美國與我國信託受託人投資義務之比較研究

A Comparative Study on Investment Duties of Trustees Between The United States and Taiwan

袁代秦(TAI-CHIN YUAN)

指導教授 ： 葉賽鶯

中原大學/商學院/財經法律研究所/碩士(2008年)

https://doi.org/10.6840/cycu200900623

摘要

信託之運用日漸普及，而信託財產為信託之重心，故信託財產之保存始終為
受託人義務的重心，受託人針對信託財產進行之投資行為自有其重要性。隨著金
融環境的快速變遷，投資工具推陳出新，受託人擁有眾多投資種類可供選擇，然
而現今投資項目五花八門，投資伴隨而來之風險亦相異甚大，受託人將信託財產
予以投資時，自應更加謹慎進行，不得恣意為之。為防範受託人不當投資之行為
對於信託財產造成不必要的風險，實應對信託受託人之投資行為提供明確之依據
及標準。
本文首先討論我國法之規定，我國信託相關法規並未區分受託人對於信託財
產之管理權限及投資權限，而對受託人課以不同之注意義務標準，一律要求受託
人應盡善良管理人之注意義務，且僅為係抽象之定義性規定，欠缺具體、明確之
內涵。其次，由於美國信託法制對於受託人投資義務之發展已久，早期移植傳統、
保守的英國標準，嚴格限制受託人僅得將信託財產投資於政府債券等法院認為屬
於安全之標的。美國法院隨後因應時代潮流及需要，陸續發展出「謹慎之人法則」
及「法定投資表」等理論，至1992 年，美國法律協會修正信託法律整編第三版，
並以現代投資組合理論為基礎，建立因時制宜之「謹慎投資人法則」，美國受託
人投資標準已日趨完備，本文遂進一步就美國之案例及相關法規予以介紹及探
討。此外，受託人可區非為專業及非專業，兩者在許多方面均有所不同，美國實
務亦有認為對於不同類型之受託人應採取不同程度之投資義務標準。最後，本文
將我國及美國之受託人投資義務規範綜合比較及檢討，且由於我國受託人投資義
務的規定付之闕如，建議宜借鑒美國的「法定投資表」及「謹慎投資人法則」等
相關規範，具體規範我國受託人投資義務，並進一步修正相關規定。

關鍵字

信託受託人

並列摘要

Preserving trust property and making it productive historically
have been a fundamental duty of a trustee. A trustee is under a duty to
invest the funds in the trust, in order to achieve a further profit to the
fund. Therefore a trustee’s investment behaviors are of great
importance to trust property. There are significant market factors that
influence a trustee’s investment behavior and the investment
decision-making process. New improved investment vehicles are
introduced to the public almost everyday and all investments always
entail some degree of risk. However, different investment classes have
varying levels of risk and potential returns. In order to prevent improper
risk of investment and reduce the loss, it is necessary to provide specific
rules and guides for a trustee to make more prudent investing and
financial decisions.
First, this paper introduces and examines the relevant rules and
development of the trust laws of Taiwan regarding trustees’ investment
duty. Second, this paper provides an overview of the historical evolution
of American fiduciary investment standards and introduces the
American leading cases of trustee investment. By the early nineteenth
century, the traditional English standard centered on the notion that
only government securities offered enough safety to merit investment
by trustees. As a developing nation, America could not successfully
import this standard. Consequently, American courts started to
consider whether American trustees could participate in a more
expansive range of trust investments. American courts formulated
the ”prudent man rule” for trust investment. Provided that a trustee
used good judgment and care, he could employ any category of
investment, including more speculative holding like common stocks. By
the middle of the nineteenth century, the courts refined the prudent
man rule, and the broad principles narrowed into specific rules called
“legal list”. Legal List codified permissible trust investment and
generally limited trustees to choices among certain fixed income debt
instruments or bonds. Over times, changes in business and economic
conditions made the restrictive nature of these lists increasingly
impractical. The desire among academics and professionals alike has
been to bring both modern economic theory and common sense to
contemporary trust management. As a result, Restatement (Third) of
Trust-Prudent Investor Rule, adopted by the American Law Institution
in 1992, replies on modern portfolio theory to anchor the new “prudent
investor rule”. Under prudent investor rule, trustees may now utilize a
wider array of modern investments and can better respond to the
ever-changing market conditions that they face. Besides, there are
critical distinctions between professional and non-professionals
trustees such as differences in settlors’ expections and objections,
negotiation settings, monitoring costs, and the trustees’ responses to
liability. American courts gradually have developed two sets of fiduciary
standards for between professional and non-professionals trustees. In
the end, this paper proposes an adjustment of Taiwan legislation to
adopt the primary elements of “legal list” and “the prudent investor
rule” as described in Restatement (Third) so that trustees will follow the
specific standard to fulfill their obligations of investment.

並列關鍵字

Investment Duties

參考文獻

財政部金融局、中華民國加強儲蓄推行委員會金融研究小組（1993）。

發展成果報告之六（2002）。

28. 陳福雄，《信託原理》，台北，華泰文化事業股份有限公司，初版（2003）。

6. 許兆慶，〈美國信託法律適用法則簡析〉，法令月刊，第57 卷第10 期

6. 許復欣，《董事信託義務之研究－以注意義務為中心－》，中原大學財經