大量持有申報制度—斷片與重構

Abstract

我國證券交易法於 1988 年修正時參考美國證券交易所法相關規定引進大量持有申報制度，要求行為人於取得公開發行公司股份超過10%後，應向主管機關進行有關取得資金、取得目的、取得人背景等事項之申報，使發行公司及投資人能夠了解公司股權大量變動之來由及其趨向，金融控股公司法及銀行法亦設有類似之制度。 惟證券交易法僅以第43 條之1 第1 項之單一規定做為規範內容，於法律位階上存在規範密度不足之問題點，金管會所制定之申報要點亦曾遭司法院大法官釋字第586 號解釋以違反法律保留原則為由宣告違憲。於既有制度存在許多尚未釐清問題點之現狀下，2015 年企業併購法修正時卻又增設以併購目的之大量持有申報制度，有必要利用此一契機進行全面性之檢視。 本論文主要以資本市場發達國家立法例做為比較法之研究對象，其中除美國法係制度引進時之參照對象外，向來SEC 已制定許多規則並發布函釋進行內容之解釋，判例法上亦有相當豐碩之事案累積。日本法則與我國法同樣參考美國威廉斯法案而引進大量持有申報制度，受到制度導入背景之影響而設有獨特的短期大量讓與申報制度。英國法做為另一種獨立類型下規制設置之歷史脈絡與美國截然不同，並具備比較法上獨特之股東調查制度，近期英國最高法院更對於大量持有申報制度制裁手段之運用界限進行闡釋。德國法下對於違反申報義務所設置之股份權利不存在之制裁，足供本次企業併購法新修正內容於解釋論及今後立法論上之參考。 透過本文之檢討分析能夠得知，我國於制度設立當初及嗣後修正過程中存在斷片式之繼受而欠缺統一解釋方針，除金融控股公司法及銀行法存在向英國法接近之趨勢外，亦存在構成要件過於寬鬆及制度實效性確保之問題點。在近期對於資本市場透明性提升之國際潮流驅使下，大量持有申報制度之重要性進後勢必與日俱增，存在參酌諸外國法制進行全盤點檢之必要性。

In 1988, the Taiwan Securities Exchange Act had referenced to the US Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to introduce the reporting system of large-accumulation in share, requiring anyone who acquire shares of a public company for more than 10%, should disclosure the fund of acquiring, the purpose of obtaining, and the background of the perpetrator etc., in order to inform the issuing company and investors understanding the changes and the trends in shares. The Financial Holding Company Act and the Banking Act in Taiwan also has similar systems. However, the Securities Exchange Act in Taiwan has only a single provision of Section 43-1(1) as the normative content, in the legal hierarchy giving rise to the insufficient of rule density. The reporting points established by the FSC had been declared unconstitutional by Grand Justices No. 586 Explanation, which conflicting with Principle of Legal Reservation. Although the content of the reporting system has not yet been clarified, the Taiwan M&A Act introduced the reporting system of large-accumulation in share with M&A purposes in 2015. It is time for us to take advantage of this opportunity to conduct a comprehensive review of the whole content. With the analysis of this article, we can be informed that neither the set up nor the amend of the reporting system, is combined with fragments of foreign legislations, lacking an unified interpretation of its objective, and existing the problem of the excessively loose elements and effectiveness of the system. With the recent trends in the international capital market enhancing the transparency of transactions, the importance of the reporting system of large-accumulation in share would gradually become an essential element of the securities market. It is necessary to refer to foreign legislations to amend both the elements and sanctions of the reporting system, so that to insure the purpose of investors protection to be achieved.