题名 |
中美影子銀行之比較-自影子銀行特性及監理層面探討 |
并列篇名 |
The Comparison of Shadow Banks in the US and China - From the Aspects of their Characteristics and Regulations |
作者 |
王儷容(Lee-Rong Wang) |
关键词 |
Shadow Bank ; Supervision ; Regulation ; Disintermediation ; Regulatory Arbitrage ; Subprime Crisis ; Leverage Activities |
期刊名称 |
兩岸金融季刊 |
卷期/出版年月 |
4卷4期(2016 / 12 / 01) |
页次 |
1 - 26 |
内容语文 |
繁體中文 |
中文摘要 |
本文針對中美影子銀行加以比較。與既有文獻不同處,在於本文自影子銀行特性與監理兩大面向探討,涉及層面較廣。另外,本文將研究重點放在東西方兩大經濟體中國大陸與美國,其分別是新興市場國家與已開發國家中影子銀行規模最大者,如此可對影子銀行進行較為聚焦之探究。在影子銀行特性之比較上,美國影子銀行之主要形成原因係金融脫媒而產生,而大陸影子銀行之主要形成原因為監理套利。在撤資風險上,美國主要來自商業票據或回購市場提供資金者,大陸則主要來自期限較短之理財產品。中大陸影子銀行相關交易主要在零售市場,美國影子銀行相關交易主要在批發市場,後者國際聯結程度相當高,故導致次貸危機效應很快席捲全球。對於影子銀行監理之比較,本文認為中美兩國對於影子銀行之監理原則類似,皆鼓勵影子銀行之發展。在監理機構之設立上,美國設立了一個由多方參與的金融穩定監督委員會,大陸則依舊維持之前「一行三會」的分業監管模式。針對監理對象,美國加強對原先不受監理或少受監理的影子銀行實體的監理,如將大型的對沖基金等納入;大陸則首次把銀行和信託理財的資金池業務、擔保公司等信用中介機構納入影子銀行範疇。針對金融衍生性商品監理,美國將大部分場外衍生品移入交易所和清算中心進行交易和監理;大陸則在槓桿率方面採取較為謹慎做法。在強化對傳統銀行的監理上,美國限制傳統銀行的自營交易;大陸則要求銀行從制度設計、業務操作、監管指標等六大方面落實。 |
英文摘要 |
This paper compares the shadow banks of China and those of the US. The contribution of this paper relatively to previous literature is, on the one hand, its wider angles by covering both characteristics and supervision of shadow banks, and, on the other hand, its focusing on the two countries, the US and China, with the largest scale of shadow banks in developed and newly industrialized countries, respectively. In the aspect of characteristics comparison, the formation of American shadow banks is due to disintermediation, whereas Chinese shadow banks are arisen from regulatory arbitrage. In addition, the major risk of capital withdrawing within American shadow banks comes from the commercial paper and repurchasing markets, in contrast, the same risk within Chinese shadow banks lies in the wealth management products with shorter maturity. The trading business of Chinese shadow banks are mainly in the retail markets, nevertheless, those of American shadow banks are mainly in the wholesale markets. Lastly, the degree of the international linkage of shadow banks in the US is much higher, relatively to that in China, leading to spreading the subprime crisis to the rest of the world. As to the comparison on regulation, this paper deploys from five aspects---regulation principle, the establishment of regulatory agencies, regulation targets, regulation on financial derivatives, and the enhancement of the regulation on traditional banks. For instance, regulation principles on shadow banks are similar in these two countries, both encouraging development of shadow banks. With regard to regulation on derivatives, the US moved most over-the-counter derivatives into centralized exchanges, however, China adopted cautious attitude towards leverage activities. |
主题分类 |
社會科學 >
經濟學 |
参考文献 |
|
被引用次数 |