進階搜尋


   電子論文尚未授權公開,紙本請查館藏目錄
(※如查詢不到或館藏狀況顯示「閉架不公開」,表示該本論文不在書庫,無法取用。)
系統識別號 U0026-2907201400504500
論文名稱(中文) 資本公積發放現金對債權人影響之研究
論文名稱(英文) Research on the impact of creditors for capital surplus cash payment
校院名稱 成功大學
系所名稱(中) 會計學系
系所名稱(英) Department of Accountancy
學年度 102
學期 2
出版年 103
研究生(中文) 李品陞
研究生(英文) Pin-Sheng Lee
學號 R18921037
學位類別 博士
語文別 中文
論文頁數 80頁
口試委員 指導教授-吳清在
口試委員-蔡彥卿
口試委員-林世銘
口試委員-陳俊仁
口試委員-黃華瑋
中文關鍵字 資本公積配發現金  現金減資  公司治理  債權人保障  公司法第241條  資本維持原則  債權人 
英文關鍵字 Capital Surplus Cash Payment  Capital Reduction  Corporate Governance  Creditor Protection  Company Act Article 241  Capital Maintenance  Creditor 
學科別分類
中文摘要 近年來台灣公司法對於資本制度修正皆為偏向公司靈活運用資本的角度為著眼點,不再以債權人保障為重,其因有二:其一為資本維持是否對債權人提供保障,目前尚無定論。其二為債權人可使用其他方式來保全債權。再者,公司法亦不再強調公司資本之穩固,所以現行法對於債權人保謢機制可說是愈趨減少,公司法更於2012年1月4日修正公布放寬公司得以資本公積發放現金股利,此舉有違長久以來公司法及會計所強調資本維持原則,本研究認為在尚未真正確定對企業目前既有債權無影響之情況下,再加上無相關配套措施,就開放企業可將資本公積發放現金退還給股東,此舉對既有債權人之保障會稍嫌不足之感。資本公積發放現金會立即使企業最主要償債資產-現金產生實質減少,進而增加債權人受損及發生鉅額代理成本的機率。另外,本次公司法修正第241條,對金融機構等債權人之保障無非是一項重大衝擊,本研究認為債權人的授信政策應立即反應調整,金融監理機關應立即檢查所有金融機構對企業授信條件及品質,以避免日後可能需付出鉅額之社會成本。故本研究基於債權人的立場,探討 (1) 以資本公積分配現金是否會違反資本維持原則,侵害債權人權益;(2) 以資本公積分配現金與現金減資的決策中,公司是否會將風險轉嫁給債權人;(3) 公司治理制度在以資本公積分配現金與現金減資的決策中扮演的角色。本研究實證發現若以資本公積發放現金股利的公司,其償債能力相較其他盈餘發放現金股利的公司為差,因此,債權受損可能性相對較高;若再考慮現金減資制度,現金減資相較於資本公積發放現金股利,更能保護債權人利益。故管理當局在修改公司法的同時,應同時考量到債權人保護機制或強化公司治理制度,以緩和公司與債權人之間的代理問題。
英文摘要 Recently, in Taiwan’s Company Act, amendments for capital regime all focus on the perspective that the company flexibly uses capital instead of focusing on the protection of creditors. As a result, in the current law, there are increasingly reduced protection mechanisms for creditors. Therefore, in this study, based on the position of the creditors, the following lists are investigated: i. whether cash distribution of capital reserves violates the principle of capital maintenance and damage to the interests of creditors; ii. in the decision-making of cash distribution of capital reserves and cash capital decrease, whether the company will pass risks to creditors; and iii. the role the corporate governance system plays in the decision-making of cash distribution of capital reserves and cash capital decrease. In empirical findings of this study, the solvency of the companies paying cash dividends with capital reserves is poor compared to other companies paying cash dividends with earnings and thus the likelihood of damaging creditor's rights is relatively high. Furthermore, in considerations of the cash capital reduction system, cash capital reduction will better protect the interests of creditors compared to cash dividends paid with capital reserves. Therefore, regulatory authorities should also consider creditors’ protection mechanisms or strengthen the governance system of companies when amending the Company Act, to ease the agency problem between companies and creditors.
論文目次 第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究動機 1
第二節 研究目的 5
第三節 論文架構 6

第二章 文獻探討 8
第一節 資本維持原則 8
第二節 公積的種類與用途 12
第三節 盈餘分配與會計表冊編造承認程序 15
第四節 探討美國法、德國法及日本法對公積及盈餘分配之規定 19
第五節 減資 22

第三章 研究方法 30
第一節 研究假說 30
第二節 資料來源與樣本選取 37
第三節 實證模型 39
第四節 變數定義 41

第四章 實證結果 46
第一節 敘述性統計 46
第二節 資本公積發放現金、減資與清償能力之實證結果 50
第三節 資本公積發放現金、減資與公司治理之實證結果 60

第五章 結論與建議 70
第一節 結論 70
第二節 研究限制與建議 74

參考文獻 75

附錄-日本公司法典相關條文(§445、§448及§449) 79
參考文獻 壹、中文部分
方俊儒、李秀英、龍春伶(2008),獨立董監事對公司績效與盈餘品質之影響-控制股東之調節效果,會計與公司治理,卷期:5-1,頁55-80。
方嘉麟(1998),論資本三原則理論體系之內在矛盾,政大法學評論,卷期:59,頁155-226。
王文宇、林仁光(2001),公司資本制度與股票面額之研究,月旦法學雜誌,卷期:73,頁26-39。
林仁光(2002),資本維持原則之重新檢視,臺灣本土法學雜誌,卷期:33,頁47-60。
施建州(2004),論資本維持原則對於債權人之保護,玄奘法律學報,卷期:1,頁59-122。
施建州(2005),法定資本制概念的檢驗-以資本維持原則為中心,輔仁大學法律學研究所博士論文。
柯芳枝(2013),公司法論(上),三民書局,修訂九版。
馬黛、李永全(2008),家族控制對負債融資決策的影響—以台灣為例,台大管理論叢,卷期:18-2,頁133-170。
陳業寧、林修葳、黃維喬、劉憶如(2003),我國金融重建基金解決銀行信用風險危機運作機制之研究,金融聯合徵信中心,信用資訊(News Letter),卷期:3-6,頁1-25。
劉憶如、何佳(1999),東亞十國-金融風暴前與後,商鼎財經叢書001。
賴科宏(2001), 本土性金融風暴之研究分析,經社法制論叢,卷期:27,頁59-96。
貳、西文部份
Acharya, V. V., Amihud, Y., & Litov, L. (2011). Creditor rights and corporate risk-taking. Journal of Financial Economics, 102(1), 150-166.
Allegrini, M., & Greco, G. (2013). Corporate boards, audit committees and voluntary disclosure: evidence from Italian Listed Companies. Journal of Management & Governance, 17(1), 187-216.
Anderson, H. (2012). The evolution of shareholder and creditor protection in Australia: an international comparison. The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 61(1), 171-207.
Armstrong, C. S., Guay, W. R., & Weber, J. P. (2010). The role of information and financial reporting in corporate governance and debt contracting. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 50(2-3), 179-234.
Becker, B. (2011). Local Dividend Clienteles. The Journal of Finance, 66(2), 655-683.
Bertrand, M., & Schoar, A. (2006). The Role of Family in Family Firms. The Journal of Economic Perspective, 20(2), 73-96.
Beyer, A., Cohen, D. A., Lys, T. Z., & Walther, B. R. (2010). The financial reporting environment: Review of the recent literature. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 50(2-3), 296-343.
Bulan, L., & Hull, T. (2013). The impact of technical defaults on dividend policy. Journal of Banking & Finance, 37(3), 814-823.
Cho, S. Y., Lee, C., & Pfeiffer, R. J. (2013). Corporate social responsibility performance and information asymmetry. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 32(1), 71-83.
Cole, C. R., & Mccullough, K. A. (2006). A Reexamination of the Corporate Demand for Reinsurance. Journal of Risk Insurance, 73(1), 169-192.
Chen, G. R., Ding, C. M., & Zheng, C. Y. (2013). Bank Debt, Growth Opportunities and Corporate Investment Behavior. In The 19th International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management 45-53.
David, F. L., & Scott, A. R. (2004). Fees Paid to Audit Firms, Accrual Choices and Corporate Governance. Journal of Accounting Research, 42(3), 625-656.
Du, J., & Dai, Y. (2005). Ultimate corporate ownership structures and capital structures: Evident from East Asian economies. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 13(1), 60-71.
González, M., Guzmán, A., Pombo, C., & Trujillo, M. (2013). Family firms and debt: Risk aversion versus risk of losing control. Journal of Business Research, 66(11), 2308-2320.
Hermalin, B. E., & Weisbach, M. S. (2012). Information Disclosure and Corporate Governance. The Journal of Finance, 67(1), 195-234.
Higgins, H. N. (2013). Conflicts of interest between banks and firms: Evidence from Japanese mergers. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 24, 156-178.
Hill, N. T., Perry, S. E., & Andes, S. (2011). Evaluating firms in financial distress: an event history analysis. Journal of Applied Business Research, 12(3), 60-71.
Hilscher, J., & Şişli-Ciamarra, E. (2013). Conflicts of interest on corporate boards: The effect of creditor-directors on acquisitions. Journal of Corporate Finance, 19, 140-158.
Hollander, S. (2010). Does Silence Speak? An Empirical Analysis of Disclosure Choices During Conference Calls. Journal of Accounting Research, 48(3), 531-563.
Hoyt, R. E., & Khang, H. (2000). On the Demand for Corporate Property Insurance. The Journal of Risk and Insurance, 67(1), 91.
Hoyt, R. E., & Liebenberg, A. P. (2011). The Value of Enterprise Risk Management. Journal of Risk and Insurance, 78(4), 795-822.
Hu, F., & Chen, X. (2012, October). Dividend smoothing and firm value: Evidence from Chinese firms. In Information Management, Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering (ICIII), 2012 International Conference.
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360.
Jiang, J. X. (2007). Causes and Consequences of Discretionary Financial Reporting: Evidence from Corporate Governance, Cost of Capital and Firm Performance. Journal of Management, 24(4), 373-397.
Jo, H. (2011). Corporate Governance and Firm Value: The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 103(3), 351-383.
Leary, M. T. (2011). Determinants of Dividend Smoothing: Empirical Evidence. The Review of Financial Studies, 24(10), 3197-3249.
Leary, M. T., & Michaely, R. (2011). Determinants of Dividend Smoothing: Empirical Evidence. Review of Financial Studies, 24(10), 3197-3249.
Lou, Y. I., & Wang, M. L. (2011). Fraud risk factor of the fraud triangle assessing the likelihood of fraudulent financial reporting. Journal of Business & Economics Research, 7(2).
Miller, D., Breton-Miller, I. L., Lester, R. H., & Cannella, A. A. (2007). Are Family Firms Really Superior Performers? Journal of Corporate Finance, 13(5), 829-58.
Nini, G. (2012). Creditor Control Rights, Corporate Governance, and Firm Value. The Review of Financial Studies, 25(6), 1713-1761.
Nini, G., Smith, D. C., & Sufi, A. (2009). Creditor control rights and firm investment policy. Journal of Financial Economics, 92(3), 400-420.
Ozelge, S. (2012). The Role of Lending Banks in Forced CEO Turnovers. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, (Vol. 44, No. 4), 631-659.
Peasnell, K. V., Pope, P.F., & Young, S. (2005). Board Monitoring and Earnings Management: Do Outside Directors Influence Abnormal Accruals? Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 32(7-8), 1311-1346.
Persons, O. S. (2011). Using financial statement data to identify factors associated with fraudulent financial reporting. Journal of Applied Business Research, 11(3), 38-46.
Persons, O. S. (2012). Stock Option and Cash Compensation of Independent Directors and Likelihood of Fraudulent Financial Reporting.Journal of Business & Economic Studies, 18(1).
Ravi, R., & Hong, Y. (2014). Firm opacity and financial market information asymmetry. Journal of Empirical Finance, 25, 83-94.
Tang, H. W., & Chang, C. C. (2013). Does corporate governance affect the relationship between earnings management and firm performance? An endogenous switching regression model. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 1-26.
Ye, K. (2014). Independent director cash compensation and earnings management. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy.
Yeh, Y. H., Lee, T. S., & Woidtke, T. (2001). Family Control and Corporate Governance: Evidence from Taiwan. International Review of Finance, 2(1-2), 21-48.
論文全文使用權限
  • 同意授權校內瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2024-12-31起公開。


  • 如您有疑問,請聯絡圖書館
    聯絡電話:(06)2757575#65773
    聯絡E-mail:etds@email.ncku.edu.tw