美國《外國公司問責法案》對中國經濟/法律影響評估

Abstract

資訊揭露與透明度（Disclosure and Transparency）係證券市場健全之基石，也是證券監管制度設計的核心。2020年中國瑞幸咖啡造假案，促使美國《外國公司問責法案（Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act of 2020）》立法頒布實施。該法案正是《沙賓法案（Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002）》的延續與修正(amend），目的在於確保在美國上市的外國公司之財務資訊公開披露與真實可靠，以保護美國投資者的利益。正因為中概股（China Concept Stocks）公司在美國金融市場是最大的外國公司群體，《外國公司問責法案》也被視為針對在美上市的中國公司。本研究採取質性研究與檔案分析方法，檢視中國官方政府及40家中國公司之決策，進而討論並評估對中國政治及經濟的影響。 因應《外國公司問責法案》之頒布施行，中國官方政府一方面制定相關金融監管法規，嚴格規範在美國上市的公司，如國有企業及掌握巨量數據的互聯網公司；另一方面，積極與美國監管機構「美國上市公司會計監督委員會」（Public Company Accounting Oversight Board，PCAOB）進行協商制定跨境監管辦法。在美國上市的中國公司則因為本身問題，及中國法規禁止提供會計師事務所的審計工作底稿（audit working papers），基本上難以符合美國《外國公司問責法案》規範要求，面臨退市（delisting）危機，因而採用「私有化退市」、「自願退市」、「二次上市」、「雙重主要上市」，以及更換會計師事務所留美上市等不同選擇。 然而，事情發生轉機在2022年8月26日，中美兩國宣布簽署「審計監管合作協議（The Audit Supervision Cooperation Agreement）」，將允許美國PCAOB在第三方目的地（香港），而且沒有中國政府官員參與的條件下，對在美國上市的中國公司進行審計工作底稿的調查。2022年9月至11月，美國PCAOB人員第一次在香港現場檢查會計師事務所之審計工作底稿。2023年5月10日，美國PCAOB發布 2022 年檢查報告並表示：「對於中國大陸的報告顯示缺陷的比例令人無法接受，這些缺陷的嚴重程度以至於認為審計公司未能獲得足夠、適當的審計證據來支持其對上市公司財務報表或財務報告內部控制的工作」。 本文最後探究從美國《外國公司問責法案》立法頒布實施過程，觀察到從中美兩國競爭的衝突下，商業問題政治化、政治問題法律化、國家安全擴大化的情境。美國則運用長臂管轄（long-arm jurisdiction）等原則，企圖維持在全世界政治及經濟的領導地位，而美國《外國公司問責法案》後續效應仍續發展中，中美兩國政府﹑中國公司以及審計機構的因應策略與方法，皆可提供進一步延續性探討與研究。

Information disclosure and transparency are the cornerstones of a sound securities market and a well-designed regulatory system. The 2020 China Luckin Coffee fraud case prompted the enactment and implementation of the US “Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act of 2020,” which amended the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. This act ensures transparent and reliable public disclosure of financial information from foreign companies listed in the United States. This protects the interests of American investors. As China concept stocks constitute the largest group of foreign companies on the US financial market, the Act targets Chinese companies listed in the US. This research employs qualitative research and archival analysis methods to examine the decisions of the Chinese government and 40 Chinese companies, further discussing and evaluating their impact on Chinese politics and the economy. In response to the implementation of the Act, Chinese government has taken two approaches. On the one hand, they have formulated relevant financial regulatory laws to strictly regulate companies listed in the US, including state-owned enterprises and internet companies with substantial data holdings. On the other hand, they actively engage in negotiations with the US regulatory body, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB), to establish cross-border regulatory measures. Chinese companies listed in the US face the risk of delisting due to inherent issues and Chinese regulations prohibiting the provision of audit working papers to audit firms, making it challenging for them to comply with the Act's requirements. As a result, these companies have explored various options, such as privatization, voluntary delisting, secondary listing, dual primary listing, and changing audit firms, to maintain their US listing. However, on August 26, 2022, China and the US announced the signing of the “Audit Supervision Cooperation Agreement,” allowing the US PCAOB to investigate audit working papers of Chinese companies listed in the US in a third-party location (Hong Kong) without Chinese government officials. From September to November 2022, US PCAOB personnel conducted their first on-site inspection of accounting firms in Hong Kong. On May 10, 2023, the US PCAOB released its 2022 inspection report, stating that “The rate of deficiencies in mainland China's reports is unacceptable, and the severity of these deficiencies is such that the audit firms did not obtain sufficient, appropriate audit evidence to support their work on the listed company's financial statements or internal control over financial reporting.” In conclusion, this article explores the process of enacting and implementing the Act, observing how commercial issues become politicized, political issues become legalized, and national security concerns expand amid competition between China and the US. The US employs principles like long-arm jurisdiction to maintain its leadership position in global politics and the economy. The subsequent effects of the Act are still developing. The strategies and methods adopted by the Chinese and US governments, Chinese companies, and audit institutions provide avenues for further study and research.