论一行三会监管模式的改革路径

发布时间：2018-03-06 20:11

本文选题：混业经营　切入点：双峰模式　出处：《山东大学》2017年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：自2015年夏季股市动荡开始,越来越多的人对中国金融市场分业监管模式提出质疑,认为现行的监管模式存在着众多问题。2015年11月3日十三五规划指出,要改革并完善适应现代金融市场的金融监管框架。2016年《政府工作报告》中指明了"对风险要做到全面覆盖,尽快对监管体制进行改革"的金融监管改革新路。2017年习近平同志强调要按照国际标准及时弥补金融监管的短板,通过体制改革来创造金融行业推动实体发展的机遇。这预示着中国金融市场监管将迎来大变革。本文第一部分介绍了我国金融监管模式的历史发展和"一行三会"的具体职责。随着金融市场的发展,我国金融监管经历了零监管时代、混业经营单一监管时代、分业经营分业监管时代并一直延续至今。《人民银行法》明确了人民银行从成立起就被赋予了货币政策相关职能以及在金融市场上维护系统稳定的功能。三会各自依据《银行业监督管理法》、《证券法》、《保险法》规定对银行业、证券业、保险业进行法律监管。第二部分介绍了金融监管模式的两组概念,即以实质内容进行划分的机构监管、功能监管、目标监管和以外在形式进行划分的多头监管、双峰监管,通过对比各种模式的优劣,提出以目标监管为实质,以双峰监管模式为外在表现的模式更符合未来监管要求。同时介绍了美国双线多头监管机制未来改革方向、英国和澳大利亚的双峰监管模式优势,明确了国际金融监管模式选择的大趋势。第三部分明确了我国现行"一行三会"监管模式存在的影子银行监管空白、金融集团监管重叠、联席会议形同虚设等问题,并从法律层面进行了原因分析。由于"一行三会"法律地位不独立、行政级别的影响以及部级联席会议不形成正式法规文件等导致了众多监管问题的出现。第四部分对我国"一行三会"改革方向进行了阐述,从监管模式选择、明确监管目标以及具体改革路径三部分展开叙述。笔者建议选择双峰监管模式,两大目标分别为通过加强审慎监管来维护金融系统稳定和加强金融机构经营行为监管来维护消费者合法权益。在具体改革路径上,不宜直接进行机构的整合,而应该分步走。第一步应通过修改《人民银行法》在法律上明确人民银行在监管机构中的领导地位,并通过法律明确部级联席会议的工作机制,加强监管部门的沟通。第二步应将《银行业监督管理法》、《证券法》和《保险法》中关于审慎监管和行为监管的相关法条进行整合,形成一套完整的标准,在监管机构实行统一监管标准一定时间之后再讨论第三步机构整合。第三步将三会中负责监管审慎经营的部门合并到银监会的职责中,而将三个负责消费者保护的部门合并到证监会的职责之中,形成我国金融监管的"双峰",人民银行主导,并加强与财政部、发改委等监管机构的协调配合。
[Abstract]:Since the stock market turmoil began in 2015, more and more people have questioned the separated supervision model of China's financial markets, believing that there are many problems in the current regulatory model. In November 3rd 2015, the 13th Five-Year Plan pointed out that. To reform and improve the financial regulatory framework adapted to modern financial markets, the 2016 Government work report states that "risk must be fully covered." "A new way to reform the financial supervision system as soon as possible". In 2017, Comrade Xi Jinping stressed the need to make up for the shortcomings of financial supervision in a timely manner in accordance with international standards. Through the system reform, we can create the opportunity for the financial industry to promote the entity development. This indicates that the supervision of the Chinese financial market will usher in a great change. The first part of this paper introduces the historical development of the financial supervision model in China and the "one line and three sessions". "specific responsibilities... with the development of financial markets, The financial supervision in our country has experienced the era of zero supervision, the era of mixed operation and the era of single supervision. The people's bank law has made clear that the people's bank has been entrusted with the functions related to monetary policy and the maintenance of system stability in the financial market since its establishment. According to the Banking Supervision and Administration Law, the Securities Law, and the Insurance Law, The second part introduces two sets of concepts of the financial supervision model, namely, institutional supervision, functional supervision, target supervision and multi-supervision, which are divided into two parts: the substantive content, the functional supervision, the target supervision, and the non-formal multi-supervision. By comparing the merits and demerits of each mode, the paper puts forward that the model which takes the target supervision as the essence and the double peak supervision mode as the external performance is more in line with the future regulatory requirements. At the same time, it introduces the direction of the future reform of the dual line and long regulatory mechanism in the United States. The advantages of the two-peak regulatory model in Britain and Australia make clear the general trend of the choice of international financial regulatory model. The third part clarifies the gap of shadow banking supervision in the current supervision mode of "one line and three committees" in China, and the overlapping supervision of financial groups. The joint meeting is virtually empty and causes are analyzed from the legal level. As the legal status of the "one line, three sessions" is not independent, The influence of the administrative level and the fact that the joint ministerial meeting does not form a formal legal document have led to the emergence of many regulatory problems. Part 4th expounds the reform direction of the "one line, three sessions" in China, and chooses the regulatory model. The author proposes to choose the double peak supervision mode. The two major objectives are to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of consumers by strengthening prudential supervision to maintain the stability of the financial system and to strengthen the supervision of the operating behavior of financial institutions. In the specific reform path, it is not appropriate to directly integrate the institutions. The first step should be to clarify in law the leading position of the people's Bank in the regulatory bodies by amending the people's Bank Law, and to clarify the working mechanism of the joint ministerial meeting through the law. The second step is to integrate the relevant provisions of the Banking Supervision and Management Law, the Securities Law, and the Insurance Law on prudential and behavioral supervision, so as to form a complete set of standards. Discuss the third step of institutional integration after the regulators have implemented the unified regulatory standards for a certain period of time. The third step is to merge the departments in charge of supervision and prudential operation into the responsibilities of the CBRC. By merging the three departments in charge of consumer protection into the responsibilities of the CSRC, the people's Bank of China will take the lead and strengthen coordination with the Ministry of Finance, the NDRC and other regulatory agencies.
【学位授予单位】：山东大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：F832.1

【参考文献】