中新外国投资法比较研究

发布时间：2018-04-03 03:14

本文选题：中国　切入点：新加坡　出处：《西南政法大学》2015年硕士论文

【摘要】：1979年,中国第一部与外国投资有关的法律《中外合资经营企业法》颁布,开启了中国外国投资法30多年来的发展之路;1959年,新加坡第一部与外国投资有关的法律---《经济扩展法令》颁布,虽然这部法律并不是完全意义上的外国投资立法,但由于其中含有与投资有关的规定并且不区分内外资适用,因此,这部法律标志着新加坡外国投资法的兴起。从各自颁布第一部外国投资法开始,中国和新加坡分别根据国内的经济形势和对外国投资的实际需求,制定了诸多与外国投资相关的法律,逐渐形成了体系。现如今,在国际投资越来越趋于自由化和便利化的大背景下,国际投资的法律环境日渐宽松,全球外国直接投资规模不断扩大,投资的机会也越来越多。中国和新加坡分别作为亚洲重要的投资对象国,也不断在这一大背景下对其外国投资法律体系进行发展和完善。深入了解一国的外国投资法对于对该国进行外国投资十分重要。因此,本文拟从法律条文本身作为切入点,对中新两国的外国投资法进行宏观的梳理和细致的比较分析,但鉴于篇幅限制,在某些与投资相关的法律制度上将不作具体分析,仅在涉及相关制度时作介绍性总结。第一部分是中新外国投资法历史沿革及立法模式。首先分别介绍了中国和新加坡外国投资法的产生背景和发展阶段,从宏观上对中新外国投资法进行了梳理。然后总结出各自外国投资法所采用的立法模式并作出比较。第二部分是中新外国投资准入制度比较。主要包括两个方面的内容,第一部分是外国投资的准入范围即外资法鼓励、限制和禁止外资进入的领域,这是外资准入的实质内容。第二部分是外资准入的审批,这是程序问题。然后是在总结中新两国各自的准入制度后做出比较。第三部分是中新外国投资待遇比较。这部分内容主要包括外国投资税收优惠、国有化征收问题以及利润的汇出管理等。通过比较总结出中国外国投资法在某些方面对于外资实行的是次国民待遇,有些方面又对外资实行的是超国民待遇。而新加坡则普遍实行国民待遇。第四部分是中新外国投资争端解决机制比较。内容主要涉及两国有关外国投资的争端解决的法律渊源和争端解决方式。
[Abstract]:In 1979, China's first law on foreign investment, the Sino-Foreign Joint Ventures Law, was promulgated, opening the way for the development of China's Foreign Investment Law for more than 30 years.Singapore's first foreign investment-related law, the Economic expansion Act, was enacted. Although this law is not entirely foreign investment legislation, because it contains investment-related provisions and does not distinguish between domestic and foreign investment,Thus, the law marks the rise of Singapore's foreign investment law.Starting from the promulgation of the first foreign investment law, China and Singapore formulated many laws related to foreign investment according to the domestic economic situation and the actual demand for foreign investment, and gradually formed a system.Nowadays, under the background of liberalization and facilitation of international investment, the legal environment of international investment is more and more relaxed, the scale of global foreign direct investment is expanding, and the opportunities of investment are increasing.China and Singapore, as important investment target countries in Asia, have been developing and perfecting their foreign investment legal system under this background.An in-depth understanding of a country's foreign investment law is important for foreign investment in that country.Therefore, this paper intends to use the legal provisions itself as a starting point to conduct a macroscopic combing and detailed comparative analysis of the foreign investment laws of China and New Zealand, but in view of space limitations, there will be no specific analysis on some investment-related legal systems.Make an introductory summary only when it comes to relevant systems.The first part is the history and legislative model of Sino-New Zealand Foreign Investment Law.Firstly, it introduces the background and development stage of the foreign investment law of China and Singapore, and combs the foreign investment law of China and Singapore from the macro point of view.Then summarizes the respective foreign investment law adopted the legislative model and makes the comparison.The second part is the comparison of the admission system of foreign investment between China and New Zealand.It mainly includes two aspects. The first part is the scope of access to foreign investment, namely, the scope of foreign investment law to encourage, restrict and prohibit foreign investment into the field, this is the substantive content of foreign investment access.The second part is the examination and approval of foreign capital access, which is a procedural issue.Then, after summing up the admission system of China and New Zealand, the author makes a comparison.The third part is the comparison of the treatment of foreign investment between China and New Zealand.This part mainly includes foreign investment tax preference, nationalization expropriation and profit transfer management.Through the comparison, it is concluded that the foreign investment law of China is the second national treatment for foreign capital in some aspects, and the super national treatment for foreign capital in some aspects.Singapore, on the other hand, applies national treatment in general.The fourth part is the comparison of dispute settlement mechanism between China and New Zealand.The content mainly deals with the legal sources and dispute settlement methods of foreign investment dispute settlement between the two countries.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D922.295

【相似文献】