| 中外创业板监管制度比较 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 王园林,刘子东.中外创业板监管制度比较[J].国际经贸探索,2011(1). |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 王园林 刘子东 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 广东外语外贸大学国际经贸探索编辑部;广东外语外贸大学国际经济贸易学院; |
| |
| 摘 要： | 纵观国外运行比较成功的创业板,如美国、英国、日本和韩国,可以发现每个国家的创业板监管制度都具有差异性,而这些差异性都与各个国家的国情差异息息相关。文章通过比较美国、英国、日本、韩国和中国等运行较为成功的创业板市场监管制度的差异,分析了造成各国创业板监管制度差异的原因,并结合我国国情和创业板发展的实际情况,提出应根据我国创业板的不同发展时期,调整监管理念的侧重点;尝试将强制性信息披露和定制性信息披露结合起来以提高保荐人的进入门槛;加强对保荐机构的规范和监管,建立和完善创业板场外市场,解决退市后的去留问题等,进一步完善创业板监管制度。
|
| 关 键 词： | 创业板 监管制度 中外比较 |
Differences in GEM Supervision System between China and the Other Countries |
| |
| WANG Yuan-lin,Liu Zi-dong.Differences in GEM Supervision System between China and the Other Countries[J].International Economics and Trade Research,2011(1). |
| |
| Authors: | WANG Yuan-lin Liu Zi-dong |
| |
| Institution: | WANG Yuan-lin,Liu Zi-dong(Guangdong University of Foreign Studies,Guangzhou 510420,China) |
| |
| Abstract: | From the successful development of GEM(Growth Enterprise Market) in foreign countries,such as America,Britain,Japan and South Korea,we can find that each of these countries has a different supervision system,and these differences are closely related with each country's specific situation.This paper first discusses the differences in GEM supervision system between the United States,Britain,Japan,South Korea and China,and then finds out the causes of these differences.At last,in accordance with the specific s... |
| |
| Keywords: | GEM supervision system comparison |
| 本文献已被 CNKI 等数据库收录！ |
|
