美国联邦政府监管中的行政罚款制度研究

The System of Administrative Penalties Imposed by Federal Regulatory Agencies in the US

行政罚款是美国联邦政府监管机构日益频繁使用的执法手段。行政罚款主要适用于与政府监管或者税收征收相关的违法行为,相对人的违法行为属于行政犯而非自然犯,并且其适用能够实现预防或者救济的功能。在联邦立法中设置行政罚款条款时往往注重与其他执法工具的组合,突出其弹性灵活的优点,使其成为刑罚、吊销许可证等制裁方式的重要补充。在罚款金额的确定上,美国联邦法律和行政规则往往明确规定执法机关确定罚款金额的公式和调整系数。行政机关在评估确定罚款金额时,往往同时考虑违法收益和违法程度,以求实现最佳的威慑效果。为了确保行政罚款的有效、高效和公正性,法律在实施程序方面提供了两种主要模式选择,一种是赋予行政机关对行政罚款和解进行评估并作出妥协的权力,但要求有更高水平的行政程序保障;一种则将实质性的权力赋予司法机关,但是强调行政程序的灵活和效率。如果相对人没有依照监管机构的罚款决定或者双方达成的和解协议交纳行政罚款时,联邦地区法院负责强制执行罚款的决定或者和解协议,法律同时规定了可以按日加收罚款或者提供禁令救济。行政罚款资金一般上缴国库,但是为了奖励举报人或者救济受害人的目的,法律作出特殊安排。

Civil penalties, mainly applicable to unlawful acts violating government regulation and tax collection, have been increasingly used as means of law enforcement by federal regu latory agencies in the United States. For unlawful acts committed by parties concerned, they are part of administrative offence instead of natural crime and enforcement of civil penalties can play a role of prevention and remedy. When drawing up provisions of administrative penalties in federal law, attention is paid to their combination with other law enforcement tools, so to highlight their flexibility and function of important supplement to other sanctions such as criminal penalty and rev ocation of license. When determining the amount of fines, federal statutes and administrative rules as well have clearly stipulated specific formulas and factors of adjustment. In assessing and deter mining the amount of fines, administrative agencies will take into consideration both unlawful prof its and seriousness of unlawful acts so as to maximize the effect of deterrence. In order to guaran tee the efficiency, effectiveness and fairness of administrative penalty, two paradigms have been established in procedures of law enforcement. One concerns power conferred on administrative a gencies in relation to assessment of settlement of fines and reaching a compromise. This paradigm requires a higher level of procedural safeguards. The other confers substantive power on the court but stresses the flexibility and efficiency of administrative procedures. In case the party concerned fails to pay fines i tween two parties, mposed by federal dis a regulatory agency or defined trict court is responsible for the by settlement agreement reached be execution of the decision of penalty or the settlement agreement. The law also provides that daily penalty sued. Civil fines collected usually are turned over to the Treasury, reward whistleblower or to compensate for the victim. and but injunctive relief can be is exceptions also provided to