摘要
2013年我国《公司法》完成的资本制度改革基本上是沿袭了法国、日本、韩国、台湾地区近10年来的做法,于我国国情考虑很不周延。工商机关从公司登记事务切入取消公司法定最低资本数额和实缴要求自始不合法治原则,谋求逃避监管职责的制度"走私"利益,欠缺正当性,存在违法情节;而深圳创造的"认缴制"概念在法律上没有确切的含义,没有体系化的制度结构,深究起来不知所云。地方政府越权修订国家的公司法,冒犯全国人大权威,实质获取"举改革大旗"、"挖制度洼地以引流抢夺国内金融资源"、"摘皇榜"等行政机会利益,倒逼全国人大及其常委会吃改革宴席中的立法"剩饭",污损了民意机构的尊严。实施颠覆性的改革措施,忽视了其他大陆法系国家和地区公司资本制度变革的背景及底线。英美授权资本制下维护交易安全的配套制度非常完备和精细,我国则缺乏那种系统性的法律配置和软文化,依托法定资本制保护债权人利益是我国长期的最适合制度选项。所幸的是,本次改制后,法定资本制的框架尚得以保存,我们必须戒急用忍,通过公司法的进一步修订建立及时、妥当的配套制度,跟进补救其错漏。
The institutional reform of company capital in Company Law happened in 2013 is a simple adoption of foreign practices from France, Japan,South Korea and Taiwan, without taking China＇s distinctive ecology into full consideration. The efforts of administration for industry and commerce in repealing the statutory registered capital and contributed capital, indeed has no foundation because it is not only unlawful but also a shirking of regulatory responsibility. The vague and ambiguous concept of ＂authorized capital＂ innovated in Shenzhen lacks an institutional framework and thus is unenforceable. Also, exceeding its powers in amending the national Company Law, the local government of Shenzhen has impinged the integrity and authority of the National People＇s Congress, in fact reduced legitimate lawmaking authority into mopping up the leftovers in the feast of reform and essentially obtained opportunism advantages stemming out of ＂race to the bottom＂. To put it in a bigger picture, the disruptive legislation reform ignores the backgrounds of and constrains on such reforms of capital rules in other civil law countries. Moreover, China has no supporting legal and culture system as well as comprehensive rules to safeguard transactions as common law countries, which makes the statutory capital rule in company law our best choice to provide full protection to creditors. Fortunately, the basic framework of statutory capital survives the reform. We ought to formulate follow-up measures in further amendments of Company Law and try to cure the defects and mistakes of the 2013 reform.
出处
《科技与法律》
2014年第3期498-515,共18页
Science Technology and Law
关键词
颠覆式改革
盲目改制
资本制度属性
制度补救
Disruptive Reform
Transition without Foundation
Institutional Nature of Capital
Institutional Remedies
