Trade finance evolution: a comparative study of regulatory reforms in factoring policies for SMEs in India and China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper evaluates the effectiveness of the Factoring Regulation (Amendment) Bill 2021 in stabilizing the economic situation of micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) in India using doctrinal research methods and comparative study. It compared the factoring regulations of India and China. The authors analyse the ramifications of the recent amendments to the Factoring law via a comprehensive literature review, legal frameworks, and comparative analysis of India and China. This study seeks to cast light on the potential of the Factoring Law in addressing the financial challenges encountered by SMEs in India. The findings provide policymakers, stakeholders, and researchers with vital insights into the regulatory framework's effectiveness and potential improvement areas. The research concluded that factoring is an important worldwide trade financing tool for economic development and financial inclusion since it promotes entrepreneurship, private enterprise, and supply chain finance. In order to raise its standing, India may consider adopting features from the Chinese Civil Code, setting regulations for factoring rights transfer, and prioritising creditor interests.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".