我国国有企业资本结构研究

【作者】 王海之；

【导师】 黄济生；

【作者基本信息】 华东师范大学 ， 金融学， 2002， 硕士

【摘要】 一个较为普遍的观点认为，目前我国国有企业资本结构处于失衡状态。如何按照市场化的方向，调整近10万国有企业的资本结构、重建市场经济体系的微观基础是我国国有企业进入到二十一世纪面临的重大课题。 国有企业在改革转制的过程中经历了一系列的放权让利过程，企业经营者获得了越来越多的对企业实际控制权，而企业的所有者对企业仍存在较大的影响力，这一时期国有企业治理结构的基本特征可描述为“政府行政干预下的内部人控制”(吴敬琏，1997)。随着对企业实际控制权的转移，内部人的基本行为目标是利用信息优势和对企业的实际控制权追求经营者和员工综合福利最大化。国有企业改革的同时伴随着社会投融资体系的变迁：国家为强化企业预算约束，退出了对国有企业的支持体系，而国有银行实际担负了财政替代的功能；股票市场的建立为国有企业提供了直接融资的途径，国有企业的融资决策也因能否能够进入到这个市场而发生分化。国有企业过度负债、资本结构失衡的问题集中地发生在我国宏观经济从计划转向市场的转轨时期，笔者认为是国有企业的治理结构和外部社会投融资体系的变迁共同决定了国有企业资本结构。 长期以来在市场缺失的情况下，国有企业承担了很重要的社会职能，国有企业沿着社会职能内卷化和冗员化的方向发展，并伴随着巨大的社会成本支出。由于国有企业的制度性因素，其社会成本的支出刚性上升，当企业无力承担社会成本时必然向国家寻求资本投入。在资本供给制下，国有企业的资本需求通过行政计体系划拨完成，进入到转轨时期国家则通过国有银行维持其生存。国有企业承担社会成本成为影响其资本结构失衡的重要因素。 对问题现象和本质的理解，直接影响到解决问题的思路。由以上分析可知，国有企业经营者在真实所有者缺位的情况下实际控制了企业经营活动，国有企业的资本结构表现为企业融资决策对社会投融资体系的变迁作出的反应，而国有企业因为承担社会职能而导致的社会成本支出强化了这一反应。改变国有企业不合理治理结构是重建我国市场经济体系微观基础的唯一出路，但是这个过程并不是简单地将国有企业民营化。建立多层次的社会投融资体系、建立社会保障制度是国有企业产权改革及优化资本结构的两个前提条件。更多还原

【Abstract】 As Normally accepted, the capital structure of state-owned enterprises in China are unbalanced. It is very important to modify the capital structure of state-owned enterprises in order to reconstruct the micro-base of marketing economy.As the deepening of reform of state-owned enterprise, the managers got more and more power on controlling the enterprises. The corporate governance can be described as " controlled by insiders under interference of government" during the transferring period (Jinglian Wu, 1997). The managers of state-owned enterprises pursued the maximum of comprehensive welfare, and changed their financing decisions according to the continued transference of social investment and financing system. The government withdrew from the supporting system, and the state-owned banks served as its substitute; stock market give the managers more choices of direct financing, and the financing decisions of state-owned enterprises thus diversified. Since the problem of unbalanced capital structure occurred mainly in the transferring period, I think the capital structure of state-owned enterprises was the co-result of both corporate governance and the transference of social investment and financing system through the above analysis.State-owned enterprises assumed important social functions without the marketing system, and they developed on the way of involution with disguised unemployment and huge social cost. When the enterprise could not afford the social cost, they turned to the government for capital, and the government used its power to sustain the state-owned enterprises. So, I think the social cost assumed by the state-owned was another important reason causing the unbalanced capital structure.The methods of resolving the problem are due to the understanding of the phenomena and their essence. The managers obtained the controlunder the absence of real proprietor. They reacted to the transference of social investment and financing system, and the social cost assumed by the state-owned enterprises strengthened the reaction. In order to reconstruct the micro-base of our marketing system, it is the only way to change the unreasonable corporate governance of state-owned enterprises. It could be no use of simply selling the state-owned enterprises. Two prerequisites are as followed: (l)set up diversified social investment and financing system to meet the diversified need of different state-owned enterprises; (2)set of social security system to substitute the state-owned enterprises to assume the social functions.更多还原