履約擔保工具研析－從科專計畫契約談起

現行經濟部依據促進產業升級條例第二十二條之一第二項規定爲鼓勵科技研發，對企業進行補助，並與受補助者簽訂補助契約。而爲確保補助計畫之執行與補助契約之履行，執行補助機關會要求受補助者提供「本票」或「銀行保證書」，作爲確保債權滿足的法律手段，然此與其他類型契約慣用之擔保工具一如工程契約中之擔保信用狀、融資契約中之不動產抵押權，航空器、船舶抵押權以及機器、設備之動產抵押權等迥異，其中的差異何在？政府補助契約所要求之擔保工具是否足夠，其風險何在？本文認爲特定類型契約履約擔保工具之使用有其成因，包括法律強制規定、取得成本、近便性等。現行部分政府補助契約所要求的履約擔保，乃鑑於補助契約屬私經濟行政，主要在踐行政策目標，違約風險低，故不宜使受補助企業負擔過多的擔保工具取得成本。因之，現行政府補助契約所使用之履約擔保工具尚屬妥適而無更易之必要。

關鍵字

科專計畫；補助；履約擔保；補助契約；私經濟行政

並列摘要

To encourage Technology R & D, Ministry of Economic Affairs conducts business subsidy according to Article 22-1, Section 2 of Statute for Upgrading Industries and forms subsidy contracts with businesses which accept subsidy. To assure the execution of the subsidy plan and the performance of the subsidy contract, businesses accepting subsidy will be asked to provide promissory notes or bank guarantees as security for the claim. However, the said guarantee means are quite different from that often used in other types of contracts, like standby credits in construction contract, real property mortgage in finance contract, aircraft and ship mortgage, mortgage on machines and equipments etc.. What are their differences? Would the guarantee means required by government subsidy contract be enough? What kind of risks are involved? This article is of the opinion that there are causes of using certain guarantee tools in certain types of contracts, including law provision, acquisition cost, accessibility etc.. Seeing that subsidy contract belongs to treasury administration, which mainly achieves policy goal, and has lower default risk. It is not appropriate to make businesses accepting subsidy bear too much guarantee acquisition cost. Therefore, guarantees required by government subsidy contract for the time being are appropriate and do not need to change.