Citizens are encouraged to save for debts
[ad_1]
Deputies are trying to revive the idea of long-term savings for citizens using housing deposits by prescribing in the updated bill an increased rate of their insurance – up to 10 million rubles. Bank clients will subsequently be able to use such deposits as a down payment on a mortgage. Experts believe that banks can offer everything prescribed in the law to clients who do not win anything. Lawyers add that the comments due to which the law was rejected earlier were not properly taken into account.
Introduced to the State Duma earlier this week bill on stimulating housing savings of citizens involves the introduction of a new type of deposit, which at the end of the term, along with interest, will be used to repay the first installment on the mortgage loan. Such a mechanism, according to the authors of the bill, ensures the “cultivation” of mortgage borrowers, allowing “to create predictable future demand for mortgage banking products.”
A special feature of the housing deposit is the client’s right to apply for a mortgage loan and the bank’s obligation to provide him with such a loan.
But the bill also lists a number of grounds on which a bank can refuse a loan – overdue debt, bankruptcy, being on the list of terrorists, an increased debt burden ratio (DLI) of the depositor, etc.
If the client is denied a loan or he withdraws the deposit himself (on time or ahead of schedule), then interest is paid to him at the demand rate. In this case, the funds on deposit are insured in the amount of 10 million rubles. and separately from insurance of ordinary deposits (the insurance limit for them is 1.4 million rubles).
A similar bill was already submitted to the State Duma in 2020, but in June 2023 it was rejected in the first reading, since many questions arose about it from various authorities. The Accounts Chamber (CA) drew attention to the fact that the increased amount of deposit insurance (then proposed in the amount of 3 million rubles) “could increase the financial burden on the deposit insurance system and, potentially, on the federal budget.” The Legal Department of the State Duma noted that “the concept of a “housing savings agreement” is a new type of agreement, unknown to the current civil legislation.”
Market participants do not see much point in creating a new design. As the head of the National Council of the Financial Market Andrei Emelin explained, by and large, everything that the bill provides for, the bank can offer the depositor today: “And the objective impossibility in our economic realities of even medium-term forecasting for both deposits and loans calls into question the conceptual feasibility proposed regulation.”
In addition, the head of the National Financial Markets Service draws attention to the fact that the legal structure of the relationship between the housing deposit agreement and the mortgage loan has so far been described schematically, but none of the possible options looks optimal.
Anatoly Aksakov, Chairman of the State Duma Committee on the Financial Market, May 31:
“We need to clearly state when a person himself can withdraw from this agreement (housing savings – Kommersant) for objective reasons, and when the bank can refuse to issue a loan.”
Legal experts add that the bill raises many enforcement issues. The initiator of the document took the path of simplifying it: instead of developing a law that would properly regulate all comments, he simply decided to exclude the norms that raised questions, says Sudohod lawyer Mark Barmin.
As Roman Suslov, senior lawyer at the KIAP law office, notes, the investor “will be confident that the available funds will increase and in the future he will receive additional financing from the bank, which could create competition between banks for the “education” of investors into borrowers.” However, in his opinion, the problem is that the bank will be given the right to specify additional conditions when refusing a loan, and in fact this will neutralize the proposed obligation to issue funds.
The issues raised by the joint venture also remained unresolved. Lawyer of the Grishin, Pavlova and Partners legal group Vladislav Ivashchenko notes that the funds on deposit are insured in the amount of up to 10 million rubles. That is, the approval of the bill “is accompanied by potential risks in the event of an insured event,” the lawyer emphasizes. The introduction of this type of agreement, he believes, will require “refinement and justification of feasibility.”
[ad_2]
Source link