期刊文献+

中国金融业全面开放后的金融安全问题思考:“JP摩根在日本受罚”事件的案例分析 被引量:2

China′s Financial Safety after the Overall Opening up of Its Financial Sector——Case Study of JP Morgan being Punished in Japan
下载PDF
导出
摘要 2006年4月5日,日本金融厅分别对JP摩根信托银行和JP摩根大通银行东京分行进行了行政处罚,这是一个月内日本金融厅对JP摩根集团进行的第三次和第四次处罚。本文对“JP摩根在日本受罚”事件从资产证券化中的信息不对称及关联方交易,房地产业务急剧扩张可能引发的房地产泡沫经济,以及日本金融厅对JP摩根大通集团的处罚力度三个角度进行了分析,并进一步讨论其对中国金融业全面开放后金融安全问题的警示,提出我国应该:(1)警惕“资产证券化”可能引发更复杂的金融风险,加强金融监管部门的“联合监管”;(2)警惕外资对房地产业务的争夺将吹大“房地产泡沫”;(3)我国需进一步明确对“信托业开放程度”的规定。 On April 5, 2006, the Financial Services Agency of Japan imposed the third and fourth administrative actions on JP Morgan Trust Bank Limited and JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., Tokyo Branch. In this paper, we analyze this event from three perspectives: the asymmetric information and transactions between the related parties in assess securitization,the real-estate bubble caused by the expansion of real-estate business and the strength of the administrative action on JP Morgan by the Financial Services Agency of Japan,aiming at giving some insightful implications for China′s financial safety after its completely opening up the financial sector.Based on our findings, we suggest that the government should, firstly, beware of the complicated financial risks resulted from the assess securitization and reinforce the cooperation among the financial regulation departments;secondly,beware of the real-estate bubble incurred by the entry of foreign funds into China′s real-estate business;thirdly,further clarify the degree to which China should open up its trust industry.
出处 《管理评论》 2006年第6期4-10,共7页 Management Review
基金 中国科学院研究生院科研启动基金项目资助。
  • 相关文献

参考文献12

  • 1Financial Services Agency of Japan. Administrative actions on JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., Tokyo Branch. April 5, 2006. http://www.fsa.go.jp/en/news/2006/20060405-2.html
  • 2Financial Services Agency of Japan. Administrative actions on JP Morgan Trust Bank Limited. April 5, 2006. http://www.fsa.go.jp/en/news/2006/20060405-1.html
  • 3Financial Services Agency of Japan. Administrative action on JP Morgan Asset Management (Japan) Limited. March 30, 2006. http://www.fsa.go.jp/en/news/2006/20060330.html
  • 4Financial Services Agency of Japan. Administrative action on JP Morgan Securities Asia Pte. Limited, Tokyo Branch. March 9,2006. http://www.fsa.go.jp/en/news/2006/20060309.html
  • 5山本康雄.1998年的日本与世界经济.上海:上海人民出版社,1998
  • 6叶凌风.资产证券化中信息不对称问题研究[J].金融理论与实践,2006(2):66-68. 被引量:11
  • 7洪艳蓉.资产证券化信息披露研究[J].证券市场导报,2005(7):28-34. 被引量:11
  • 8张维迎.博弈论与信息经济学[M].上海:上海人民出版社,2002..
  • 9JP Morgan Securities Asia Pte. Limited, Tokyo Branch.
  • 10JP Morgan Asset Management (Japan) Limited.

二级参考文献12

  • 1陈桂明,纪格非.美国证据法中的保密特权原则及其对我国证据立法的启示[J].法学评论,2002,20(2):104-111. 被引量:10
  • 2阿克洛夫·斯彭斯和斯蒂格列茨论文精选[M].上海:商务出版社,2002..
  • 3张维迎.博弈论与信息经济学[M].上海:上海人民出版社,2002..
  • 4Tamar Frankel, Securitization:Structured Financing Asset-Backed Securities, Little,Brown & Company Limited 1991.
  • 5Theodor Baums & Eddy Wymeersch ed., Asset-backed Securitization in Europe, Kluwer Law International Ltd., 1996.
  • 6Jason H.P. Kravitt ed.,Securitization of Financial Assets, Second Edition, Aspen Law & Business 2000.
  • 7(英)HoldenJ.Milnes著 中国银行港澳管理处培训中心译.银行法律与实务第一册--银行与客户[M].中国银行港澳管理处培训中心,1988..
  • 8Robert Palache & Lan Bell, Legal and Tax Issues, in International Securitisation, IFR 1992, p.122.
  • 9.在英国,如果一个人在收到信息时可以合理地意识到信息的秘密性,则其负有保密义务.See:Allison Coleman,the Legal Protection of Trade Secrets, Sweet & Maxwell, 1992, p.32[Z].,..
  • 10.有关巴塞尔委员会对证券化的探索历程,参见洪艳蓉.资产证券化金融监管:巴塞尔委员会的经验与启示[J].,..

共引文献100

同被引文献23

引证文献2

二级引证文献10

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部