金融控股公司法對公司治理與市場的影響：台灣案例

Abstract

本文採用2000-2001年之間所有台灣銀行、劵商、保險公司每日收盤價，並且應用近似無相關模型，以探討在金融控股公司法立法過程中的對股價的宣告效果，並同時對檢驗包含公司治理變數對宣告效果的影響。實證結果指出，在立法過程中，我們發現銀行、保險公司及證券業並無顯著異常報酬發生。我們推論是因打破金融界限，使業者銷售產品的管道增加，雖從中獲得小幅利益，卻與股價相抵銷，故無顯著異常報酬發生。另外，我們試圖使用橫斷面分析測試公司治理變數與財務指標對股價反應有無解釋能力與影響。我們發現，在立法過程中，公司規模、獲利力、交易量與股價並無顯著差異；而董事會規模、內部所有權與質押比率對股價具有解釋能力。

In this paper, we apply the Seemingly Unrelated Regression model to the daily closing prices of banks, securities firms and insurers obtained from TEJ during 2000-2001 in order to examine the effect of stock price reactions to announcements related to the Financial Holding Company Act. We find that there is no significant abnormal return on any of the three stock sub-portfolios. We interpret this result to mean that the concessions that the financial sector participants made to pass the legislation resulted in a deal that left them little in way of average net incremental benefits. The major benefits from the product-line diversification implemented by banks, securities firms and insurers appeared to have already been reflected in their stock prices. In addition, we observed that the benefits (costs) in the case of each sub-portfolio did not differ, regardless of the profitability, size and trading volume of different kinds of financial institutions. In a cross-sectional analysis, we looked to see whether the corporate governance variables could help explain the possible market abnormal returns surrounding the event date. We found that the corporate governance variables had significant explanatory power around the date the legislation became effective.