A Systemic Fix for Financial Risks

(a) Preventing and controlling trust risks: the Opinions on Further Strengthening the Oversight of the Risks of Trust Companies (Yin Jian Ban Fa [2016] No.58) issued on March 18, 2016, which calls for:

(i) in-depth management of the capital pool business of trusts, heightened monitoring over potential uses of capital pool items to take over high-risk products;

(ii) tightening the structured fund matching leveraging ratio, which in principle may not exceed 1:1, or at most 2:1 (3:1 was common in the industry);

(iii) changing the method of reserve provisioning by trust companies, requiring them to not only make sufficient allocations to a reserve based on asset quality, but to also make provisions for the anticipated liabilities of their off-balance- sheet business and trust business, as well as transmit the latter's risks onto the balance sheet; and

(iv) making substantive changes in the disposal of trust risk items instead of merely altering the nature, requiring the inclusion of fixed assets bought back in the monitoring of non-performing assets, as well as of trust fund items bought back in trust fund financial statements.

(b) Targeting the “three arbitrages”: the Circular on Launching the Dedicated Work of Addressing “Regulatory Arbitrage”, “Empty Transaction Arbitrage” and “Affiliated Arbitrage” in the Banking Industry (Yin Jian Ban Fa [2017] No.46) of March 29, 2017 was drafted by the CBRC Onsite Inspection Bureau, which is also responsible for the final collection of reports and has encountered the greatest number of penalty cases. The highly detailed document lists close to 100 ways of arbitraging. At present, loopholes involving entities in the same industry, wealth management, and commission-based sales are basically covered, including regulatory arbitrage, empty transaction arbitrage, and affiliated arbitrage.

• CIRC:

(a) Regulating the insurance asset management business: the Circular on Matters Relevant to Cleaning up and Regulating the Channeling Business of Insurance Asset Management Companies (Bao Jian Zi Jin (2016) No.98) was issued on June 1, 2016, requiring insurance asset management companies to ensure their roundabout bank-deposit investment and other businesses are in full compliance, safeguard against regulatory arbitrage, conduct comprehensive self-examinations, including investment, credit, operational, and ethical risks, and suspend handling new roundabout investment businesses during the clean-up period.

(b) Defining and qualifying insurance asset management products: the Circular on Strengthening the Oversight of the Portfolio-type Insurance Asset Management Product Business (Bao Jian Zi Jin (2016) No.104), issued on June 22, 2016, provided clarity on the product business qualifications, product investment scope, registration, offering, and prohibited acts concerning the product businesses of insurance asset management and old-age insurance companies. The key features include:

(i) setting forth the conditions, such as requirements for internal control management and establishment of departments, that a company applying for the product business pilot project must satisfy in order to ensure qualifications are met;

(ii) confirming that the scope of a product's underlying assets should strictly be in line with the Circular on Issues Relevant to the Pilot Projects for the Engagement in Asset Management Product Business by Insurance Asset Management Companies;

(iii) laying down the principles governing product offering and registration services, as well as requiring them to be provided through CIRC-designated asset trading platforms; and

(iv) outlining the specific regulatory requirements for the product business, such as the criteria for classifying products and list of prohibited items.

(c) Building the insurance regulatory system: the Circular on Remedying Regulatory Shortcomings and Erecting a Sound and Effective Insurance Regulatory System (Bao Jian Fa [2017] No.44) (Circular 44), issued on May 5, 2017, requires insurance companies to strengthen their institutional equity management, monitor their insurance capital application more stringently, implement a comprehensive solvency management mechanism, and solidify their insurance product management system. Once in effect, Circular 44 will impose stricter requirements on the shareholders of insurance companies, regulate insurance capital investments in financial products, and work towards the broader goal of eliminating leveraging, multi-level embedding, and roundabout investments. It also stresses the principles of senior management responsibility, and will have a major impact on shareholder changes in insurance companies and capital application products.

• CSRC:

(a) Setting capital requirements for asset management companies: the Provisions for the Administration of the Subsidiaries of Securities Investment Fund Management Companies and the Guidelines for the Risk Control Metrics of Specific Client Asset Management Subsidiaries of Fund Management Companies (Guidelines) were issued on May 18, 2016. The Guidelines establish a net capital restraint mechanism for a series of risk control metrics for specific client asset management businesses of subsidiaries of fund management companies. As the entire asset management industry is required to make capital provisions, all trust companies and securities houses must expend net capital when engaging in asset management. These metrics will have a wide impact on the industry and, in fact, are the main factor behind the increase in registered capital being seen among fund subsidiaries.

(b) The new “eight baselines”: the Tentative Provisions for the Administration of the Operation of the Private Asset Management Business of Securities and Futures Firms (New Eight Baselines) were issued on July 15, 2016 to supplement the Asset Management Association of China's 2015 Rules for the Implementation of the “Eight Baselines” for Prohibited Acts in the Asset Management Business of Securities and Futures Firms. The New Eight Baselines are not only a promotion to the level of ministerial rules, but also further strengthen the constraints on the private fund sector. The aim is to prevent highly-leveraged structured asset management products from destabilizing the capital markets and causing severe volatility. They are a part of a series of policies for eliminating leveraging and guarding against financial risks, and the ratio restrictions will, in the medium to long term, help prevent unrestrained multiple leveraging. Furthermore, as the rules ban any preferential compensation for guaranteed capital and returns as well as multi-level embedding and capital pool manipulation, they can help achieve product information transparency and business risk isolation, reduce liquidity shock risks at specific times, and enhance regulatory enforcement. At the same time, the new rules bring challenges for securities houses in asset management, and for fund companies in expanding their product scales. By restricting the roundabout investment function of asset management plans, the New Eight Baselines make it difficult for firms to continue relying on leveraging for high returns.

2. WHAT ARE THE LATEST REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS IN ONLINE/P2P LENDING AND SHADOW BANKING?

On April 7, 2017, the CBRC issued the Guiding Opinions on the Work of Preventing and Controlling Risks in the Banking Industry (Guiding Opinions), which implement the decisions of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the State Council as well as the Central Economic Work Conference agenda, and are aimed at further strengthening financial regulation and preventing and mitigating risks in the banking industry.

The Guiding Opinions particularly emphasize internet finance risks, mandating the “continued promotion of dedicated rectification of P2P risks and duly carrying out the cleaning up and rectification of campus P2P lending and 'cash loan' business”. Specifically, they call for strict enforcement of the Tentative Measures for the Administration of the Business Activities of Peer-to-peer Lending Information Intermediaries (Measures) and other complementary rules and regulations (such as those for record filing, registration, and fund custody). They also propose, in line with the requirements of the implementation plan for dedicated rectification, steadily advancing handling by type, improving P2P information intermediaries, and taking measures such as closing down, suspending, merging, and transformation where appropriate.

P2P information intermediaries are forbidden from including borrowers that are unable to repay within the scope of their marketing, offering P2P services to university students under the age of 18, conducting fraudulent publicity and sales, and extending usurious loans in any disguised manner. Furthermore, they must engage in business in a lawful and compliant manner and ensure the legality of lenders' source of funds. The Measures require the strict application of relevant provisions of the Supreme People's Court on the interest rates on private loans, prohibit the unlawful extension of usurious loans, and the use of violence in pursuing repayment.

In early August 2017, certain media reported that the CBRC was seeking comments on the Circular Seeking Comments on the Syndicated Loan Model (Circular), which set the access qualifications and risk control requirements for the online lending model. The Circular first defines an internet loan as a loan denominated in renminbi or a foreign currency to be used for consumption, routine production, or operational turnover that a borrower applies for online, whereby the lender uses internet and mobile communication technology to provide the loan to a qualified borrower through a big data information and risk model. This signifies that both internet consumer financing and cash loan platforms fall within the regulatory scope of the Circular. Furthermore, the Circular states that only licensed financial institutions established with CBRC approval may engage in the business of extending internet syndicated loans. This means that if the Circular ultimately becomes official, only the current 26 licensed consumer finance companies are qualified to provide internet syndicated loans. As for small online lenders, if the CBRC recovers the authority to approve them, only the 180 or so that have been cleared will qualify. Online small-loan licenses have become increasingly sought after in the last two years. Despite the fact that the regulators have yet to officially confirm the genuineness and accuracy of the Circular, measures will soon be taken to combat any latent risks surrounding the current legal environment.

3. WHAT IS THE VALUE-ADDED TAX (VAT) POLICY FOR THE FINANCE AND ASSET MANAGEMENT INDUSTRIES?

The current regulations governing value-added tax (VAT) in the asset management industry include the Circular on Issues Relevant to Value-added Tax on Asset Management Products (Cai Shui [2017] No.56) (Circular 56)issued by the Ministry of Finance and the State Administration of Taxation on June 30, 2017. Circular 56 states that, for VAT taxable acts that occur during the course of operation of an “asset management product” by an “asset management product manager”, the simplified tax method at a rate of 3% provisionally will apply. This will be implemented from January 1, 2018.

The term “asset management product manager” specified in Circular 56 includes banks, trust companies, public fund management companies and their subsidiaries, securities companies and their subsidiaries, futures companies and their subsidiaries, private fund managers, insurance asset management companies, professional insurance asset management institutions, and old age insurance companies. “Asset management products” include bank wealth management products, fund trusts (including pooled fund trusts and single fund trusts), property right trusts, publicly offered securities investment funds, specific customer asset management plans, collective asset management plans, targeted asset management plans, private investment funds, debt investment plans, equity investment plans, combined debt-equity investment plans, asset-backed plans, portfolio type insurance asset management products, and old-age security management products.

From the tax rate perspective, the simplified method and 3% VAT rate specified by Circular 56 offer a major advantage for the asset management business. Firstly, the method avoids the complex process where the manager is required to allocate the input tax amount to different products. Second, considering the number of items that can be deducted in the course of an asset management product's operation is practically minimal, the 3% rate helps to reduce the tax burden during this period. Lastly, the simplified tax allows a manager to more accurately predict the tax burden on a certain product, making it easier for investors to grasp the net profit after tax. However, it should also be noted that a manager must calculate the input tax amount that may not deducted due to use of the simplified tax method, and promptly transfer the same so as to ensure compliance and reduce risks.

4. TO WHAT EXTENT HAVE RESTRICTIONS ON FOREIGN-FUNDED BANKS BEEN LIFTED IN 2017?

On March 17, 2017, the CBRC issued the Circular on Matters Relevant to Foreign-funded Banks Engaging in Certain Businesses (Yin Jian Ban Fa [2017] No.12) (Circular 12), which clarifies the policy permitting foreign-funded banks with legal personality in China to lawfully invest in domestic banking financial institutions—in line with the principle of equal treatment of Chinese and foreign investors.

Circular 12 allows a foreign-funded bank in China to internally coordinate with its parent group in providing comprehensive financial services for activities such as offshore debt offering, listing, M&A, and financing, to enterprises that have “gone global” and leverage its strengths in providing comprehensive services on an international scale.

It specifies that a foreign-funded bank that is engaged in sovereign bond underwriting, financial advisory, or most custody businesses does not need to secure administrative permission from the CBRC and instead must adhere to the post-event reporting system. Strengthening compliance and risk management is also required.

The CBRC then issued the Decision on Amending the <Implementing Measures for the Administrative Permission Matters of Chinese-invested Commercial Banks> (Decision) on July 20, 2017, which supplements Circular 12 with additional conditions for foreign-funded banks investing in domestic financial institutions—specifically requiring that relevant provisions for the acquisition of equity stakes in Chinese-invested commercial banks by foreign financial institutions acting as promoters or strategic investors must be referred to. This also signifies that, in future, a foreign-funded bank may have the option to invest in Chinese banks directly through its onshore Chinese entity as well as through its offshore parent.

5. WHAT IS YOUR OUTLOOK FOR CHINA'S BANKING AND FINANCE SECTOR OVER THE NEXT 12 MONTHS?

The policies and guidelines issued over the past year all indicate that future market oversight will improve regulation. When proceeding with financial innovation, it is crucial to pay particular attention to “eliminating leveraging, eliminating arbitrage” so as to prevent and control risks. The intensity of penalties will continue to increase and relevant regulations and systems will be released and revised so as to adapt to the evolving market.

Dorothy Xing, Managing Partner

East & Concord Partners

Dorothy Xing is currently a managing partner of East & Concord Partners, and is also the vice president of the Beijing Chaoyang Lawyers Association, consulting director of the China Banking Association, director of the Beijing New Social Class Association, and a member of the China Youth Entrepreneurs Association. She is also an independent director of Jihua Group Corp. and J.P. Morgan First Capital Securities, and a part-time professor at Wuhan University School of Law.

Ms. Xing obtained her LL.B. from China University of Political Science and Law, and her LL.M. from Peking University. She has been practicing law for more than 20 years and has advised numerous large enterprises and financial institutions on finance, stocks, and M&A.

She currently serves as a legal consultant for more than 10 banks, trusts, funds, and listed companies. Her clients consist of enterprises including CITIC Group, China Resources Group, and China Investment Group, as well as banks such as China Construction Bank and China CITIC Bank, and foreign capital and equity investment trusts including Sequoia Capital.

Her working languages are Chinese and English.

Jennifer Zhang, Partner

East & Concord Partners

Jennifer Zhang is the head of the finance department at East & Concord Partners and a member of the Beijing Lawyers Association's Company and Public Office Committee.

Ms. Zhang received her bachelor's degree in English form Shandong University of Technology, and her LL.M. from East China University of Political Science and Law. As part of a collaboration between the Chinese and English Ministries of Justice, she was selected as an outstanding young lawyer to be trained and work alongside solicitors and barristers in London.

She has more than 10 years of experience in banking and finance, and regularly provides legal services to the China Banking Regulatory Commission, China Securities Regulatory Commission, and China Insurance Regulatory Commission for their projects, as well as to facilitating agencies and trust, insurance, fund management, and private fund management companies. She has advised Sequoia Capital Fund on its Chinese investment, ABN AMRO TEDA Fund Management on its fundraising, and Manulife Teda Fund Management on its fund projects.

Ms. Zhang's working languages are Chinese and English.

1. 过去一年，有哪些影响中国金融行业的重大法规变更？

2016-2017年是金融市场众多事件突发的一年，也是监管趋于严格的一年，一行三会密集发文，从金融机构的内部治理、风险监管、业务指导等各维度均进行了规范，其中受到重点监管的以银行和保险行业为代表。该等规定的核心为：去杠杆、去监管套利、防控风险。该等法规对金融市场的产品模式、融资成本等均产生了重大影响。

去年发布的主要政策法规包括：

• 　银监会

（一） 对信托的风险防控： 2016年3月18日，银监会向各银监局下发《进一步加强信托公司风险监管工作的意见》（银监办发【2016】58号）。该文件的内容主要有四点：

1、 对信托资金池业务穿透管理，重点监测可能出现用资金池项目接盘风险产品的情况；

2、 结构化配资杠杆比例原则上不超过1:1，最高不超过2:1，相比之前业内常见的3:1有明显的压缩；

3、 对信托公司的拨备计提方式提出改变，除了要求信托公司根据资产质量足额计提拨备，还要求对于表外业务以及向表内风险传递的信托业务计提预计负债；

4、 对信托风险项目处置从性质到实质的转变，要求把接盘固有资产纳入不良资产监测，接盘信托项目纳入全要素报表。

（二） 对三套利的监管措施：2017年3月29日《关于开展银行业“监管套利、空转套利、关联套利”专项治理工作的通知》（银监办发〔2017〕46号）是银监会现场检查局起草并负责最终报告收集，正是因为现场检查局接触到的处罚案件最多，所以其文件最为详细，列举了近100种套利手法，目前同业、理财、代销等平时绕道手法基本都覆盖，包括监管套利、空转套利、关联套利。

• 　保监会

（一） 对保险资产管理业务的监管措施： 2016年6月1日保监会向各保险资管公司下发了《中国保监会关于清理规范保险资产管理公司通道类业务有关事项的通知》，要求各保险资管公司清理规范银行存款通道等业务，防范监管套利，要求保险资管公司全面自查，包括投资风险、信用风险、操作风险、道德风险等，清理期间暂停新增办理通道类业务。

（二） 对保险资产管理业务的监管措施：2016年6月22日，保监会印发了《关于加强组合类保险资产管理产品业务监管的通知》（保监资金（2016）104号），就保险资产管理公司和养老保险公司开展产品业务资质、产品投资范围、登记发行以及禁止行为给予了明确的说明。主要内容包括：

1、 明确公司申请产品业务试点应当具备的条件，对公司内控管理、部门设置等提出要求，确保符合相关条件方可开展产品业务。

2、 明确产品基础资产范围应当严格按照《关于保险资产管理公司开展资产管理产品业务试点有关问题的通知》的规定执行。

3、 明确产品发行与登记服务原则，通过保监会指定的资产交易平台为产品提供登记、发行等业务服务，以规范产品业务行为，有效保护相关当事人合法权益。

4、 明确产品业务的具体监管要求，包括产品分类标准、产品业务的禁止情形等。

（三） 构建保险监管体系：2017年5月5日，保监会印发《中国保监会关于弥补监管短板构建严密有效保险监管体系的通知》 （保监发〔2017〕44号），要求保险公司加强机构股权监管、严格保险资金运用监管、深化偿付能力监管制度全面实施、夯实保险产品管理制度等。该通知实施后，将对保险公司的股东提出了更高的要求，也更加从严监管保险资金投资各类金融产品，坚持去杠杆、去嵌套、去通道导向。同时，亦强调了高管人员责任制的原则。该等通知将势必对保险公司股东变更、资金运用产品等带来重大影响。

• 　证监会

（一） 对资产管理公司设资本要求：2016年5月18日发布的《证券投资基金管理公司子公司管理规定》和《基金管理公司特定客户资产管理子公司风险控制指标指引》对于基金公司专户子公司开展特定客户资产管理业务设置了一系列风险控制指标的净资本约束机制。由于整个资管行业，进行资产管理业务都需要计提资本，不论是信托公司还是券商从事资管业务都需要消耗净资本，因此该等指标的设置将对行业产生非常深远的影响，这也是目前基金子公司纷纷增加注册资本金的主要动因。

（二） 新“八条底线”

2016年7月15日，证监会发布《证券期货经营机构私募资产管理业务运作管理暂行规定》（下称“新八条底线”）。相比2015年3月基金业协会发布实施的《证券期货经营机构落实资产管理业务“八条底线”禁止行为细则》，“新八条底线”不仅在法律层级上升级为部门规章，也进一步增强了对私募基金领域的约束力，因此又被称为“新八条底线”。总体来看，新“八条底线”，其主要目的就是防范高杠杆的结构化资管产品对资本市场形成助涨助跌的扰动，同时也是监管层为了防范金融风险，进行的金融去杠杆系列政策之一。新规对杠杆率的限制，从中长期来看有助于预防未来再次疯狂加杠杆的行为。另外规定禁止任何对优先级保本保收益的补偿，禁止嵌套和资金池操作，有助于资产管理回归本源，也有利于实现产品信息的透明化与业务风险的隔离，降低特殊时点的流动性冲击风险，提升监管的有效性。不过券商资管以及基金公司等机构进一步扩张资管产品规模的难度加大，限制了资管计划的通道作用，尤其是原来靠杠杆追求高收益的模式难以延续。

2. 网上/P2P借贷和影子银行业方面有什么最新的法规动态？

2017年4月7日，为贯彻党中央、国务院决策部署，落实中央经济工作会议精神，进一步加强金融监管，防范化解银行业风险，银监会发布《关于银行业风险防控工作的指导意见》（下称《指导意见》）。

《指导意见》重点防控的风险类型之一即为互联网金融风险，明确要求“持续推进网络借贷平台（P2P）风险专项整治，做好校园网贷、'现金贷'业务的清理整顿工作”。具体来说，首先要严格执行《网络借贷信息中介机构业务活动管理暂行办法》和备案登记、资金存管等配套制度，按照专项整治工作实施方案要求，稳妥推进分类处置工作，督促网络借贷信息中介机构加强整改，适时采取关、停、并、转等措施。

其次，网络借贷信息中介机构不得将不具备还款能力的借款人纳入营销范围，禁止向未满18岁的在校大学生提供网贷服务，不得进行虚假欺诈宣传和销售，不得通过各种方式变相发放高利贷；此外，网络借贷信息中介机构应依法合规开展业务，确保出借人资金来源合法，禁止欺诈、虚假宣传。严格执行最高人民法院关于民间借贷利率的有关规定，不得违法高利放贷及暴力催收。

2017年8月初，有媒体报道称银监会正就《关于就联合贷款模式征求意见的通知》（下称《通知》）征求意见，就互联网贷款模式提出了准入资质以及风控要求。根据网上披露出的部分《通知》内容，《通知》首先明确了互联网贷款的定义，即借款人通过互联网渠道自助提交借款申请，贷款人运用互联网技术和移动通信技术，通过大数据信息和风险模型，全流程线上为符合条件的借款人提供的，用于其消费、日常生产经营周转的本外币贷款。这就意味着，互联网消费金融和现金贷平台均在《通知》监管范围之内。

此外最引人注目的是，《通知》中明确提出，只有经银监会批准设立的持牌金融机构才能从事互联网联合放贷业务。这意味着，如果银监会此次《通知》最终成为正式文件，目前仅26家持牌消费金融公司才有互联网联合放贷资格。而对于网络小贷公司而言，如果银监会将网络小贷公司审批权限收回，那么目前已经获批的180家（不完全统计）网络小贷公司可能也会具备放贷资格，因此，网络小贷牌照近两年正在变得日益抢手。尽管该等《通知》的真实性及准确性尚未获得监管机构的正式确认，但在当前的监管环境下，只要有风险隐患，监管措施便会跟上，只是迟早的问题，因此，《通知》中体现出的监管思想仍然值得关注。

3. 针对融资和资产管理行业，有什么增值税政策？

目前针对资管行业增值税现行有效的规定是2017年6月30日财政部及国家税务总局发布的《关于资管产品增值税有关问题的通知》(财税【2017】56号，下称“56号文”)，56号文规定对资管产品管理人运营资管产品过程中发生的增值税应税行为，暂适用简易计税方法，按照3%的征收率缴纳增值税。这一通知将于2018年1月1日起施行。

56号文规定的“资管产品管理人”包括银行、信托公司、公募基金管理公司及其子公司、证券公司及其子公司、期货公司及其子公司、私募基金管理人、保险资产管理公司、专业保险资产管理机构、养老保险公司；“资管产品”包括银行理财产品、资金信托（包括集合资金信托、单一资金信托）、财产权信托、公开募集证券投资基金、特定客户资产管理计划、集合资产管理计划、定向资产管理计划、私募投资基金、债权投资计划、股权投资计划、股债结合型投资计划、资产支持计划、组合类保险资产管理产品、养老保障管理产品。

从税率上来看，56号文规定，按照3%的征收率缴纳增值税的简易计税方法对于资管行业来说是重大利好。首先，采用简易计税避免了管理人需要将进项税额“分摊”到不同产品的复杂过程;其次，考虑到资管产品运营中可抵扣项目不多的实际情况，3%征收率对于降低资管产品运营期间的税负将产生积极影响;最后，简易计税使得管理人可以比较准确地预测某一产品的税负情况，有助于投资者及时了解“税后净收益”。但同时需要注意的是，管理人需准确计算因用于简易计税方式而不得抵扣的进项税额并及时转出，以确保合规、降低风险。

4. 在2017年，对外资银行取消了哪些限制？

2017年3月17日，银监会发布《关于外资银行开展部分业务有关事项的通知》（银监办发〔2017〕12号，下称《通知》），外资法人银行可以依法投资境内银行业金融机构，贯彻中外一致原则。

银监会在《通知》中指出，在华外资银行可以与母行集团开展内部业务协作，为“走出去”的企业在境外发债、上市、并购、融资等活动提供综合金融服务，发挥外资银行的全球化综合服务优势。

此外，《通知》明确在华外资银行开展国债承销业务、财务顾问业务、大部分托管业务不需获得银监会的行政许可，采取事后报告制，在华外资银行开展上述业务活动应加强合规及风险管理。

2017年7月20日，银监会发布《关于修改<中资商业银行行政许可事项实施办法>的决定》（下称《决定》）。为保障《通知》中规定的政策措施落地，《决定》中增加了相应的入股条件：参照关于境外金融机构作为发起人或战略投资者入股中资商业银行的相关规定。这也意味着，未来外资银行既可以选择以境外母行为主体投资境内银行业金融机构，也可选择以在华法人银行为主体进行投资。

5. 您对中国的银行和金融业在未来12个月有什么展望？

从上述近一年各监管机关颁布的法规、通知、指引可见，未来金融监管将完善监管，在金融创新的同时将重点关注“去杠杆、去套利”等方面以防控风险，以监管处罚促改的监管力度将持续加大，并将出台、更新法规和制度以适应市场的新变化。

邢冬梅  管理合伙人

天达共和律师事务所

邢冬梅律师是天达共和律师事务所的管理合伙人，同时任北京朝阳律协副会长、中国银行业协会特聘专家顾问、北京市新社会阶层联谊会理事、中国青年企业家协会会员，以及际华集团股份有限公司、第一创业摩根大通证券独立董事、武汉大学法学院兼职教授。

邢律师法学本科毕业于中国政法大学，并持有北京大学法律硕士学位。她从业逾20年，为大型企业集团和金融机构提供各类金融、证券、并购等专项服务。邢律师的专长为公司、证券及金融业务。

目前，她常年担任十几家银行、信托、基金、证券公司的法律顾问。邢律师的客户包括中信集团、华润集团、国投集团等大型央企和建设银行、中信银行等多家银行、红杉资本等外资风险和股权投资基金等。

邢律师的工作语言为中文和英文。

张璇  合伙人

天达共和律师事务所

张璇律师是天达共和律师事务所的金融与融资部负责人，同时任北京市律师协会公司与公职委员会委员。

张律师本科毕业于山东理工大学英语系，并持有华东政法大学法律硕士学位。她曾作为中国司法部与英国司法部联合选拔的优秀青年律师赴英国进修，并在伦敦的诉讼和非诉律师事务所工作。

她拥有超过10年的银行与金融领域业务从业经验，为银监会、证监会及保监会监管项下的各类金融机构提供各类专项和常年法律服务，服务机构涵盖银行、信托公司、保险公司、基金管理公司及私募基金管理公司。曾承办红杉资本基金在中国境内投资项目、泰达荷银基金管理有限公司基金募集专项法律服务项目、泰达宏利基金管理有限公司基金产品专项法律服务项目等。

张律师的工作语言为中文和英文。