Legal Issues In The Reform Of Rural Collective Assets Quantization

The reform of rural collective assets quantization not only related to agricultural modernization and new city construction, but also have a major impact on the vital interests of the majority of farmers, social stability and harmony. Therefore, The Third Plenary Session of the eighteen and fourth plenary session repeatedly mentioned reform of rural collective assets, that "giving farmers the rights of in possession of shares of collective assets, income, mortgage, guarantees and inheritance. " However, no systematic legislative principles are available to standardize the management of the rural collective property. As a result, different handling principles by different local governments leads to countless clashes and restricting further reform.The author, on the basis of field investigation, carried out a deep analysis of the problems and difficulties in the reforms of our rural collective property rights, and put forward some feasible measures and concrete legislation suggestions, in the hope of making some active promotions in the legislative settlement of this problem.The first chapter talks about the basic meaning and reality of the reform of rural collective assets quantization. It explains what are rural collective assets and what is quantify reform. It noted that the causes for the poor status of rural collective assets to arrive at the conduct of the reform of rural collective assets quantization is thefundamental way, and further elaborated to quantify the significance of the reform.Meanwhile, compared to Land assets securitization and Rural land trust, the reform of rural collective assets quantization have an advantage in target range, functions,and operability, indicating a major breakthrough. So this is a rare institutional innovation of great significance.The second chapter discusses the scope of the quantized collective assets. Rural collective assets include the operating assets, non-operating assets and resource assets. This probelom relates to the further development of the reform and the position of public ownership. In this regard, I believe that the scope of the collective assets to quantify is limited to operating assets. Because the collective ownership belongs to public ownership, while the quantized collective assets belongs to private ownership. In order to maintain public ownership, the reform must retain certain assets not to be quantified, and only the nature assets qualify the condition,considering the nature of the assets. In view of the public nature of non-operating assets, it should be excluded. There is a subsequent advantage, such as choosing the form of the company freely and realizing transform, mortgagee and inheritance of the company.The third chapter mainly analyzes the problem of defining the collective membership. However there are two problems exist in the theory and practice: take registration or the fact that the doctrine for collective member qualification standards,whether minors should be excluded. I think we should take both registration and the fact. First, we should base on the household registration. Because of the long residence from the State Administration to be standardized, registered, well documented, and can be operable and convincing; secondly, by members of the general assembly to vote on the special personnel for comprehensive consideration and judgment. Because the delineation of the scope of members will involve the vital interests of the members; finally, age or capacity for civil conduct should not be identified as the collective member qualification standards, regardless of the source of collective assets, the Germanic law in total, collective assets of the social security function or the consistency of rights and obligations all come to this conclusion.The fourth chapter mainly analyzes the problem of the quantitative standard of collective assets. On this issue, Songjiang Shanghai to land and farm age as the standard, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, with the population and labor age as the standard,Chengdu Sichuan to collective unit, population welfare, the contribution of cadres as the standard. In this regard, there is also a "collective", "population and welfare", "contribution to say" debate. In my opinion, according to the collective property and collective property of social security function, for each member of the configuration "population welfare unit", according to the principle of consistent with the rights and obligations of considering the contribution of each member and finally to "work the age of shares" as a bonus shares distinguish each members of different contributions.At the same time, the low level of economic development in the early stages of reform can retain a certain proportion of collective shares to solve the problem of reform.Reform of rural collective assets quantization has been quite some time and gotton a lot of success. However, due to the lack of unified law or policy document,the further development of reform encountered difficulties. The author hope that a rudimentary discussion can help practitioners of the reform to more accurately grasping the legal issue and promoting the healthy development of the reform.