چکیده:
The devaluation of money has been one of the economic issues of Iran over the last three decades. To counter its unfavorable consequences based on jurisprudential and economic reasons, the 'Theory of Compensating for the Devaluation of Money' has been proposed in Iran through the indexing of debts, and the addition of a note to Article 1082 of the Civil Code—granting bank interest by calculating the inflation rate of consumer goods and services as compensation for the devaluation of money—has become recognized as law. This article, using an analytical and comparative method, first: examines the jurisprudential and economic evaluation of the theory of compensating for the devaluation of money and second: raises the practical problems resulting from the application of this theory in the economy of Iran. The research hypothesis is that due to theoretical and practical reasons, indexing is not an appropriate method for compensating for the devaluation of money.
خلاصه ماشینی:
To counter its undesirable consequences based on jurisprudential and economic reasons, the "theory of compensating for the devaluation of money" through the indexing of debts has been proposed in Iran, and the addition of a note to Article 2801 of the Civil Code, granting bank interest by calculating the inflation rate of consumer goods and services as compensation for the devaluation of money, has become recognized as law.
In the theory of compensating for the devaluation of money in term payments, especially in loans, compensation for the devaluation of money is necessary because: First: Compensation for the devaluation of money is not included in the true definition of riba (increase); Second: The becoming qimi (non-fungible) of money over time due to the economic transformations of the present era necessitates compensation for the devaluation of money; Third: Failure to compensate for the devaluation of money in term exchanges contradicts the principle of "adam al-zulm" (non-oppression) which governs all transactions, and purchasing power is the only criterion for implementing justice in term transactions; Fourth: The rule of la darar (no harm) (Mousavi, 1377, pp.
Some jurists have argued for the compensation of the devaluation of money as follows: The decrease in the value of real (metallic) moneys is not guaranteed; because their materiality arises from their own essence, but credit money, since it does not possess consumption value in itself and is only used in trade, its exchange value characteristic and purchasing power are considered a real attribute in the view of custom and rational people, and like other attributes, it is guaranteed.
(
, 
, 
)
