaction. Practice, the heating asset securitization project for the legal definition of basic assets exist heat supply rights, benefits and heat supply contract claims two perspectives. If the basic assets are defined as heating fee collection and profit-making rights, it is not necessarily the most reasonable and effective definition to further prove their types of rights, rights and transferability; in contrast, the definition of basic assets as heating contracts Credibility is feasible, easy to practice, in line with the spirit of asset securitization, more conducive to the clarity of the underlying assets and the interests of asset-backed securities investors.