The members of rural collective economic organizations enjoy a composite membership right that includes both property and non-property right.Individual members of the collective must rely on their ‘household’to exercise these rights，that is，‘exercising right by household’.This rule for exercising rights has been retained throughout various land system reforms and the newly enacted Rural Collective Economic Organizations Law （2024）continues to uphold this rule.The causes of this rule mainly include the intrinsic motivation of the‘household-based’culture，the consistent roughness of the membership rights system under collective land ownership，and the influence of the political jurisprudence prior to the reform and opening up.As long as the system of collective member rights remains incomplete，this special rule for exercising rights will persist，driven by the powerful cultural inertia and functional attributes displayed in the logic of institutional change，as well as a rational return of historical and cultural origins of the “household-based” tradition in China.While recognizing the importance of cultural inertia，it is also essential to address the inherent issues of ‘exercising rights by households’，namely，that collective members are dependent on their ‘households’ and are long constrained by it，which can obscure the individual membership rights of members.These practical issues cannot be overlooked.Within the context of the third plenary session of the 20th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China proposing to consolidate and improve the basic rural management system and deepen land system reform，and based on goals such as social equity and justice and the clarity of property rights pursued by modern property law，‘household’ should not be identified as the subject of membership rights.The reform direction should focus on improving the membership rights system in the future.