《证券投资者保护基金补偿法律问题研究》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《证券投资者保护基金补偿法律问题研究（43页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、 1 内 容 摘 要 自美国1970 年证券投资者保护法案创制以来，英国、日本、德国、 我国台湾地区和香港特别行政区等国家和地区相继制定了证券投资者保护基金制度（以下简称“保护基金制度” ） ，并据此设立了证券投资者保护基金（以下简称“保护基金” ） 。经过三十余年的精心运作，保护基金在资本市场发达国家和地区已发展成为一项比较成熟的制度， 而实证研究也表明， 作为金融安全网的一个重要组成部分， 保护基金对于保护投资者利益、 维护投资者信心， 促进证券市场的稳定和健康发展等方面均具有良好的实践意义。为借鉴国外的制度经验，解决国内证券市场积弊，我国对建立保护基金产生了热切的关注并开始了一系列的立法
2、努力， 中国证券投资者保护基金于是在万众瞩目中逐步登上了资本市场的历史舞台。 然而， 保护基金的设立是一项浩大而繁杂的系统工程， 关涉方方面面利益的权衡。 囿于对该制度认识的不足， 立法的仓促和初期运作经验的欠缺，我国保护基金并未真正起到保护投资者、维护市场信心、防范风险的作用。相反，在某些方面，如投资者补偿问题上，还引发了新的争议和矛盾，违背了设立保护基金的初衷，亟需改变和完善。 基于以上认识， 本文从保护基金与投资者关系最为密切的补偿问题入手， 以投资者补偿的现行规定和实践中出现的现实问题为研究对象， 分若干层次对保护基金补偿法律问题展开了相应的论述。 引言部分简明扼要的介绍了我国引入保护
3、基金的时代背景和存在的现实问题， 从而导出本文研究的背景、 方法和目标。 第一部分对保护基金补偿制度的内涵进行了解析，肯定了我国设立保护基金的积极意义， 同时从制度和运作两个层面分别简要的阐述了保护基金在补偿投资者过程中存在的问题和不足， 为下文的深入论述作了铺垫。第二部分在对比美国 SIPA 关于“合格客户”认定的基础上， 对我国保护基金的补偿对象进行了条分缕析， 指出其判断标准的不尽合理之处和存在的盲区， 并提出了相应的完善建议。 第三部分论述保护基金的补偿范围，主要涉及两个方面：一是启动保护基金补偿的情形，二是对哪些损失进行补偿。 此部分还就上市公司侵权致投资者损失是否应列入保护基金补偿
4、范围的问题展开了讨论。 第四部分从投资者保护与道德风险防范角度切入，在对比各国（地区）保护基金补偿标准的基础上，论述2 了我国“有限偿付、逐步收紧、区别对待”的补偿原则，并就引入超限额商业保险、 完善补偿标准和方式以及制定稳定长效的补偿制度提出了法律建议。 第五部分在对比分析我国和域外保护基金补偿程序的基础上， 建议我国应尽快完善补偿的程序， 明确赋予投资者程序性权利。 最后部分为本文的结论。 本文运用比较法研究、 历史研究、 法经济学以及法解释学等研究方法，将我国保护基金关于投资者补偿的现行规定与美国、欧盟、日本、我国台湾、香港地区的相关制度结合起来深入分析，在比较研究的基础上，重点论述了保
5、护基金补偿的对象、 补偿的范围、 补偿的幅度和补偿的程序四个问题。通过研究，笔者认为，我国保护基金的设立，改变了之前由央行充当最后贷款人救助问题证券公司和补偿投资者损失的做法， 建立一种市场化方式来解决证券公司失败时的投资者补偿问题， 具有较高的制度价值和实践意义。但必须深入调查研究补偿过程中存在的问题，完善相关立法，赋予投资者相应的权利， 真正发挥保护基金应有的维护投资者信心、 促进资本市场稳定的作用。 关键词关键词：保护基金；补偿对象；补偿范围；补偿幅度；补偿程序 1 Abstract Since the formulation of the Securities Investor Pro
6、tection Act of 1970 in United States, Securities Investor Protection Fund Systems (hereinafter referred to as “Protection Fund System“) were continually established in United Kingdom, Japan, Germany, Chinas Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Taiwan region and other countries and regions, based
7、 on which Securities Investor Protection Fund (hereinafter referred to as “Protection Fund“) was founded. After more than 30 years of elaborating operation, the Protection Fund has developed into a relatively mature system in the capital markets of developed countries and regions. Furthermore, the e
8、mpirical studies have shown that, as an important part of financial security network, the Protection Fund has had a practical significance in protecting investors interests, preserving their confidence, promoting the stability and healthy development of market, and so on. In order to solve the long
9、standing sickness of domestic security market, Chinas Securities Investor Protection Fund has gradually stepped into the historical arena of capital market with fervent concern and a series efforts on legislation in the revelation of foreign countries. However, the establishment of the Protection Fu
10、nd is a large and complicated project, which concerns how to balance interests of many aspects. Because of the insufficient understanding of that system, Chinas Protection Fund system has failed to play the role of protecting investors interests, preserving their confidence and preventing risks unde
11、r the hasty legislation in China and the inexperienced operation in the initial stage. On the contrary, Chinas system has triggered new controversies and contradictions, such as the issue on compensation for investors, which is in an urgent need to be improved. Based on the above understanding, the
12、paper, starting with the compensation issue which is closest to investors, carries out a corresponding discussion on the legal problems of the compensation of Protection Funds at 2 several levels by taking the current regulations about compensation and the problems in operation as study objects. The
13、 introductory part gives a concise introduction to the background of our countrys bringing in protection funds and the existing realistic problems, and then the research background of this paper, the methods and objectives are given. The first part analyzes the connotation of the system of compensat
14、ion, reaffirms the significance of setting up Protection Funds in China, and at the same time, from the two levels of system and operation, it respectively elaborates the problems and shortcomings of Protection Funds in the process of compensating investors, lying a foundation for the following disc
15、ussion. The second part gives a detailed analysis of the phenomena of Chinas funds compensation, making comparison with the affirmation of “qualified clients” by SIPA in America, pointing out the unreasonable standards and the existing blind spots, and putting forward relevant suggestions. The third
16、 part, dealing with the scope of protection fund compensation, involves two aspects: the cases of starting protection fund compensation; what losses should be compensated. This section also carries out a discussion on whether investors loss due to the tort of listed companies should be included in the scope. Apart from the discussion of Chinas “limited reimbursement, and gradually tightening, differential treatment“ principle of compensation on the basis of comprising the criteria
