本研究以「政策誘發之破壞（Policy-Induced Disruption，以下簡稱『政策破壞』，指制度規則之結構性改寫與資源取得條件之重寫，非政策價值評斷）」視角，分析宏觀審慎房市措施（選擇性信用管制、升息、存款準備率上調）對建商融資與現金流的影響。採質性單一個案設計（A公司），涵蓋期間為2014-2025年，結合文件、半結構式訪談與同業對照，並採用Pre-Post、同業基準與中斷時間序列（ITS）的三重評估設計，重建「政策事件→公司行動→財務結果」鏈條。結果顯示：A公司透過固定利率公司債／可轉債與聯貸／票券的組合，加上到期牆分散與備用流動性，擴張授信額度並降低資金成本（平均借款利率（含債）由2.74%降至2025年8月2.60%），同時縮短決策時滯並降低12/24月到期牆集中度，在量縮與利率上行下維持營運韌性。本文補充建商端制度情境（資訊揭露、授信集中度）之脈絡說明，並將核心指標之操作型定義與更新頻率彙整於附錄二〈Measurement Codebook〉，同時界定外部效度邊界與可移植條件。據此提出三支柱治理方案：特許化（準入）× 建商評鑑制（分級）× 差別化信貸（風險分層），以準入與評級連動LTV與定價，並設定固定利率最低配比與到期牆上限作為風險配額規則，兼顧總體穩定與資金配置效率。

This study adopts a policy-induced disruption lens, defining policy disruption as a structural rewriting of institutional rules and resource-access conditions rather than a value judgment on policy, to examine how macroprudential housing measures (selective credit controls, policy-rate hikes, and higher reserve requirements) reshaped developers’ financing conditions and cash-flow risks. Using a qualitative single-case design focused on Company A over 2014-2025, and drawing on documents, semi-structured interviews, and peer benchmarking, the study triangulates evidence through pre-post comparison, peer benchmarking, and interrupted time-series inspection to reconstruct the chain from policy events to corporate responses and financial outcomes. The findings show that Company A relied on a coordinated mix of fixed-rate corporate and convertible bonds, syndicated loans, and commercial paper, together with maturity-wall diversification and standby liquidity buffers, to expand credit headroom while containing debt-inclusive borrowing costs. Its weighted average borrowing rate declined from 2.74% to 2.60% as of August 2025, decision latency shortened, and 12/24-month maturity-wall concentration eased, allowing the firm to preserve operating resilience under tightening conditions. Building on these findings, the study proposes a three-pillar governance framework of sectoral licensing, builder rating, and differentiated credit, linking entry and rating status to LTV, pricing, fixed-rate floors, and maturity-wall caps. This framework offers a more risk-sensitive alternative to one-size-fits-all quantity controls and seeks to balance macro-financial stability with more efficient credit allocation.