各营业网点柜员应当面为客户完成企业网银签约及认证工具发放，若客户因故无法到现场，可暂时代客户保管认证工具，后续再行发放

对于异地客户（公司注册地非深圳的客户）、重点关注客户，开户行必须按照规定上门核实，上门核实应包括并不限于客户注册地址与经营场所真实存在、客户开户意愿真实可信等内容

需上门核实的开户申请只需填报留存《中国银行深圳分行开立人民币单位银行结算账户上门实地核实情况表》，无需填写《账户尽职调查报告》按流程完成审批，与开户档案一起存档备查

珠宝、古董、艺术品交易行业的企业客户，核心系统风险等级无需手工调整为E

分行以下机构（含分行）为涉及政要人士的客户建立客户关系必须经过分行行领导审批

原则上，一次性代办借记卡的数据量不得超过3张（含代理多人或代理1人）

代理开立的借记卡，应将卡片置于未激活状态，柜员需明确告知需持卡人本人持有效身份证件办理激活

批量开立客户号和账户时，应要求委托单位准确采集申请人有效身份证件、手机号等重要身份信息并盖章确认，其中，申请人的手机号码允许留存财务人员手机号

个人客户至网点柜台申请开通电子银行服务或申请电子银行市场细分升级时可以使用临时身份证

移动POS设备未支持联网核查功能的，禁止用于借记卡激活业务

对于开卡申请人因行动不便等原因不能前往银行网点，网点可采取柜台延伸服务等方式办理

开立个人网银时，已分配客户的认证工具应由网点经办人员在核对实物和凭证上的序列号一致后当场递交申请人

对于新开借记卡客户，应预留本人实名登记手机号码，确无手机号码的，拒绝为其开立借记卡

公司客户申请开立一般存款账户，若已在分行辖内网点开立基本账户，开户行在办理时无需审核开户资料，只需核对客户提供的开户资料与基本户录入资料是否一致

公司客户营业执照注册地非深圳市时，开户行可委托异地中行见证核实

对于法定代表人（单位负责人）未亲自到场由被授权人办理相关开户手续的，应通过法定代表人（单位负责人）在我行预留联系方式进行电话核实开户意愿真实性

根据规定，代理开立的借记卡，应将卡片置于未激活状态，并告知需持卡人本人持有效身份证件办理激活

受理对私业务大额交易时，对代办需审核代理人与账户人双方有效身份证件，并与账户人进行电话核实，做好核实记录

受理对公结算业务时，依据监管规定，各行应建立对公客户大额查证制度，与客户建立两个以上主管热线联系人；如客户只预留一个热线查证联系人，须由客户提出书面申请并说明理由

对于企业同名账户之间资金划转、与客户签订的协议办理划款、购付汇支出、涉及保密需要的军队武警发生的支付业务等以上柜面大额交易业务，如未发现交易异常或可疑情形的，可免于大额交易热线查证

派驻业务经理应监督查证人员与客户约定的大额交易有权确认人进行热线查证，并予以确认

代办大额交易中，电话核实中的手机号优先使用代办人提供的手机号

同一网点为客户办理单笔或同时办理多笔大额转账汇款交易累计金额超过等值1000万元（不含），须由管辖支行指定财运部大额交易核实人员与账户人进行电话核实

在办理大额交易热线查证时，业务经办人员与查证、登记人员岗位需分离

涉及保密需要的军队武警发生的柜面大额交易业务可直接免于大额交易热线查证

银行承兑汇票到期收款如无异常或可疑情形可免于大额交易热线查证

客户尽职调查是做好制裁合规管理的重要基础，直接影响客户风险评级、交易监控、制裁风险管控的质量

各业务部门和机构要按照“谁的客户谁负责”的原则，完善实施细则，做好客户端尽职调查

对私跨境汇款收款人为企业的该笔汇款涉及资本、投资项下，且不违反外汇合规要求和我行反洗钱、制裁政策的，可叙做

跨境汇款尽职调查时需要前后台分离

对于代理行发送的反洗钱查询，业务发起机构不需要确保对跨境汇款代理行查询回复及时性

对于临时客户在监管限额下频繁办理现金交易，单笔现金交易金额较大，只要客户出示身份证即可办理

对于我行私行级以上的客户家属过来办理临时业务，可不必开展身份识别，并在核心创建临时客户号

客户可持临时身份证在我行创建临时客户号

对于未在我行开立账户的客户，不需开展身份识别，也不需记录客户信息即可开展业务

临时客户频繁在我行开立或兑付连号票据的，不需加强开展尽职调查

未经授权机构不得开办银行承兑汇票承兑业务

以存单作质押，应到存款行将单位存款证实书置换为单位活期存单，并办理存单冻结手续

公募产品与私募产品允许统一营销和管理，但严禁将私募产品销售给大众投资者

客户办理电子商业汇票业务，需与我行签署服务协议，开通网上银行电子相关服务功能

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What do Jones and Klenow think of the comparison between France and the U.S. in terms of real consumption per person?___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What is an advantage of the Jones-Klenow method?___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What can we infer from the passage about American people’s economic well-being?___

大学生的成才目标是___。

现代人才素质的灵魂是___。

___是人才素质的基础.

世界政治格局发展的必然趋势是___。

在全面发展的教育中德、智、体、美是缺一不可，统一存在的，其中处于主导地位的是___。

时代精神的内涵十分丰富，其中___居于核心地位。

民族精神是一个民族赖以生存和发展的精神支撑。中华民族在五千年的发展中所形成的伟大民族精神的核心是___。

下列名言反映中华民族是一个艰苦奋斗的民族的有___。

___是人才素质的基本内容

10。___是我们立党立国的根本指导思想

衡量大学生全面发展的一个重要标准是___

独立生活意识指___

___作为社会主义核心价值体系的精髓，解决的是应当具备什么样的精神状态和精神风貌的问题。

___是人才素质的综合体现.

人们对生活在其中的世界及人与世界的关系的总的看法和根本观点就是___

人生观的核心是___

人的本质属性是___

社会主义社会人生价值标准是___

回答人为什么活着___

表明人应当怎样对待生活___

判别什么样的人生才有意义___

下列人生态度中正确的是___

下列属于正确的人生目的的是___

___认为,金钱可以主宰一切.

___ 认为，社会和他人是达到个人目的的手段。

___认为，人生的全部内容就在于满足感官的需求与快乐。

马克思对于人的本质的论断确立与___

人与自然关系的实质是___

在社会交往和公共生活中公民应该遵守的道德准则是___

社会公德最基本的要求是___

通过其规定和实施，影响人们思想，培养和提高人们法律意识，引导人们依法行为的作用是法律的___

有序的公共生活是构建和谐社会的___

一行人在过路口时迎面遇到红灯，看到近处没有车辆便径直通过。他这样做是___

任何一个社会成员，无论具有何种身份、职业和地位，都必须在公共生活中遵守社会公德。这体现了社会公德具有的___特点。

影响公共生活、公共秩序、文明礼貌、清洁卫生以及其他影响社会生活的最主要行为规范是___

《公民道德建设实施纲要》明确指出，社会公德涵盖了___

为调整和规范人类社会生活三大领域，相应分别形成了___