在企业租赁经营中,许多人认为,当承租人为个人或合伙时,存在负亏能力差的问题。承租人提供作为风险保证的个人财产,与企业经营不善时可能发生的亏损数额,往往相差悬殊,结果仍是出租人即国家承担亏损风险,而承租人则只能负盈而终难负亏。这个问题甚至被视为租赁制的难点之一。我认为承租人担保财产与企业可能亏损额相差悬殊的问题,确实客观存在,但这并不能说明承租人负亏能力差。因为负亏能力之强弱,要以承租人存在负亏义务为前提,并据此来衡量。根据目前法律规定,在现有形式的租赁经营中,承租人根本不应负有承担全部经营亏损的 In the business of leasing, many people think that when the lessee is an individual or a partnership, there is a problem of poor profitability. The personal property provided by the lessee as a risk guarantee is often disproportionate to the amount of losses that may occur when the enterprise fails to operate. As a result, the lessor risks losing money, while the lessee can only afford to lose profits. This problem is even seen as one of the difficulties of the leasing system. In my opinion, the issue of the disparity between the lessee’s guaranteed property and the loss potential of the enterprise does exist objectively. However, this does not mean that the lessee has a poor ability to handle losses. Because of the strength of the ability to bear or endure, the lessee must assume the obligation of loss as a precondition, and accordingly to measure. According to the current law, in the existing form of leasing business, the lessee should not bear all the operating losses