- 期刊
美國Dodd-Frank Act有關證券化利益衝突規範之評析－給台灣的借鏡
The Analysis for the Conflict of Interest in Securitization in Dodd-Frank Act: An Experience for Taiwan
摘要
「證券化」，是一種須結合商業銀行、投資銀行、資產管理機構（例如共同基金、避險基金、私募股權基金等）、特定目的機構及保險公司等相關機構共同參與的架構式金融。因為此種資金融通方式已突破過去銀行、證券監理法制的區劃，致難以將之納入在主管機關監管範圍之內。美國次級房貸風暴即起因於證券化參與機構敵用其代理人「資訊不對稱」的優勢地位，造成對本人之「利益衝突」。加上從事證券化之各金融機構介入彼此領域過深，金融體系在骨牌效應影響下，產生「系統性風險」，最後必須由聯邦政府利用納稅義務人的稅金進行補貼，造成「逆選擇」現象。美國為因應全球金融海嘯，國會通過了「多德．法蘭克華爾街改革與消費者保護法」。其中，第621條「伏爾克法則」及第619條「利益衝突法則」，即是防範金融機構從事證券化業務利益衝突之重要規範。前者，在處理證券化參與者對投資人所造成的利益衝突問題；後者，則在限制大型金融機構為自己之利益擁有、投資或發行避險基金、私募股權基金或進行任何「自營交易」，造成大到不能倒的利益衝突問題。本文引介此二法則，評析其利弊得失，並探討台灣目前金融法規中有關利益衝突防範規範不足之處。希望截長補短，用供未來本土化立法可能性之參酌，或作為解釋適用現有金融法規之理論上參據。
並列摘要
Securitization is a measure of structured finance that must joint commercial bank, asset management institutions (such as mutual funds, hedge funds, private equity funds, etc.), special purpose vehicle (SPV), insurance companies, and other related agencies to participate. It confuses the traditional separation of banking and securities activities that it is hard to be supervised by related financial authorities. U.S. subprime mortgage crisis was resulted from the presence of conflict of interest involving the information asymmetry between securitization participants and investors. Moreover, entered each participant's inherent field too deeply, systematic risk is easy to bring out when a participant faced insolvency or bankruptcy. In the end, Federal Government pushed bailout plan to solve systematic risk problem by using taxpayers' fund. And then, the market faced an adverse selection problem. U.S. Congress passed the ＂Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act＂ in 2010. It was a legislative response to the global financial tsunami and it was the largest financial regulation overhaul since the 1930s. Among them, Section619 ＂Volcker rule＂ and Section 621 ＂Conflicts of Interest Rule＂ are very important regulations providing useful tools to address too big to fail problem and conflicts of interests problem in securitization. Section619 is the rule to prevent banks from engaging in the high-risk activities of proprietary trading and limit conflicts of interest in such proprietary trading or other trading-related activities. Section 621 is the rule to prohibit participant who structures or sells an asset-backed security or a product composed of asset-backed securities from going short, in the specified timeframe, on what they have sold. In this article, I introduce such two rules and comment its pros and cons, then describe and analyze Taiwan's current financial regulations relating to prevent conflicts of interest. I hope my opinion in this article could contribute to the future legislation or could as a explain theory for application of financial regulations in judicial review.