從先買後付（BNPL）論我國之金融消費者保護法制

Abstract

BNPL 係一種提供分期功能及遞延付款之支付方式，具備申請流程簡易快速、提升消費者財務配置自由度，並有助於提升商家銷售額等優點。然而，BNPL 亦伴隨顯著之消費者保護風險，包括適合性評估不足、缺乏標準化資訊揭露、行銷招攬手法可能誤導、爭議處理機制不完善、資料蒐集及濫用風險，以及對脆弱族群之保護不足等。 隨著 BNPL 市場快速擴展，國際間對 BNPL 監管之要求亦日益升高，多數國家已將 BNPL 定位為消費者信用產品。比較法上，英美兩國皆因 BNPL 在消費信用市場中迅速成長且帶來潛在消費者風險，逐步將BNPL 納入監理框架；我國現行監管主要透過納管融資租賃公司之監理途徑進行，致使BNPL業者間適用法規分歧，形成「同業不同規」的監理落差與競爭不公平。 基此，本文主張我國應以BNPL所具之「消費信用功能」為核心，朝向兼採功能性監理之方向調整，建立一致之行為規範與消費者保護標準。本文並提出分階段的納管策略：短期透過既有法制補強未納管業者之定型化契約規範，使其保護密度貼近金融消費者保護法；中期擴大金保法適用對象至所有提供 BNPL 之業者；長期則以制定消費信用專法為目標，統一適合性評估、資訊揭露、風險控管與爭議處理等核心義務，並配套要求全面資訊揭露與資料自主權保障。

Buy Now, Pay Later (BNPL) is a payment method that provides installment and deferred payment functions. It offers advantages such as a simple and rapid application process, enhanced flexibility in consumers’ financial allocation, and potential benefits for merchants through increased sales. However, BNPL also entails significant consumer protection risks, including inadequate suitability assessments, the lack of standardized information disclosure, potentially misleading marketing and solicitation practices, insufficient dispute-resolution mechanisms, risks related to data collection and misuse, and inadequate protection for vulnerable consumers. As the BNPL market has expanded rapidly, regulatory demands for BNPL have increased correspondingly at the international level, with many jurisdictions now characterizing BNPL as a form of consumer credit. From a comparative law perspective, both the United States and the United Kingdom have responded to BNPL’s rapid growth in the consumer credit market and its associated risks by progressively bringing BNPL within their regulatory frameworks. By contrast, Taiwan’s current regulatory approach primarily relies on the regulation of finance leasing companies, resulting in divergent regulatory treatment across BNPL providers and creating regulatory inconsistencies and competitive inequities. Against this backdrop, this thesis argues that Taiwan should recalibrate its regulatory approach by centering on the “consumer credit function” inherent in BNPL and moving toward a functional regulatory model that establishes uniform conduct rules and consumer protection standards. It further proposes a phased regulatory strategy: in the short term, strengthening standardized contract requirements for non-regulated providers under existing laws to align protection levels more closely with the Financial Consumer Protection Act; in the medium term, extending the application of the Act to all BNPL providers; and in the long term, enacting a dedicated consumer credit statute to unify core obligations—such as suitability assessments, information disclosure, risk management, and dispute resolution—alongside comprehensive disclosure requirements and safeguards for consumers’ data autonomy.