金融腐败的微观经济效应:一般均衡与金融业不良资产问题  

Microeconomic Effects of Financial Corruption: General Equilibrium and Bad Assets of Banking Sector

作　　者：陆磊 

机构地区：[1]招商银行,深圳100872

出　　处：《金融研究》2005年第2期13-34,共22页Journal of Financial Research

摘　　要：本文从金融腐败角度对当前银行业和证券业两个市场的诸多微观运行现象给出了新的解释,基本结论如下:第一,银行业与证券业腐败存在质与量的差别。证券业腐败具有在较短时间内对交易价格和数量进行双重操纵的特征,因而其交易对手面临投资本金和收益率的全面损失;而银行业腐败仅仅是价格加成,体现为在法定利率之上的额外收入,且受到非正规金融市场价格的制约,存在腐败定价的上限。第二,价格的市场化程度高和竞争性强是银行相对低腐败的体制因素,而价格操控性垄断和短期寻租模式是证券业腐败的体制原因。第三,无论对好企业还是坏企业而言,上市融资都意味着更高的现金收入和更低的成本,因此银行业腐败仅仅局限于寻租,而设租、圈钱和共谋是证券业腐败的基本交易特征。第四,银行业与证券业腐败直接导致了两个市场不良资产的攀升。这是金融改革成本,但不是改革到位后的成本,而是在改革过程中必然出现的成本。从两种成本比较,银行业腐败所导致的吞噬的资产虽总额巨大,但强度不如证券业不良资产。因此,在法人治理结构(所有者制约机制)不完善的时期,债权融资比股权融资的效率高。第五,银行业腐败和证券业腐败的不同体制特征是导致银行市场膨胀、证券市场萎缩的根本原因。The paper analyzes the microeconomic effects of financial corruption in banking and securities market. Though financial corruption is not the only explanation for the characteristics of micro financial behavior, it is still a persuasive framework. Conclusions are as follows. First, corruption in securities market is greater than banking sector, given the price and trading volume control in the former market, while only price control in banking industry. Second, competition is a factor to explain the relative degree of corruption. Third, IPO shows more attraction for any firms with high quality or low quality. Fourth, corruption leads to bad assets in both markets, however, such reform costs are higher in securities market. Finally, above facts affects households financial assets choice, and thus results in the expansion of banking sector and decline of securities market.

关 键 词：金融腐败 不良资产 一般均衡 微观经济效应 

分 类 号：F830[经济管理—金融学]