巴塞尔协议Ⅲ视角下我国银行监管法律问题研究

发布时间：2018-03-11 06:50

本文选题：银行监管　切入点：巴塞尔协议Ⅲ　出处：《西南政法大学》2012年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：国际金融一体化和金融自由化是当今国际金融领域最引人注目的两大趋势。这两大趋势也给银行带来了前所未有的发展机遇。金融自由化使得限制竞争的规则有所放宽，而金融一体化则使银行的经营空间进一步扩大，使其能够跨国开展各种业务。但与此同时，一体化和自由化也为既有的金融体系带来了不安定性，它使跨国银行在经营中面临着更多风险，也给目前各国标准不一的银行监管体制造成了前所未有的冲击。正是为了推进各国监管标准的统一化以及实现各国监管当局的协调，巴塞尔文件体系诞生了。自1975年巴塞尔文件体系发布以来，其在国际银行监管领域的权威性逐渐得到广泛认可，体系中的原则和标准也被众多国家从借鉴，一些国家甚至将体系中的标准转化为自身的国内法或区域性规范。最近，巴塞尔委员会在1988年巴塞尔资本协议I和2004年巴塞尔资本协议II的基础上，发布了巴塞尔协议Ⅲ，提出了更严格的资本金要求，设定了资本留存缓冲比例，引入了杠杆率监管标准，还力求建立一个全球通用的流动性监管指标。巴塞尔协议Ⅲ的出台，有助于各国监管机构对于银行风险监控能力的进一步提升，同时也能够督促各国银行加强其风险管理和内部治理能力。巴塞尔协议虽然本身不具有强制约束力，但在国际上已经得到普遍的公认，其内容也在世界范围内被参照实施。由于各国在经济环境和监管模式上存在差异，特别是发展中国家和发达国家在监管理念、监管水平和监管模式上仍然有较大的差距，因此，发展中国家如何在国际银行监管标准统一化的趋势下，立足于自身的实际情况，逐步引入巴塞尔协议Ⅲ，便成为了完善其银行监管制度的一大难题。随着我国金融市场与国际金融市场的联系日益紧密，我国作为发展中国家，，要想在一体化和自由化的浪潮中抓住发展的机遇，就必须学习先进的监管理念和监管模式，并化为己用。由于我国监管理念较为落后，对应的各项法律法规也并不健全，巴塞尔协议Ⅲ的内容以及各国的实践经验都是值得我国借鉴的。这些经验必然会对我国银行监管法律制度的完善提供有益的助力。本文开篇先介绍巴塞尔资本协议的历史沿革，并将巴塞尔协议Ⅲ和巴塞尔协议II进行对比，充分说明巴塞尔协议Ⅲ在监管标准及方式上有何革新。同时结合金融危机后的国际背景，分析巴塞尔协议Ⅲ可能具有的国际影响并对其进行比较分析。之后，本文通过将巴塞尔协议Ⅲ的具体内容和我国银行监管体系现状进行对比，检视出我国体系现存的不足。最后，本文结合我国监管体系的现状，对我国应如何构建符合国际潮流的监管制度提出了建议。笔者认为，针对我国当前的银行业监管状况，应当完善外部监管制度，健全我国银行内部的治理结构，充分发挥内外部监管的综合效应。同时，还要重视信息披露制度的完善，进一步加强监管力度。此外，注重填补法律制度的空白，构建起与国际标准一致的银行监管法律制度，这一点也是至关重要的。
[Abstract]:International financial integration and financial liberalization are the two most eye-catching trends in today's international financial sector. These two trends but also to the banks brought hitherto unknown development opportunity. Financial liberalization makes competition rules have been relaxed, but the bank financial integration of the business space to further expand, so that it can carry out a variety of transnational business but at the same time, integration and liberalization to the existing financial system has brought instability, it makes multinational banks facing more risks, but also to the current national standard is not a banking system caused a hitherto unknown impact. It is in order to promote the national regulatory standards and implementation of unified national regulatory coordination the Basel authorities, the file system was born.
Since the release of the 1975 Basel file system, its authority in the field of international banking supervision has been widely recognized, and the principle of the standard system has also been a number of countries from reference, some countries even in the system into its domestic law or regional regulations. Recently, the Basel Committee in 1988 Basel capital the I agreement and the 2004 Basel capital accord II, issued the Basel accord, made more stringent capital requirements, set capital cushion ratio, introduced leverage regulatory standards, but also strive to establish a global liquidity supervision index. The Basel III introduction, help to further enhance to regulators for bank risk control ability, but also to urge the banks to strengthen their risk management and internal governance.
Although the Basel agreement itself is not binding, but in the international arena has been widely recognized, its content in the world by reference implementation. Because of the difference between countries in the economic environment and the mode of supervision, especially in developing countries and developed countries in the regulatory philosophy, regulatory standards and supervision model is still a large gap, therefore, how the developing countries in international banking supervision standard unified trend, based on their actual situation, the gradual introduction of Basel III, has become a major problem to improve the banking supervision system.
With the financial market and international financial market in China is more closely linked, as a developing country, to seize the opportunity for development in the integration and the trend of liberalization, we must learn the advanced supervision idea and mode, and to their own. Because China's regulatory philosophy is relatively backward, the corresponding laws and regulations also Basel III is not perfect, the content and the practical experience of various countries are worthy of our reference. These experiences will improve the legal system of banking supervision in China to provide useful help.
This paper first introduces the history of the Basel Capital Accord, and the Basel accord and the Basel agreement II comparison, fully explain Basel 3 what is innovation in the regulatory standards and methods. Combined with the international background of financial crisis, the international influence of the Basel Agreement III may have analysis and comparative analysis of the later. In this paper, by comparing the specific content of the Basel III and the status quo of China banking supervision system, examine deficiencies of our existing system. Finally, combining with the status quo of our country's supervision system of our country, put forward proposals on how to build in line with the international trend of the supervision system. The author believes that, in view of our country current banking supervision, we should perfect the external supervision system, improve the internal governance structure of our country's banks, give full play to the comprehensive effect of internal and external supervision. At the same time, but also We should pay more attention to the improvement of information disclosure system and further strengthen supervision. In addition, we should focus on filling in the gaps in the legal system and establishing a banking regulatory regime consistent with international standards.

【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D996.2;D922.281

【参考文献】