【摘要】：自從2001年中國加入世界貿(mào)易組織至今已近十年了。其在會(huì)計(jì)法方面的改革也日益趨近于國際會(huì)計(jì)法規(guī)。一直以來會(huì)計(jì)舞弊、會(huì)計(jì)誠信問題都是各國研究的重點(diǎn)問題。2008年的經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)也與誠信、舞弊等問題有一定聯(lián)系。虛增報(bào)表利潤(rùn),造就繁榮景象,而對(duì)繁榮下的漏洞諱莫如深,這些問題是今天各國乃至我國都無法解決的問題之一。 近年來國外一些財(cái)務(wù)丑聞不斷出現(xiàn),如安然公司虛報(bào)利潤(rùn)6億美元,施樂公司虛報(bào)銷售收入64億美元,默克公司連續(xù)三年共虛報(bào)收入124億美元。這一系列的會(huì)計(jì)信息的失真事件使會(huì)計(jì)使用者對(duì)會(huì)計(jì)信息失去了信心,也大大降低了企業(yè)的會(huì)計(jì)誠信度。本文要闡述主要內(nèi)容是以藍(lán)田股份為案例進(jìn)行分析,找到上市公司的幾種主要監(jiān)管方式以及相關(guān)法律法規(guī)對(duì)上市公司的規(guī)制及懲罰舞弊行為的方式。最后闡述相應(yīng)配套法規(guī)的不足之處及筆者對(duì)現(xiàn)行法律的見解。 通過比較分析法分析中、外法律對(duì)各監(jiān)督方式的規(guī)則,從中發(fā)現(xiàn)我國法律存在的結(jié)癥之處。通過比較之后得出了一些結(jié)論,例如我國獨(dú)立董事制度及監(jiān)事會(huì)制度的混合應(yīng)用導(dǎo)致的內(nèi)部審計(jì)部門的職責(zé)混亂,無法獨(dú)立于董事會(huì)執(zhí)行內(nèi)部審計(jì)之職；雖然我國《公司法》規(guī)定股東大會(huì)選舉產(chǎn)生董事會(huì)和監(jiān)事會(huì),其兩者處于并列狀態(tài),但事實(shí)上董事會(huì)的職權(quán)過大,監(jiān)事會(huì)的職權(quán)無法與其抗衡,監(jiān)事會(huì)只能“提議”各項(xiàng)議案,而不能像德國的監(jiān)事會(huì)一樣行使其解除董事會(huì)董事的職權(quán)。這一點(diǎn)大大削弱了監(jiān)事會(huì)的作用；最后由于我國政策大于法律的特殊情況,證券監(jiān)督管理委員會(huì)及證券交易所對(duì)上市公司監(jiān)管力度主要取決于當(dāng)前的經(jīng)濟(jì)環(huán)境、政策背景等情況而無法完全實(shí)施法律的規(guī)制功能,導(dǎo)致上市公司舞弊情況屢見不鮮；媒體作為舞弊最后的防線也沒有起到非常關(guān)鍵的作用,在董事會(huì)會(huì)議上很少有邀請(qǐng)媒體參與的情況,同時(shí)媒體也并沒有嚴(yán)重關(guān)注上市公司的舞弊行為。這些原因都是導(dǎo)致舞弊無法根除的原因。 因此,我國應(yīng)當(dāng)更加注重法律的嚴(yán)肅性,避免政策導(dǎo)向性的發(fā)生。而且要在法律實(shí)施之前做好充分的論證,保證法律的嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)性。避免朝令夕改,政令繁雜。
[Abstract]:It has been nearly ten years since China joined the World Trade Organization in 2001. Its reform in accounting law is also increasingly approaching to international accounting laws and regulations. Accounting fraud and accounting honesty have always been the key issues in various countries. The economic crisis of 2008 is also related to the problems of honesty, fraud and so on. The false increase in the profit of the report forms a prosperous scene, but the loopholes under the prosperity are kept secret. These problems are one of the problems that can not be solved by all countries and even our country today. In recent years, a number of foreign financial scandals have emerged, such as Enron's false profit of $600 million, Xerox's false sales of $6.4 billion and Merck's three consecutive years of false income of $12.4 billion. This series of accounting information distortion events make accounting users lose confidence in accounting information, but also greatly reduce the accounting integrity of enterprises. The main content of this paper is to analyze the case of Lantian shares, to find out the main ways of supervision of listed companies, as well as the relevant laws and regulations to regulate listed companies and punish corrupt practices. At last, the author expounds the deficiency of the corresponding supporting laws and the author's opinions on the existing laws. Through the comparative analysis of the rules of foreign laws on various supervision methods, we can find out the problems existing in our country's laws. After comparison, some conclusions are drawn, such as the confusion of the responsibility of internal audit department caused by the mixed application of the independent director system and the board of supervisors system, and the inability to carry out the internal audit function independently of the board of directors; Although the Company Law of our country stipulates that the shareholders' general meeting elects the board of directors and the board of supervisors, they are in a parallel state, but in fact the board of directors has too much power to compete with the board of supervisors, and the board of supervisors can only "propose" various bills. Instead, the board of supervisors in Germany cannot exercise its power to remove board members. This greatly weakened the role of the board of supervisors; Finally, because of the special situation that the policy of our country is larger than the law, the securities regulatory commission and the stock exchange mainly depend on the current economic environment, the policy background and so on, so they can not fully implement the regulation function of the law. Leading to fraud in listed companies is common; The media as the last line of defense of fraud also did not play a very critical role in the board of directors rarely invited the media to participate in the situation and the media also did not pay serious attention to the fraud of listed companies. These are the reasons why fraud can not be eradicated. Therefore, China should pay more attention to the seriousness of the law and avoid the occurrence of policy-oriented. And before the implementation of the law to do a good enough argument, to ensure the rigour of the law. Avoid changing orders and regulations.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：蘭州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：D922.291.91

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 孫志敏;;運(yùn)用法律手段根治會(huì)計(jì)失信[J];財(cái)會(huì)通訊;2006年08期

2 劉金星;;透視美國會(huì)計(jì)環(huán)境與會(huì)計(jì)改革[J];財(cái)會(huì)學(xué)習(xí);2008年11期

3 李雪穎;陸穎豐;李若山;;查找舞弊是注冊(cè)會(huì)計(jì)師的天職——從“艾迪·安達(dá)”案說起[J];財(cái)務(wù)與會(huì)計(jì);2002年03期

4 陳t;從藍(lán)田案探討中國財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)表品質(zhì)[J];產(chǎn)業(yè)經(jīng)濟(jì)研究;2003年06期

5 馬其家;張婧;;上市公司財(cái)務(wù)欺詐及其法律規(guī)制[J];法學(xué)雜志;2008年01期

6 朱瑞芳;;我國上市公司內(nèi)部監(jiān)督機(jī)制模式的再思考[J];河北法學(xué);2008年06期

7 孫湄;;新會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則下會(huì)計(jì)監(jiān)督體系的改革與創(chuàng)新[J];河北學(xué)刊;2009年05期

8 游文麗;羅穎琳;;我國證券交易所對(duì)上市公司信息披露監(jiān)管的法律制度研究[J];海南大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2009年05期

9 葛家澍,黃世忠;安然事件的反思——對(duì)安然公司會(huì)計(jì)審計(jì)問題的剖析[J];會(huì)計(jì)研究;2002年02期

10 顏延;;會(huì)計(jì)改革的法律背景初探[J];會(huì)計(jì)研究;2006年05期

，

本文編號(hào)：2384997