我國金融重建基金處理機制成果之研究

金融重建基金於100年底屆期結束，自90年7月設置至結束這10年間，總共處理了56家經營不善金融機構，花費總額為2,892億元，運用公共資金處理應受高度檢視及管理，其運作成效如何？是否有達成其設置之目的？值得去研究探討。本研究選取台東區中小企業銀行進行個案分析，剖析其經營失敗原因、分析其財務業務狀況、探討切割分包出售等標售策略及員工權益保障等退場過程。再針對金融監理機關、銀行等金融機構及資產管理公司進行問卷調查，採五點尺度的Likert量表計分，瞭解受試者對於該基金處理經營不善金融機構的成果與回歸存款保險限額保障機制之看法，依現行金融監理制度、運用公共資金處理、處理經營不善金融機構成效、員工及不法人員處置及回歸存款限額保障等五構面設計問項，共有40項命題。問卷分析結果顯示，受試者對於金融監理制度、金融重建基金處理成效以及回歸存款限額保障因應措施多數予以正面肯定，運用公共資金處理部份則視存款及股東權益等項目有不同看法，對於不法訴追速度及成效則持負面看法。最後提出七項建議：建議未來處理金融機構模式採取祕密標售及損失分攤機制、增強財務報表資訊揭露透明度、積極培訓專業金監人員、落實立即糾正措施、修訂法令，以確實對不法人員追究責任、調整存款保險費率，充實一般金融存款保險賠款特別準備金、持續宣導存款限額保障觀念。

關鍵字

金融重建基金；經營不善金融機構；接管；存款保險

並列摘要

Closed at the end of 2011, the financial restructuring fund had handled 56 distressed financial institutions in total over the past decade since July of 2001, with a total expense of NT$289.2 billion. They handled the cases by using public fund, which is supposed to be highly inspected and managed. So, how was the operation effectiveness, and has it achieved the establishment purpose? These issues deserve study and discussion. This study conducts a case study on the Taitung Business Bank, to explore the reason causing its operation failure, analyze its financial business status, and discuss its market withdrawal procedures including the staff equity guarantee and the auction strategies such as split and subconstructing sales. It also conducts a questionnaire survey on the Financial Supervision Institutions, the financial institutions such as Banks, and the Asset Management Companies, with the five-point Likert scale for grading. By doing so, it tries to understand the respondents’ views on the achievements of the distressed financial institutions handled by the fund and on the guarantee mechanism of recovering the deposit insurance limits. The 40-question questionnaire is designed based on five dimensions, namely, currently financial supervision system, application of public fund, achievement of handling the distressed financial institutions, treatments of the staff and offenders, and the guarantee of recovering the deposit insurance limits. According to the questionnaire analysis, most respondents show positive recognition on the financial supervision system, the handling achievements of financial restructuring fund, and guarantee measures for recovering the deposit insurance limits. Regarding the application of public fund, they show different views in terms of deposit and shareholder’s equity. When it comes to the efficiency and effectiveness of law proceeding, they show negative views. Finally, seven suggestions are proposed. 1) the model of handling the financial institutions in the future should adopt the secret auction and the loss sharing mechanism. 2) the information disclosure transparency of the financial statement should be strengthened. 3) the financial supervision personnel should be trained actively. 4) Prompt Corrective Action should be implemented. 5) the laws should be revised to investigate the liabilities against the law-breakers. 6) the deposit insurance ratio should be adjusted to prepare the general financial deposit insurance payout special reserves. 7) the concept of deposit insurance guarantee should be advocated continuously.