华夏银行理财产品事件或将树立先例

Scenes of angry customers who lost money on an exotic structured product protesting outside a Shanghai bank has analysts wondering whether Chinese banks could soon be facing their own Lehman Brothers “minibonds moment.

看到上海一家银行的客户因为投资一款奇异结构化产品亏钱、然后在银行门口愤怒抗议的场景，分析师在猜想，不久之后中国银行业是不是也会遇上它们自己的雷曼(Lehman Brothers)“迷你债券时刻。

Last week, the collapse of a product sold by a Shanghai branch of Huaxia Bank Co. 600015.SH +0.44% drew dozens of protestors, holding signs with slogans such as “Huaxia Bank swindled us of our money we earned through blood and sweat. The product promised annualized returns of between 11% and 13%. When the one-year product came due on Nov. 25, the investment firm that created the product failed to pay investors. The money was invested in four companies including a pawn shop, a car sales company, a car services company and an entertainment company.

上周，华夏银行上海分行销售的一款产品违约，引来数十人举牌抗议。牌子上写着“华夏银行骗取储户血汗钱等标语。这是一款一年期产品，承诺年回报率在11%到13%之间。11月25日到期之时，创造出该产品的投资银行未能对投资者进行兑付。资金投进了四家公司，分别是一家典当行，一家汽车销售公司，一家汽车服务公司和一家娱乐公司。

Readers may be able to draw parallels with here with the scenes of customers, many retired retail investors, who for the last few years have been ceaselessly protesting outside banks such as Bank of China’s Hong Kong branch, Citibank and DBS over the collapse of derivatives linked to Lehman Brothers, including “minibonds and equity-linked notes.

读者或许能够联想到过去几年银行客户在中国银行香港分行、花旗银行(Citibank)和星展银行(DBS)门外不断抗议的情景，这些人当中很多人都是已经退休的散户投资者，抗议原因则是与雷曼兄弟有关的衍生品违约，如“迷你债券和股权联接产品。

In 2009, under pressure from Hong Kong regulators, the banks that sold the minibonds agreed to buy them back from retail investors, paying back around 60% of the par value. The banks later signed a settlement with Lehman Brothers and its receivers and trustees to recover some of the underlying collateral on those notes, giving minibond investors additional compensation from the banks.

2009年，在香港监管机构的压力下，销售迷你债券的银行同意将这些债券从散户投资者手中买回，价格在面值的六成左右。后来银行同雷曼兄弟及其接管人、托管人签订协议，挽回了基础抵押物中的部分价值，让迷你债券投资者获得了银行的更多补偿。

For their part, Chinese banks have been selling high-yielding products, or wealth-management products (WMPs), amid ultra-low savings rates in recent years. According to Barclays, the total outstanding balance of WMPs increased from 0.5 trillion yuan at the end of 2008 to 8.8 trillion yuan by the third-quarter of this year, OR around 10% of total deposits.

在中国内地，由于近几年存款利率极低，银行一直在销售被称为理财产品的高收益产品。据巴克莱(Barclays)估计，理财产品余额已经从2008年年末的0.5万亿元增加到今年第三季度的8.8万亿元，相当于全部存款的10%左右。

Huaxia Bank is in discussions with investors over a settlement. Shanghai authorities have also begun investigating the default, and have said that Huaxia bank should “bear some responsibility for the product.

华夏银行正在与投资者协商解决办法。上海有关部门也对这起违约事件启动了调查，并曾表示华夏银行对产品负有一定责任。

“We view the settlement of Huaxia’s equity investment fund as a good indication of whether banks will be bearing future liabilities for all investment products, said Barclays.

巴克莱说，我们认为，华夏银行股权投资基金问题的解决方案能够很好地反映出，银行将来会不会为所有投资产品承担责任。

Even if the banks played no role in structuring or guaranteeing these WMPs, Moody’s analyst Bin Hu says in a note that there are growing instances of disputes where claimants are “turning to banks to address their grievances.

穆迪(Moody’s)的分析师胡斌在一份研究报告中说，即使银行没有参与理财产品的构造或担保，投资者要求银行解决问题的纠纷也已经越来越多。

“The risk is that, given the potential effect on banks’ reputation and social stability, they will face heavy pressure to settle, said Moody’s, adding that while the amount involved in the Huaxia case is relatively small 140 million yuan ($22.5 million) ─ it would nonetheless “set a precedent for future cases.

穆迪说，其风险在于，考虑到银行声誉和社会稳定可能受到的影响，它们将面临解决问题的强大压力。穆迪还说，虽然华夏此案涉及的金额（1.4亿元）相对不大，但它还是会为将来“树立一个先例。