由經濟觀點論金融市場上以衍生性商品進行市場投機之管制

Regulation of Speculation in the Financial Market by Derivative Instruments: From the Economic Perspective

10.6199/NTULJ.2010.39.03.04

陳肇鴻(Chao-Hung Chen)

投機 ； 避險 ； 衍生性商品 ； 期貨 ； 信用違約交換 ； 經濟分析 ； 系統性風險 ； 賭博 ； 保險利益 ； 集中清算 ； speculation ； hedging ； derivatives ； futures ； credit default swap ； economic analysis ； systemic risk ； gambling wagering ； insurable interest ； clearing

臺大法學論叢

39卷3期（2010 / 09 / 01）

167 - 222

繁體中文

本文認為，市場投機本身係經由承擔風險以獲利的行為，經由衍生性商品進行市場投機可協助避險、撮合市場以及協助完整化投資市場，然而，純粹的投機行為可能造成市場效率的淨損失並產生外部成本，並可能衍生資訊不對稱以及濫用市場的問題，甚至可能造成系統性風險，這些可構成限制市場投機的理由。本文以為，於台灣現行法下，可維持以金融機構為中心的規範模式之上，以限制投機交易及減少風險擴大的方式來控制利用衍生性商品進行投機的潛在問題；另就零售市場方面，可更進一步採取若干程度的直接產品規範，以更明確化合約內容以及當事人間的權利義務關係，以減少一般投資人利用衍生性商品投機的不良影響。

This article argues that market speculation is a conduct to acquire benefits by undertaking risk. Derivative instruments are powerful tools for market participants to conduct market speculation, which may help hedging, market making and completing investment market. However, pure and excessive speculation might cause net loss of market efficiency and create external costs. Some speculative transactions may imply asymmetric information. Market speculation might also lead to market abuse and even systemic risk. These reasons provide the basis to regulate market speculation by derivatives trading. This paper argues that Taiwan law might build on current regulatory model centring on the type of financial institution and devise legal rules to restraint the amount of speculative transactions and to avoid risk from spreading in order to contain problems from market speculation. In addition, in the retail market, Taiwan law might employ a certain degree of direct product regulation in order to clarify terms of relevant derivative contracts and the rights and obligations of parties in order to reduce the negative consequences of speculation/investment by way of derivative instruments.

1. ISDA (1995-2009). Summaries of market survey results. Retrieved September 3, 2009, from http://www.isda.org/
2. Turner L. (2009, March 27). The Turner review: A regulatory response to the global banking crisis. Retrieved May 22, 2009, from http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/other/turner_review.pdf
3. 中華民國證券商業同業公會（2008）。〈台灣資本市場發展白皮書〉，載於中華民國證券商業同業公會網站http://www.csa.org.tw/downdoc/doc/台灣資本市場發展白皮書.pdf（最後瀏覽日：07/03/2009）。（Taiwan Securities Association [2008]. Taiwan Big Bang. Retrieved July 3, 2009, from the website of the Taiwan Securities Association: http://www.csa.org.tw/downdoc/doc/台灣資本市場發展白皮書.pdf.）
4. Aranson, P. H.,Miller, R. L.(1980).Economic aspects of public gaming.Conneticut Law Review,12,822-853.
5. Avgouleas, E.(2005).The mechanics and regulation of market abuse: A legal and economic analysis.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
6. Bair, S. C.(1995).Lessons from the Barings collapse.Fordham Law Review,64,1-10.
7. Bianco, J. J.(1977).The mechanics of futures trading: Speculation and manipulation.Hofstra Law Review,6,27-40.
8. Chen, C.-h. C.(2009).Information disclosure, risk trading and the nature of derivative instruments: From common law perspective.National Taiwan University Law Review,4(1),1-53.
9. Chen, C.-h. C.(2009).The boundary of futures regulation: From UK and US judgments regarding commodity forward contracts.Soochow Law Journal,6(1),165-197.
10. Clark, G. W.(1978).Genealogy and genetics of "contract of sale of a commodity for future delivery" in the Commodity Exchange Act.Emory Law Journal,27,1175-1223.
11. Cooter, R.,Ulen, T.(2000).Law and economics.Reading:Addison-Wesley.
12. Das, S.(2006).Structured products volume 2: Equity; commodity; credit & new markets.Singapore:John Wiley & Sons.
13. Das, S.(2006).Derivative Products & Pricing.Singapore:John Wiley & Sons.
14. Das, S.(2006).Traders, guns & money : Knowns and unknowns in the dazzling world of derivatives.Harlow:Financial Times Prentice Hall.
15. Das, S.(2006).Risk management.Singapore:John Wiley & Sons.
16. Eppel, D.(2002).Risky business: Responding to OTC derivative crises.Columbia Journal of Transnational Law,40,677.
17. Fishel, D. R.,Ross, D. J.(1991).Should the law prohibit "manipulation" in financial markets?.Harvard Law Review,105,503-553.
18. Gerding, E. F.(2007).Laws against bubbles: An experimental-asset-market approach to analyzing financial regulation.Wisconsin Law Review,2007,977-1039.
19. Giddens, A.(1999).Risk and responsibility.The Modern Law Review,62(1),1-10.
20. Hazen, T. L.(2005).Disparate regulatory schemes for parallel activities: Securities regulation, derivatives regulation, gambling, and insurance.Anniversary Review of Banking & Financial Law,24,375-441.
21. Henderson, S. K.(2003).Henderson on derivatives.London:LexisNexis Butterworths..
22. HMSO(1951).Report of the royal commission on betting, lotteries and gaming, 1949-1951.London:HMSO.
23. Hu, H. T. C.,Black, B.(2008).Equity and debt decoupling and empty voting II: Importance and extensions.University of Pennsylvania Law Review,156,625-739.
24. Hu, H. T. C.,Black, B.(2006).The new vote buying: Empty voting and hidden (morphable) ownership.Southern California Law Review,79,811-908.
25. Huang, P. H.(2000).A normative analysis of new financially engineered derivatives.Southern California Law Review,73,471-521.
26. Hudson, A.(2006).The law on financial derivatives.London:Sweet & Maxwell.
27. Hurt, C.(2006).Regulating public morals and private markets: Online securities trading, internet gambling, and the speculation paradox.Boston University Law Review,86,371-441.
28. International Monetary Fund(2006).,WA:International Monetary Fund.
29. Lejot, P.(2008).Dictum non meum pactum: Lehman's minibond transactions.Hong Kong Law Journal,38,585-591.
30. Long, D.(1995).Oil trading manual.Cambridge:Woodhead.
31. Markham, J. W.(1987).The history of commodity futures trading and its regulation.New York:Praeger.
32. Martin, S.,Partnoy, F.(2005).Encumbered shares.University of Illinois Law Review,2005,775-814.
33. Moloney, N.(2007).Large-scale reform of investor protection regulation: The European Union experience.Macquarie Journal of Business Law,4,147-178.
34. Paredes, T. A.(2006).On the decision to regulate hedge funds: The SEC's regulatory philosophy, style, and mission.University Illinois Law Review,2006,975-1034.
35. Partnoy, F.,Skeel, D. A., Jr.(2007).The promise and perils of credit derivatives.University of Cincinnati Law Review,75,1019-1051.
36. Perdue, W. C.(1987).Manipulation of futures markets: Redefining the offense.Fordham Law Review,56,345-401.
37. Pickens, C. T.(2006).Of bookies and brokerss: Are sports futures gambling or investing, and does it even matter?.George Mason Law Review,14,227-270.
38. Rescher, N.(1983).Risk: A philosophical introduction to the theory of risk evaluation and management.Boston:University Press of America.
39. Schwarcz, S. L.(2008).Systemic risk.Georgetown Law Journal,97,193-249.
40. Stout, L. A.(1999).Why the law hates speculators: Regulation and private ordering in the market for OTC derivatives.Duke Law Journal,48,701-786.
41. Tarring, T.(1999).Wolff's guide to the London metal exchange.Worcester Park:Metal Bulletin Books.
42. Tomasic, R.(2008).Corporate rescue, governance and risk-taking in Northern Rock: Part 1.Company Lawyer,28(9),297-303.
43. Worthington, S.(ed.)(2003).Commercial Law and Commercial Practice.Oxford:Hart.
44. 王澤鑑(1995)。商品製造者責任與純粹經濟上損失：最高法院二則判決的評釋及消費者保護法第七條的解釋適用（下）。法學叢刊，40(1)，13-23。
45. 王澤鑑(1994)。商品製造者責任與純粹經濟上損失：最高法院二則判決的評釋及消費者保護法第七條的解釋適用（上）。法學叢刊，39(4)，17-28。
46. 林美惠(2002)。侵權行為法上交易安全義務的保護客體：以純粹經濟上損失為主。政大法學評論，70，53-86。
47. 邱琦(2001)。Taiwan，國立臺灣大學法律學研究所=National Taiwan University College of Law。
48. 陳肇鴻(2008)。ISDA總契約、利率交換與消費者保護法：評高等法院96年金上字第3號判決。律師雜誌，347，65-76。
49. 陳肇鴻(2007)。論信用違約交換之類型化風險及契約性質。月旦財經法雜誌，9，175-194。
50. 陳肇鴻(2007)。由美國次級房貸市場風暴論信用衍生性商品及信用證券化產品之使用及管制。律師雜誌，338，77-89。
51. 陳肇鴻(2009)。論權益交換與大股東持股揭露之法律問題。法學新論，7，105-131。
52. 陳肇鴻(2009)。論結構債之法律關係及指定用途金錢信託之法律性質。軍法專刊，55(3)，111-133。
53. 曾宛如(2009)。金融海嘯下金融監理之反思。月旦法學雜誌，168，81-92。
54. 黃立(2003)。純粹經濟上損失之賠償問題。台灣本土法學雜誌，49，134-138。

1. 陳肇鴻、朱德芳(2014)。衍生性金融商品之內線交易禁止法律規制：以規範客體範圍與民事賠償責任為核心。臺大法學論叢，43(2)，419-487。
2. 林嬌能、林晨(2019)。企業使用衍生性金融工具與租稅規劃之關聯性。會計學報，8(1)，73-112。
3. 徐肇鴻(2012)。論國際衍生性金融商品交易中翻轉條款效力－美國破產法觀察之。法令月刊，63(6)，90-107。
4. 徐肇鴻(2013)。由經濟觀點論銀行體系中系統風險之成因及事後處理機制之規範原則。東吳法律學報，24(3)，87-124。
5. (2015)。從法令規範的角度初探臺灣店頭衍生性金融商品監理制度之發展及政策方向。期貨與選擇權學刊，8(1)，85-120。
6. (2017)。目標可贖回遠期契約(TRF)。月旦法學雜誌，264，187-209。