從比較法視角探討中國大陸影子銀行的界定與監管

Abstract

08年國際金融危機之後，影子銀行因被指責為美國次貸危機爆發和蔓延的原因之一，而成為金融領域研究和關注的重點。而當金融危機的陰霾散去，影子銀行卻又開始蓬勃發展，這表明，影子銀行的發展的確是一個不可忽視的發展方向。 影子銀行通常是指在傳統銀行業之外進行了信用轉換、流動性轉換、期限轉換的一個信用仲介系統。與傳統銀行不同，影子銀行系統是依靠多個金融機構配合，組成一個金融鏈條以完成這些功能的。但是這樣的系統性視角在“影子銀行”概念舶來中國大陸的時候產生了異化。在中國大陸，影子銀行被理解為多種具有共同特徵的金融機構或金融活動的集合，包括：P2P融資平臺、私募基金、融資性擔保公司、小額貸款公司、典當行、融資租賃公司、貨幣市場基金、理財業務、信託公司、資產證券化等非銀行金融機構或者非銀行傳統業務。這兩個概念看似接近，實則不然：中國大陸影子銀行是替代了傳統商業銀行吸收公眾存款或發放貸款的功能的金融機構或者活動；而美國影子銀行體系是替代了傳統商業銀行借短貸長的功能的金融仲介。二者的本質區別在於：中國大陸對影子銀行的認定是，只要對銀行的吸收存款功能或者發放貸款功能有所替代，就屬於影子銀行，借與貸之間是“或”的關係。而美國影子銀行借短貸長功能中的借和貸是“並”的關係，只有既完成短借又完成長貸才會被視為影子銀行。 會出現這樣的定義差別，其原因在於美國影子銀行與中國大陸影子銀行意圖解決的問題不一樣。美國提出影子銀行概念的背景是金融危機，針對的是影子銀行給整個金融市場帶來的系統性風險，因此關注重點集中在容易導致融資鏈條斷裂的借短貸長功能，將影子銀行定位為取代了銀行借短貸長功能的信用仲介系統。而中國大陸影子銀行的概念提出則以金融抑制為背景，監管者意圖解決的是上述這些非銀行金融機構和銀行非傳統業務對當前既有的的強力管制的普遍突破問題，因此對銀行吸收公眾存款或者貸款業務有替代作用的機構和活動都被認定為影子銀行。 這樣的學界定義自然也影響了中國大陸的官方視角和監管思路，以107號文為綱領性文件的中國大陸影子銀行監管體系對影子銀行的定義的也是采單個金融機構或金融產品的集合的觀點，而沒有使用系統性視角。在監管思路上，採取的是一行三會分業經營、分業監管的模式，將影子銀行塞入既有的監管體系中去，缺乏像美國在08金融危機後金改方案中金融穩定監督委員會(FSOC)一類的宏觀監控機構。然而在實踐中，中國大陸的影子銀行已經在長期的與金融監管的博弈中發展出了類似美國影子銀行系統一樣的金融鏈條，雖然交易模式還很簡單與粗糙，但已經具備了和美國影子系統同質的功能和風險（如2013年錢荒）。這也為當前在頂層設計上仍有一些滯後的監管制度敲響了警鐘。 綜上所述，中國大陸對“影子銀行”概念的本土化變形當然是有其合理性的，但是其想要解決的問題也具有非常強的時代背景。當下，既要在資金缺口銀行不足的情況下發展影子銀行，又要在影子銀行的風險初露端倪之時完善監管模式，應當結合國情和美國比較法，在修正影子銀行定義的同時，對金融監管也做出相應調整，以適應中國大陸影子銀行的動態發展。

In the aftermath of the 08 international financial crisis, shadow bank has become the focus of research in the financial field because of being blamed for the outbreak and spread of the US subprime mortgage crisis. However, when the financial crisis of the haze dispersed, the shadow bank has begun to flourish, which shows that the development of shadow banks is indeed an important direction of development that can not be neglected. The shadow bank usually refers to a credit intermediary system which has carried out credit transformation, liquidity transformation and maturity transformation outside the traditional banking system. Unlike traditional banks, the shadow banking system relies on multiple financial institutions to form a financial chain to accomplish these functions. But such a systemic perspective changed when the concept of 'shadow bank' was imported into China. In mainland China, shadow banks are understood as a collection of financial institutions or financial activities with common characteristics, including non-bank finance institutions or non-bank traditional business such as peer-to-peer financing platforms, private equity companies, financing guarantee companies, microfinance companies, pawn shops, financial leasing companies, money market mutual funds, wealth management services, trust companies, asset securitization. The two concepts seem to be close, and in fact they are different. The shadow bank in China is a financial institution or activity that replaces the function of traditional commercial banks in absorbing public deposits or issuing loans, while the American shadow banking system is a credit intermediate system that replaces traditional commercial banks with the function of both lending and deposit taking. There is an essential difference between the definition of shadow banking in China and America. The Chinese mainland's recognition of the Shadow Bank is that, a financial institution or financial business can be assumed as a shadow bank in the Chinese mainland, as long as it replaces the bank's function to absorb deposits or lend a loan. In the United States, however, it is considered a shadow bank only when both lending and deposits taking function are replaced. The difference is due to the fact that when the US and mainland China define the shadow banks, the problems they intend to solve are different. The background of America's definition of shadow banking is a financial crisis, and regulator wants to guard against the systemic risks that shadow banks bring to the financial markets, and therefore pays attention to the maturity transformation function that leads to the breakage of the financing chains. So, the shadow bank in America is defined as a credit intermediate system that replaces the bank's lending and deposits taking function. In mainland China, however, when the concept of shadow banking was proposed, financial regulation was already so stringent that regulators intended to address the widespread breakthrough in the current strict controls over non-bank financial institutions and unconventional banking operations. So in mainland China, institutions and activities that have an alternative to bank’s deposits or loans function are identified as shadow banks. This kind of academic definition has also influenced the official definition and regulation plan of mainland China. The 107th Document is an outline of the shadow banking regulatory system in mainland China, where the definition of shadow banking is a collection of individual financial institutions or financial products without a system perspective. In the way of regulation, China has adopted a regulatory model in a separate industry, using the regulatory system already in place to oversee shadow banks, and the lack of macro-monitoring institutions such as the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC), which the United States has put forward in the financial reform programme after the 08 financial crisis. However, shadow banks in mainland China have actually developed financial chains similar to the US shadow banking system in the course of a long-term game with financial regulation. While the trading model is simple and crude, it already has functions and risks that are very similar to the US shadow system (for example, the 2013 money shortage). There are still some lagging regulatory regimes that need to be vigilant. To sum up, the localization of the concept of 'shadow bank' in mainland China has its rationality, but the problems it wants to solve are also time-sensitive. At present, in the absence of both banks and funds, it is necessary to develop shadow banks and to perfect the regulatory model when shadow banks are emerging at risk. The mainland China should combine its own reality with the US regulatory approach, while revising the definition of the shadow bank and adjusting the financial regulation program to accommodate the development of shadow banks in mainland China.