美国金融监管体系改革评析

为了应对金融危机和完善监管体系,美国财政部于2008年3月提出了现代金融监管架构改革蓝图,改革蓝图是对美国现行监管体系存在问题的检讨和修正,所传达出的金融监管新理念,对完善我国金融监管体制、维护金融稳定具有启示意义。     

美国金融监管体系改革评析

为了应对金融危机和完善监管体系,美同财政部于2008年3月提出了现代金融监管架构改革蓝图,改革蓝图是对美国现行监管体系存在问题的检讨和修正,所传达出的金融监管新理念,对完善我国金融监管体制、维护金融稳定具有启示意义.     

美国经验与中国金融监管体系改革

一、美国金融监管体系改革对中国的启示金融危机的爆发表明了美国金融监管体系的脆弱性。美国长期以来实行的是金融分业监管和分层次监管的监管体系。应该承认,美国的这套监管体系确实在历史上支持了美国金融业的发展。然而,随着全球化的发展和金融机构综合化经营的发展,随着金融市场之间产     

我国金融监管体系研究

我国现行金融监管体系存在的主要问题，一是缺乏有效金融监管的条件；二是多元化监管主体缺乏必要的信息交流与合作；三是证券业、保险业的监管资源与行业发展不匹配；四是金融监管缺乏科学的实务操作系统。建立有效金融监管体系的重点，一是建立与完善以监管当局、内控制度和行业自律为主要内容的金融监管组织体系；二是建立与完善以金融监管制度体系、金融监管信息系统、金融风险减震机制、金融风险预警系统、金融监管合作制度为主要内容的金融监管操作系统；三是培育以稳健的宏观经济环境、完善的公共金融基础设施、有效的市场约束、完善的系统性保护性机制和金融问题高效处理机制为主要内容的有效金融监管条件。     

改革开放四十周年:我国金融监管体系的演变

改革开放四十年,我国金融监管体系实现了从无到有,并在金融业不断创新的环境下发展完善。我国在学习国外监管经验和总结自身教训的过程中逐渐形成了独具中国特色的监管思想和监管制度。但在金融产品迭代创新和金融业不断融合发展的今天,金融监管体系仍然存在着各种矛盾,我国金融监管机构肩负重任,未来还需在改革中砥砺前行。     

建立金融监管协调机制的必要性和现实选择

由于金融业的特殊性和金融在现代经济体系中核心地位的不断强化，通过有效的监管保证金融业的稳健运行日益成为经济与社会健康发展的关键。在推进金融业发展过程中，我国逐步形成了现行“一行三会”的分立金融监管体制。但是，分业监管体制存在很多弊端，如不能覆盖主要风险领域；容易出现监管“真空”和重复监管；金融监管政策协调性差，不利于提高监管效率。因此，加快建设金融监管协调机制，对促进金融业稳健发展具有重大意义。     

多重目标下金融监管评价体系的构建

随着经济社会的发展以及经济金融形势与政策的演变,金融监管的目标呈现出多元化的趋势,金融监管评价的范围和内容也在发生深刻变化。本文从道德风险和外部性这两个监管的理论基点出发,梳理了金融监管目标的演变特征与金融监管评价体系的发展现状,分析了金融监管目标与金融监管评价体系的差异性,构建了以发展贡献度、社会满意度、改革进步度、依法合规度和监管配合度等"五个维度"为核心内容的"CATCH"评价指标体系。同时,本文对"CATCH"评价指标体系在重庆辖内银行业金融机构的初步评价情况进行了分析,并就如何更加科学、合理地应用"CATCH"监管评价体系和更好地以此服务于监管目标提出了相关监管建议。     

功能性监管:我国金融监管体制的新选择

在全球金融业混业经营的共同趋势下,我国现行的机构性监管模式面临巨大的挑战。功能性金融监管是基于金融体系基本功能而设计的更具连续性和一致性,并能实施跨产品、跨机构、跨市场协调的监管,因而是金融业混业经营下金融监管模式的最优选择。在借鉴英国的功能性监管框架基础上,对构建我国功能性金融监管模式进行了若干思考。     

我国地方金融监管问题研究

随着地方新型金融业态的飞速发展,我国以金融监督管理局为特色的地方金融监管体系已初露端倪,其在弥补"一行两会"监管空隙的同时,也面临着新型金融业态监管不足、央地监管界限较为模糊、地方"发展经济"与"加强监管"在短期内存在着目标冲突、地方监管效能有待提升等诸多问题。为此,我国必须持续深化地方金融监管体制改革,通过强化中央层面与地方层面的立法、构建多层次的监管协调机制、完善监管信息共享平台、推进地方监管能力建设等路径,不断克服地方金融监管面临的各种困难和挑战,从而实现地方金融业行稳致远。     

美国金融监管改革法案评述及其对我国的启示

本文通过对金融监管主要理论的回顾,说明了美国金融监管政策的演进与当时主流经济学流派的观点密切相关.危机过后,美国对原有金融监管制度进行了改革,美国金融监管改革法案的通过势必将对国际金融监管体系产生重要影响.我同要以此次美国金融监管改革为契机,认真审视、反思我国的金融监管体系,在立足于本国金融发展环境的前提下,借鉴、吸收美国金融监管改革的成功经验,为国内金融业的持续健康发展创造稳定的环境.     

REGULATION OF FINANCIAL MARKETS: TOWARD A FOCUSED APPROACH

Regulation of financial markets arose in a simpler time when transactions were carried out face to face on an exchange floor or in a banker's office—when trading was localized and the variety of financial instruments was small. Today the task of regulators is much more difficult. Markets are global, trading takes place in cyberspace, and the variety of financial instruments is limitless.
The initial focus, and still the central concern, of our regulatory system is to ensure full corporate disclosure and transparency of trading markets. But regulation today goes far beyond disclosure requirements. The existing tendency to expand regulation to match the expanding financial markets is likely to be inefficient, unwieldy, and too costly, given the increased complexity and global nature of financial markets. A new approach and a new regulatory mindset are needed—one in which regulators aim to identify and provide only necessary regulation rather than simply continuing to expand regulatory oversight. Such a focused approach to regulation would separate what is regulated from what is not. Those aspects of banking that are essential to the integrity of the payments system would be regulated while other aspects would not. Some securities and derivatives markets would be regulated, while others would not. And market participants would be able to choose which markets to participate in. Given an ever-expanding financial system, such a focused approach to regulation is not only the most cost effective one—it is also likely to prove the only workable alternative to a system that is now under great pressure.     

The Interplay among Financial Regulations,Resilience, and Growth

Interconnectedness has been an important source of market failures, leading to the recent financial crisis. Large financial institutions tend to have similar exposures and thus exert externalities on each other through various mechanisms. Regulators have responded by putting in place more regulations with many layers of regulatory complexity, leading to ambiguity and market manipulation. Mispricing risk in complex models and the arbitrage opportunities through the regulatory loopholes have provided incentives for certain activities to be more concentrated in the regulated entities and for other activities to leave the banking into new shadow banking areas. How can we design an effective regulatory framework that would perfectly rule out bank runs and TBTF and to do so without introducing incentives for financial firms to take excessive risk? It is important for financial regulations to be coordinated across regulatory entities and jurisdictions and for financial regulations to be forward looking, rather than aiming to address problems of the past.     

供给拉动和需求推动的金融监管制度改进

金融监管制度供给不足和金融监管制度供给过剩是我国金融监管制度非均衡的两种基本形式。中国金融监管制度在总体上体现出政府供给主导型的特征,需求主导型尚未形成。随着金融创新发展,需要在基于市场需求、金融市场参与者的效用、金融功能等方面推动监管制度的供给。要实现金融监管制度供给、需求的均衡,仅从供给和需求的单方面改进无法实现,这就必须寻求第三条道路,既要有供给的适当超前性,也要有需求的拉动,走强制性和诱致性的交互演进之路。     

金融监管信号传递与金融市场有效运行

金融市场是金融监管当局与金融市场参与者之间动态博弈、合作共生的信息不对称系统。通过把信号博弈和重复博弈思想引入金融监管理论研究,构建以金融市场有效运行为反馈信号的金融监管当局与金融市场参与者之间的监管信号传递模型,分析金融市场治理中有效监管信号的传递机制。结果表明：金融监管力度与金融市场有效运行水平之间存在分离、混同两种均衡关系;在金融监管声誉效应的驱动下,金融监管当局倾向于选择混同均衡策略,而不是分离均衡。因而只有建立通畅的金融监管信号传递及反馈机制,强化并放大金融监管信号显示,增大监管乘数效应,形成良性的监管声誉效应,才能保障金融市场的有效运行。     

工业革命、金融革命与系统性风险治理

本文以历史上三次工业革命为切入点,探讨工业革命、金融革命与系统性风险治理间的关系。在工业革命演进过程中,先进技术创新应用、经济结构转变和社会环境变迁,推动了金融业演进发展和升级;反过来,资本的快速积累和有效融通对科技进步转化为工业革命不可或缺,以现代商业银行、现代投资银行和创业投资体系为特征的三次金融革命分别是三次工业革命的重要推动力量。但如果制度规则建设和监管滞后,金融发展失序也会导致系统性风险逐步累积,引发金融危机,反过来催生重大金融体制或监管制度变革。当前第四次工业革命已拉开序幕,金融科技引领的金融业集成创新有望成为第四次金融革命的突出特征。我国是全球金融科技发展领先的国家之一,应统筹发展与安全,在金融科技带动下发挥好银行体系、资本市场、创投体系和金融科技企业服务实体经济创新发展的合力,同时做好风险防范,引导从业机构在服务实体经济和遵从审慎监管的前提下守正创新,防止资本无序扩张,牢牢守住不发生系统性风险的底线。     

净资产完全损失点在商业银行市场退出机制中的应用分析

要想促进经营资源向效率高的金融机构转移,同时又避免金融机构市场退出所产生的外部性来实现高效率的金融稳定,降低金融机构市场退出的行政法规壁垒,提高金融机构的市场退出效率,减少商业银行向监管者寻租的可能,更有效地防范存款保险制度带来的道德风险,应该确定商业银行净资产完全损失点,并在这一点上实施市场退出。要想确定商业银行净资产完全损失点,在技术上,需要能够估算商业银行的潜在损失;在体制上,应该对商业银行实施末位监控制并建立和完善损失分担机制,同时,还应该建立商业银行市场退出后的后续债权管理机制并探索运用资产证券化方式,提高后续债权变现能力。     

美国金融衍生工具市场的发展、运作及监管研究

20世纪70年代以来,以资产证券化为主的金融创新从供给和需求两个角度推动了金融衍生工具市场的发展,该市场对于降低交易成本、削弱信息不对称以及提高资源配置效率发挥了重要的作用,并促使商业银行经营模式的转变和金融体系结构的变迁。但由于监管的疏漏,衍生工具市场对金融稳定带来了巨大威胁。鉴于此,美国金融监管部门加强了对该市场的监管改革,但关于改革的必要性和力度成为学术界和业界争议的焦点。就我国而言,发展衍生工具市场虽然有助于多元化融资渠道的构建,但以审慎原则为基础构建相应的监管体系也是十分必要的。     

美国金融监管体系的问题与变革

金融危机暴露美国金融监管出了问题,既有自由市场主义监管理念的根本问题,也有原监管体系在对付混业经营过程中的诸多缺陷和漏洞,美国政府试图通过立法对金融监管体系进行重大变革,以防范未来的系统性风险和金融危机,实现金融市场效率与风险的平衡。     

Market discipline and the evaluation of Euro financial bonds—An empirical analysis

Within the context of the increasing discussion on a shift in financial regulatory philosophy from the currently prevailing rules-based approach to a more incentive-based supervisory procedure in which market discipline should play a decisive role in overcoming several moral hazard and efficiency problems of the financial system, the question regarding the evaluation of financial bonds has gained an important dimension. Such a disciplining market influence could namely be exercised if financial institutions were obliged to issue subordinated bonds on a regular basis (mandatory subordinated debt policy). However, the influence of market discipline will only be effective if the evaluation of different subordinated (and other) bonds occurs in a differentiated manner and dependent on the inherent risks. This study provides findings, on the basis of which this requirement for the Euro financial bond market can be regarded as fulfilled.     

The Global Financial Architecture: Twenty‐First Century Solutions*

Twentieth‐century global financial architectural solutions are outdated and have been found wanting. They are fundamentally structural solutions and continuing to rely on them would be to run the risk of repeating our mistakes. We must look to twenty‐first century solutions. Solutions created post‐1945 need replacing with networked solutions, reflecting what we see in the Internet and its development. These are not fanciful notions but concepts that have already been successfully modelled, albeit in a relatively narrow sphere. What we need is a mechanism by which global financial standards can be implemented in every jurisdiction around the world. This paper proceeds from the premise that the nexus between investor confidence and financial market stability is a crucial one, and one that a regulatory approach can impact. It discusses the international regulatory environment and the role of key players in the emerging global financial architecture, in particular the International Organization of Securities Commissions ( IOSCO ). It also examines the potential that mutual recognition offers for the trans‐Tasman market.