台灣上市櫃電子業公司之財報舞弊研究-以博達個案為例

Abstract

本研究動機起自2001年安隆財報舞弊至近年全球中資股地雷事件頻傳，以個案分析2004年博達財報造假案，從會計制度、財務分析、銀行授信、信用評等和資本市場運作等審核角度，重新整理和歸納分析博達案，期望能在歷史的事件中汲取教訓。另外，本研究以2001年至2011年間上市櫃中小型電子業公司的財務報表，資本額介於10億至100億之間，並加入4家面臨破產或具有財務危機之公司，總計資料為3,332筆作為樣本數，採Logistic Regression Model(羅吉斯迴歸模型)為基礎，應變數分類為破產與否，未破產公司再利用TCRI信用評等作對照條件加以分析，並佐以個案分析相關資料和過去學者專家之研究，從財務變數和總體經濟變數找出企業發生危機的相關變數，來建構企業財務危機預警模型，期望能提早發現導致公司破產的相關因子。 實証結果顯示，在應變數以財務健全對照破產公司分類，自變數以槓桿比率和利率對於破產模型具有顯著效果，但槓桿比例與預期破產模型關係呈現相反，檢視破產公司樣本資料，印證台灣2004年所爆發的地雷股，其財務報表在自有資產上，大都維持良好的財務槓桿，並無異常負債比例，也因此該年地雷風暴都是猝死倒閉，此也造成自變數槓桿比率與財務管理學上相違之因。另以未破產的公司資料再加上信用評等對照公司財務狀況作分析，總資產報酬率、槓桿比率、市場價值和利率等變數都對此模型具有顯著的效果，且與破產模型關係預期符合。信用評等與總資產報酬率、槓桿比率、市場價值及利率等變數影響有顯著關連，此與台灣金融業實務上是一致的，其作業流程依賴信用評等指標作為授信依據。 經個案與實証分析，公司的財務狀況，若能正確藉由財務報表顯示，資產報酬率(ROA)和槓桿比率等財務比率變數都具有顯著效果，投資人可由財報正確評估公司經營績效和未來發展潛力。但當公司在財報上動手腳，以財務比例作為分析企業破產之相關變數就不顯著，顯示當財報舞弊時，財務報表的任何分析只是徒勞無功，甚至還可能會誤導投資人的決策分析。

Enron scandal in 2001 is the head to lead my study, while in recent years subsequent rubbish stock events happened in Global Chinese base companies, which finds me starting the research by analyzing the case of fictional financial report of PROCOMP Informatics LTD. occurred in 2004. By examining accounting system, financial analysis, loan credit rating in bank, credit evaluation and capital market operation to manage, induct and analyze PROCOMP Informatics LTD. case again, which purpose is to learn a lesson from the history. Besides, the sampling of the study is based on the SME (small-medium-enterprise) technology companies, which were listed in Taiwan’s stock market from 2001 to 2011 and capital between 1 billion and 10 billion. While adding 4 companies which are facing bankruptcy or financial crisis, the total sample size of the study reaches 3,332. By using Logistic Regression Model as foundation, the dependent variance is fixed as whether went bankruptcy or not. In additional, by using TCRI (Taiwan Corporate Credit Risk Index) as control condition, to run the analysis of those companies which didn’t go bankruptcy. Furthermore, according to financial and macroeconomic variance of the case study mentioned above and the researches were done by savants in the past, to build a financial crisis warning model from those related variances lead enterprises to go financial crisis, which expect to discover earlier the factors which lead a company to go bankruptcy. The evidence states, by using whether a company has health finance situation or not as dependent variances, leverage ratio and interest are 2 independent variances which show statistical significance level of the bankruptcy, which actually points the relation between leverage ratio and the model are on the contrary. To check the samples of bankruptcy companies, the financial statement of those companies which became rubbish stock in 2004, basically the asset remain in good leverage ratio, without any unusual debt ratio. It directs me to believe those companies were closed in sudden in the period when rubbish stock event happened. It’s also the reason that independent variance leverage ratio is big different from what mentioned in financial management. If adding credit evaluation data to analyze the financial circumstance of the companies which didn’t go bankruptcy, no matter the return on total assets, leverage ratio, market value, or the variance of interest are figured out its significance level, which conclusion meets my anticipate. Credit rating and the return on total assets, leverage ratio, market value, or the variance of interest shows significance level is actually unanimous in Taiwan financial sector, whose loan credit rating process mainly relies on credit rating system. After the analysis of case study, the evidence is if the financial statement can exactly show the financial ratio variances like ROA and leverage ratio are under significant level, then investors no doubt enable to estimate an enterprise’s operate performance and potential. However, if the enterprise buries fictions in the financial statement, to use financial ratio as tool to analyze enterprise’s bankruptcy wouldn’t show significant level. It’s obviously that not only financial report analysis will be worked to no avail, but also lead investors’ to make wrong decision if make financial statement fiction.