美國Dodd-Frank Act有關證券化利益衝突規範之評析──給台灣的借鏡

The analysis for the conflict of interest in securitization in Dodd-Frank Act: An experience for Taiwan

「證券化」，是一種須結合商業銀行、投資銀行、資產管理機構（例如共同基金、避險基金、私募股權基金等）、特定目的機構及保險公司等相關機構共同參與的架構式金融。因為此種資金融通方式已突破過去銀行、證券監理法制的區劃，致難以將之納入在主管機關監管範圍之內。美國次級房貸風暴即起因於證券化參與機構濫用其代理人「資訊不對稱」的優勢地位，造成對本人之「利益衝突」。加上從事證券化之各金融機構介入彼此領域過深，金融體系在骨牌效應影響下，產生「系統性風險」，最後必須由聯邦政府利用納稅義務人的稅金進行補貼，造成「逆選擇」現象。

Securitization is a measure of structured finance that must joint commercial bank, asset management institutions (such as mutual funds, hedge funds, private equity funds, etc.), special purpose vehicle (SPV), insurance companies, and other related agencies to participate. It confuses the traditional separation of banking and securities activities that it is hard to be supervised by related financial authorities. U.S. subprime mortgage crisis was resulted from the presence of conflict of interest involving the information asymmetry between securitization participants and investors. Moreover, entered each participant’s inherent field too deeply, systematic risk is easy to bring out when a participant faced insolvency or bankruptcy. In the end, Federal Government pushed bailout plan to solve systematic risk problem by using taxpayers’fund. And then, the market faced an adverse selection problem.