The polished facade of online lending often presents borrowing as simple and easy, but the true cost of repayment frequently lies hidden beneath the surface. Regulatory authorities are now directly confronting these hidden practices.
The past March witnessed intensive regulatory action in the loan facilitation industry. The National Financial Regulatory Administration held talks with five major platforms, including "Niwodai," urging them to standardize marketing practices, clearly disclose all loan fees, strictly adhere to personal information protection regulations, conduct lawful debt collection, and improve customer complaint mechanisms to protect financial consumers' rights.
This move responds to a significant increase in financial consumer complaints, which surged 118% from 6,778 cases in 2024 to 14,791 cases in 2025. Common issues included privacy breaches, unauthorized contact with borrowers' personal networks, and harassment of unrelated third parties.
The talks were merely a prelude to stricter measures. New regulations effective August 1 this year mandate that all personal loan businesses must provide a unified cost disclosure table. Any hidden charges under names like guarantee fees or service fees will no longer be permitted outside this comprehensive financing cost statement.
The industry's fundamental logic is being rewritten, forcing platforms to transition from profiting through information asymmetry to operating with full transparency. Platforms like "Niwodai," already mired in customer complaints, now face a critical test of survival as regulations tighten.
On the Niwodai app, borrowers encounter advertised rates as low as 7.2% APR, with claims that fees for a 1,000 yuan loan can be as low as 0.11 yuan per day. However, these low rates often prove illusory. A borrower named Zhang Xin (pseudonym) reported taking a 10,000 yuan loan from Niwodai in 2025 with 12 monthly installments of 999.87 yuan. While the apparent interest totaled 1,998.44 yuan, suggesting an APR of about 19.98%, the actual cost calculated using the Internal Rate of Return (IRR) method—which accounts for decreasing principal—revealed a true annualized financing cost of 35%.
This exceeds the 24% annualized cap on comprehensive financing costs for new loans set by regulatory guidelines. When questioned, the platform informed Zhang that 102 yuan of each payment was a "guarantee fee," excluded from the interest calculation. The platform claimed this fee was necessary due to her credit history, which Zhang disputes, stating she had no credit issues and had even secured a car loan the same year.
Loan platforms often use various fees—guarantee fees, membership fees, service fees—that are not included in advertised rates. The critical questions are whether these fees are incorporated into the comprehensive APR, fully disclosed before borrowing, and if their separation creates a misleading impression of low rates masking high actual costs.
This fee-splitting structure allows platforms to seemingly comply with rate display rules while maintaining high effective yields. In one reported case, a Mr. Liang borrowed 10,000 yuan from Niwodai at a displayed rate of 13.41%, but the actual IRR reached 59.64%, with an additional service fee equal to 25% of the principal.
The new "one-table" disclosure rule is expected to eliminate such practices. Furthermore, Zhang Xin reported never receiving a copy of her loan contract despite repeated requests, with the platform citing a 40-day processing delay that stretched over two months without resolution.
After discovering the unreasonable rates, Zhang halted repayments and subsequently faced intense harassment, including threats to her personal safety, and continues to receive 5-6 debt collection calls daily. Her experience is not unique; complaints about aggressive collection, unauthorized credit checks, and information leaks are widespread, with over 96,000 complaints related to Niwodai on public platforms.
The regulatory message is clear: financial services cannot infringe on personal peace and privacy. Risk models relying on privacy violations and pressure tactics are no longer acceptable. For platforms, establishing compliant post-lending management systems is essential for survival.
These operational issues have triggered a sell-off in the stock market. Since the start of 2026, shares of Jiayin Group Inc., Niwodai's parent company, have continued their decline, falling approximately 32% year-to-date and over 78% from last year's high. The drop followed the release of the company's latest financial report.
Jiayin Group reported facilitating approximately 129 billion yuan in loan transactions for full-year 2025, with revenue of about 6.22 billion yuan and a net profit of approximately 1.54 billion yuan, equating to daily earnings of around 4.2 million yuan. However, fourth-quarter figures showed a significant slowdown, with facilitated transaction volume dropping 31% to 24.2 billion yuan and revenue falling 36% to 1.09 billion yuan compared to the quarterly averages from the first three quarters.
Amid stricter regulations, the platform has neither offset the volume decline with higher per-transaction profits nor demonstrated new growth drivers, indicating constraints on its previous reliance on fee structures and traffic expansion.
Market focus has shifted from growth speed to quality. The stock decline reflects repricing of compliance risks, doubts about profit sustainability, and concerns over growth dependent on high-cost投入. Pure transaction volume no longer impresses investors, who now prioritize asset quality and regulatory compliance. The nearly 80% erosion in Jiayin Group's market value signifies a loss of market confidence.
With less than six months until the new rules take effect, platforms like Niwodai face not just tighter regulation but a fundamental business model overhaul. Profit strategies built on information asymmetry and fee segmentation are being dismantled. The loan facilitation industry is entering a more transparent and intensely competitive phase where all costs must be justified, and all profits must withstand scrutiny. Platforms operating at the规则's edge will inevitably be淘汰.
Comments