【作者】 李姗姗；

【导师】 施建祥；

【作者基本信息】 浙江工商大学 ， 金融学， 2008， 硕士

【摘要】 保险行业是一种专门以风险为经营对象,为投保人提供风险保障的高风险特殊行业,保险公司偿付能力不足会引发诸多严重危害,不仅会危及保险业经营秩序的稳定、人民生活的安定,更会危及到整个金融业甚至国民经济的发展。因此,各国保险监管部门都将偿付能力的监管作为保险监管的主要内容,皆在维护保险业的市场秩序、保证保险公司具有充足的偿付能力,促进保险业的健康发展。偿付能力监管指标就是保险偿付能力监管的重要工具之一。本文以保险学监管理论和会计学财务理论为基础,对非寿险偿付能力监管指标的有效性进行了研究,探索了改善监管指标的途径,提出了改进设想。本论文围绕这一主题从四个方面展开研究。第一章引言系统的回顾了国内外偿付能力的相关研究文献,阐述了论文的写作背景和写作意义。本文将采用理论和实证相结合、定性与定量相结合的研究方法重点探讨两个问题:①我国非寿险公司现行的偿付能力监管指标是否有效;②对现行的非寿险偿付能力监管指标作出调整和改进。第二章首先介绍了保险偿付能力、偿付能力额度、偿付能力监管指标等相关概念,阐述了非寿险偿付能力的影响因素。其次从法定偿付能力额度和偿付能力监管指标两个角度介绍英美国家非寿险偿付能力监管指标的情况。英国的法定偿付能力额度法和美国的风险资本法(RBC)都是法定偿付能力额度的计算方法,但两者在计算方法、风险考虑、公司规模等方面都有显著的差异。保险监管信息系统(IRIS)和财务分析与偿付能力追踪系统(FAST)都是偿付能力监管指标体系,但两者的有效性和适用范围也有一定差异。最后本章系统的介绍了我国现行的非寿险偿付能力监管指标,并分析了每个指标的财务意义。第三章提出偿付能力监管指标有效性的内涵并进行统计分析和实证检验。偿付能力监管指标的有效性包括三个层次:一是指标的计算方法和参数设置符合我国非寿险业的实际;二是保监局的双重监管指标的一致性;三是监管指标能有效识别出保险公司的偿付能力状况。接下来本章选取了2000～2005年21个非寿险公司财务报表的相关数据从三个层次分析非寿险监管指标的有效性。首先分析监管指标的计算方法和参数设置是否符合我国保险业实际;结果表明我国非寿险法定偿付能力额度和偿付能力监管指标很大程度上借鉴了英国和美国的相关方法,指标选择和参数设置并不完全适合我国非寿险市场的实际情况。其次分析了保监会双重监管标准是否一致;结果表明保监会对偿付能力充足率的监管标准和偿付能力监管指标的监管标准并不一致。最后运用Logistic模型对监管指标进行实证检验。结果表明偿付能力监管指标作为一个整体对偿付能力状况有准确的识别作用,但并非所有的指标对偿付能力都具有显著意义;只有认可资产负债率、速动比率的解释意义比较明显。第四章提出了对目前监管指标的改进建议并进行检验。首先合理区分了大小两类规模保险公司,在此基础上采用比率法分别计算其法定偿付能力额度,结果显示我国非寿险现行的法定偿付能力额度规定偏低。其次对监管指标进行改进,删除了保费增长率、应收保费率、资产认可率和融资风险率,新增毛保费增长率、准备金变化率、固定资产与责任准备金之比、所有者权益与自留保费之比等指标。最后对改进后的监管指标进行实证检验并修改了保监会的监管标准以提高指标体系的有效性。经检验,改进后的监管指标和监管标准能有效的发挥监管作用。更多还原

【Abstract】 Insurance industry is a special one with high risk that specializes in risk operation and provides the risk safeguard to the policy holders. Insolvency of insurance companies will result in serious hazards, not only damaging the normal order of the insurance industry and people’s life but also endangering the entire financial industry even the development of the National economy. Therefore, insurance supervision departments in many countries have taken the solvency supervision as the primary task in order to maintain the insurance market order, ensure adequate solvency of companies and promote the healthy development of insurance industry. Solvency supervisory indicators are one of the most important supervisory tools. Based on theories in insurance supervision and in accounting and finance, this dissertation conducted the research on the effectiveness of solvency supervisory indicators for non-life insurance, explored ways to improve existing supervisory indicators and presented corresponding suggestions. The dissertation on this subject has been developed in the following four parts:Chapter One systematically reviewed relevant researches from domestic and overseas on insurance solvency and elaborated the writing background and the writing significance. This paper will discuss two questions with emphasis use the methods that unified the theory and actual, the qualitative and quota analysis. First, whether the solvency supervisory indicators in China are effective. Second, put forward suggestions to improve the supervisory indicator system.In Chapter two, the basic concepts of solvency are introduced, such as insurance solvency, solvency margin, solvency supervisory indicators and what are those factors that influence non-life insurance solvency. Then this part introduced minimum solvency margin and solvency supervisory indicators adopted in the USA and England. The minimum solvency margin in England and the Risk-Based Capital Model in the USA both are the methods to calculate the minimum solvency, but the two have remarkable difference in the computation, the condidered risk and the company scale. The IRIS and the FAST both are solvency supervisory indicators, but the two have difference in the applicable scope and the effect. At last it presented the current solvency supervisory indicators of non-life insurance in our country and analysed the financial significance of every indicator.Chapter Three proposed the connotation of effect of solvency supervisory indicators and conducted an empirical research. The effect of solvency supervisory indicators includes three levels: the computational method and the parameters are compatible with China’s actual situation. The double regulatory standards are consistent. Solvency supervisory indicators can recognise the solvency of insurance companies effectively. Then the chapter analyzed the effect of solvency supervisory indicators with the financial data of 21 non-life insurance corporations from 2001 to 2005. It first analyzed whether the calculation method and parameters of current solvency supervisory indicators are compatible with China’s actual situation. The result demonstrated that the current minimum solvency margin and solvency supervisory indicators for non-life insurance profited from English and American to a great extent. The indicators and the parameters are are incompatible with China’s actual situation. Then it analyzed whether the double regulatory standards are consistent. The result demonstrated that the regulatory standards about solvency sufficiency and the indicators are inconsistent. At last the chapter conducted an empirical research by a logistic model. The research result indicated that solvency supervisory indicators are effective as a whole, some indictors such as admitted liabilities to admitted assets, speed ratio have a effective explanation to solvency status.Chapter Four put forward suggestions to improve the supervisory indicator system and carried out an examination. First, Large-scale and small scale companies are discriminated and the minimum solvency margint are computed by Ratio Model. The result demonstrated that the current minimum solvency margin for non-life insurance is lower to the actual. Second this part made an improvence on insurance solvency indicators. It deleted several indicators such as change in premiums, the receivable insurance premium rate , admitted assets ratio, financed capital to gross capital and added some new indicators such as change in gross premiums, change in reserving ratio, fixed asset to reserves, owners’ equity to net premiums. In the end, it made an empirical test for the new indicator system and revised the regulatory standards. The effectiveness of the new indicator system and the regulatory standards proved improved obviously.更多还原