【摘要】：與國(guó)外很多發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家相比,我國(guó)外資準(zhǔn)入制度一直都比較保守,“三資企業(yè)法”、《外商投資產(chǎn)業(yè)指導(dǎo)目錄》等法規(guī)、政策共同構(gòu)建了我國(guó)外資準(zhǔn)入制度體系。雖然,它們對(duì)于我國(guó)積極有效地利用外資發(fā)揮了重要的促進(jìn)作用,但是,隨著全球經(jīng)濟(jì)一體化的推進(jìn)以及我國(guó)進(jìn)一步對(duì)外開(kāi)放需求的擴(kuò)大,現(xiàn)行的外資準(zhǔn)入制度出現(xiàn)了很多與時(shí)代需求不相符合的因素,如“逐案審批制”效率低下、“正面清單”模式缺乏透明度、國(guó)家安全審查制度缺乏可操作性等。隨著美國(guó)與歐盟在世界范圍內(nèi)推行由其主導(dǎo)的國(guó)際貿(mào)易投資新規(guī)則,越來(lái)越多的國(guó)家開(kāi)始采用“準(zhǔn)入前國(guó)民待遇+負(fù)面清單”的外資管理模式。在中美BIT的談判中,也是以這樣的外資管理模式為前提和基礎(chǔ)的。隨著這種開(kāi)放型的外資準(zhǔn)入管理模式在上海自貿(mào)區(qū)的成功試點(diǎn)推行,下一步將有望在全國(guó)范圍內(nèi)推廣。改革是場(chǎng)攻堅(jiān)戰(zhàn),此次進(jìn)行外資準(zhǔn)入制度的改革與重構(gòu),必將涉及國(guó)內(nèi)各項(xiàng)制度的重大調(diào)整。那么,為什么我們要推行“準(zhǔn)入前國(guó)民待遇”以及“負(fù)面清單”的管理模式呢?在對(duì)外開(kāi)放的同時(shí),我們?nèi)绾尉S護(hù)我們的國(guó)家安全呢?推行“準(zhǔn)入前國(guó)民待遇”模式,將給予外資的國(guó)民待遇從以前的經(jīng)營(yíng)階段提前至設(shè)立階段,也就是說(shuō),外資進(jìn)入國(guó)內(nèi)市場(chǎng)將無(wú)需再向?qū)徟鷻C(jī)構(gòu)申請(qǐng)準(zhǔn)入審批,只需備案即可。這將大大減少外資進(jìn)入國(guó)內(nèi)市場(chǎng)的時(shí)間和成本,提升外資進(jìn)入的成功率,給予外資來(lái)我國(guó)投資以極大的激勵(lì)。同時(shí),簡(jiǎn)化行政審批,將市場(chǎng)能夠自主調(diào)節(jié)的交給市場(chǎng),政府不再過(guò)度干預(yù),也與我國(guó)政府職能轉(zhuǎn)變,建設(shè)服務(wù)型政府的目標(biāo)相符。然而,對(duì)于資本輸入國(guó)來(lái)說(shuō),外資的進(jìn)入固然可以帶來(lái)很多積極作用,但是,外資涌入對(duì)本國(guó)產(chǎn)業(yè)所帶來(lái)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)也不能忽視。對(duì)外資的引入不是越多越好,我們引入外資要重量,更要重質(zhì);我國(guó)在給予外資鼓勵(lì)和保護(hù)的同時(shí),對(duì)外資也要進(jìn)行合理的限制和引導(dǎo);我國(guó)在利用外資促進(jìn)國(guó)內(nèi)經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展、產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)優(yōu)化升級(jí)的同時(shí),也要注意對(duì)本國(guó)國(guó)家安全、經(jīng)濟(jì)安全的保護(hù)。因此,我們?cè)谕菩小皽?zhǔn)入前國(guó)民待遇”時(shí),應(yīng)當(dāng)制定“負(fù)面清單”以限制外資進(jìn)入本國(guó)關(guān)鍵產(chǎn)業(yè)、薄弱產(chǎn)業(yè)。與我國(guó)現(xiàn)行的“正面清單”模式相比,“負(fù)面清單”模式更加透明,對(duì)外資的限制也比較少。政府將禁止和限制外商投資經(jīng)營(yíng)的行業(yè)、領(lǐng)域以清單的形式列出,在“負(fù)面清單”以?xún)?nèi)的領(lǐng)域,外資進(jìn)入仍需向外國(guó)投資主管部門(mén)申請(qǐng)準(zhǔn)入許可,在“負(fù)面清單”之外的領(lǐng)域,實(shí)行內(nèi)外資一致的原則,外資進(jìn)入國(guó)內(nèi)市場(chǎng)一律取消準(zhǔn)入審批,只需履行規(guī)定的備案和信息報(bào)告程序,這與“法無(wú)禁止即自由”的現(xiàn)代法治理念相符合,有利于充分發(fā)揮市場(chǎng)對(duì)資源的調(diào)配作用,并促進(jìn)政府的簡(jiǎn)政放權(quán)。從“正面清單”模式向“負(fù)面清單”模式的轉(zhuǎn)變,我國(guó)還有很多的工作要做。首先,“負(fù)面清單”的制定依據(jù)是國(guó)內(nèi)的法律法規(guī),因此,制定“負(fù)面清單”的前提和基礎(chǔ)就是要對(duì)國(guó)內(nèi)的法律法規(guī)進(jìn)行統(tǒng)一的梳理,將確實(shí)需要對(duì)外資設(shè)置限制的措施整理出來(lái),同時(shí)刪除已經(jīng)過(guò)時(shí)的規(guī)定,進(jìn)而整理成一份列明不符措施的清單。同時(shí)我們需要注意到,“負(fù)面清單”中對(duì)外資準(zhǔn)入的限制性措施,不是由當(dāng)事國(guó)一方說(shuō)了算的,其制定的背后是國(guó)家與國(guó)家之間的談判、妥協(xié)和利益交換�！柏�(fù)面清單”一旦制定出來(lái),中國(guó)在實(shí)施相關(guān)政策時(shí)就會(huì)受到約束。因此,為了不至于在今后的談判中陷于被動(dòng),我們應(yīng)當(dāng)注意在“負(fù)面清單”中保留未來(lái)增添新的不符措施的權(quán)利。還要注意的是,在編排“負(fù)面清單”時(shí),要注意提升透明度、可理解性和可操作性,主要就是將限制性措施所依據(jù)的法律法規(guī)列明,同時(shí)對(duì)限制性措施進(jìn)行具體的描述。國(guó)家安全審查制度與“負(fù)面清單”一起,在吸引外資的同時(shí)對(duì)之予以一定的限制。我國(guó)外資法律、政策并不是從來(lái)不曾提及國(guó)家安全審查的內(nèi)容,只是這些提及都只是原則性的規(guī)定,比如《反壟斷法》第31條僅僅是提到涉及“國(guó)家安全”時(shí)要進(jìn)行國(guó)家安全審查,但是審什么?如何審?都沒(méi)有具體說(shuō)明,從而導(dǎo)致這些法律、政策中的國(guó)家安全審查沒(méi)有實(shí)際操作意義。美國(guó)的國(guó)家安全審查制度已經(jīng)比較完善,它山之石,可以攻玉,我國(guó)在制定國(guó)家安全審查制度的具體操作規(guī)則時(shí),也應(yīng)當(dāng)借鑒學(xué)習(xí)美國(guó)的經(jīng)驗(yàn)。要對(duì)外商投資項(xiàng)目進(jìn)行國(guó)家安全審查,首先涉及到的就是外資的界定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)問(wèn)題,也即國(guó)家安全審查的對(duì)象問(wèn)題。對(duì)外資的界定是采取縮小化的解釋還是擴(kuò)大化的解釋,直接決定了我們國(guó)家安全審查的審查范圍。我國(guó)在外資的界定上,通常采取的是設(shè)立地標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。這一標(biāo)準(zhǔn)會(huì)帶來(lái)一系列的問(wèn)題,在外國(guó)注冊(cè)設(shè)立的企業(yè),即使其最終為我國(guó)國(guó)民所控制,其也要被視作外資,并會(huì)引發(fā)國(guó)家安全審查。而相反,在我國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)注冊(cè)設(shè)立的企業(yè),即使其最終為國(guó)外資本所控制,也不會(huì)被視作外資,不會(huì)引發(fā)國(guó)家安全審查程序。而在美國(guó),國(guó)家安全審查采取的是實(shí)際控制主義標(biāo)準(zhǔn),在這一標(biāo)準(zhǔn)下,即使一家企業(yè)在國(guó)外注冊(cè)并運(yùn)營(yíng),但只要其最終是由美國(guó)國(guó)民或?qū)嶓w所控制,其就不會(huì)被視為外國(guó)實(shí)體,其在美國(guó)的投資當(dāng)然也就不會(huì)涉及到國(guó)家安全審查程序。相反,即使一家企業(yè)是在美國(guó)注冊(cè)并運(yùn)營(yíng),但是其最終是由外國(guó)國(guó)民、政府、實(shí)體所控制,其就會(huì)被視為外國(guó)實(shí)體,其在美國(guó)的投資行為會(huì)引發(fā)國(guó)家安全審查。將設(shè)立地標(biāo)準(zhǔn)與實(shí)際控制主義標(biāo)準(zhǔn)進(jìn)行比較,很明顯實(shí)際控制主義這種對(duì)外資擴(kuò)大化的解釋更能維護(hù)我國(guó)國(guó)家安全。當(dāng)然,由于我國(guó)設(shè)立地標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的傳統(tǒng)存在,我國(guó)對(duì)外國(guó)人、外資的解釋適宜采用設(shè)立地標(biāo)準(zhǔn)為主,同時(shí)兼顧實(shí)際控制主義標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。而實(shí)際控制主義標(biāo)準(zhǔn)又涉及到對(duì)“控制”的認(rèn)定,在“控制”的認(rèn)定上,不僅僅要看實(shí)際持股比例,更要看外資是否能夠通過(guò)信托、合同等具體措施對(duì)企業(yè)重大事項(xiàng)實(shí)施決定性影響,也即更加傾向于“控制”的功能屬性。其次是要確定安全審查的范圍,我們應(yīng)當(dāng)注意“國(guó)家安全”的概念復(fù)雜且易變,因此建議采取列舉并輔以彈性條款的方式,對(duì)安全審查的可審內(nèi)容進(jìn)行界定,這將有助于我國(guó)在國(guó)內(nèi)外形勢(shì)發(fā)生變化,或者國(guó)內(nèi)出現(xiàn)新興業(yè)態(tài)需要保護(hù)時(shí),掌握主導(dǎo)權(quán),為國(guó)家安全提供更周延的保護(hù)。第三是安全審查程序的構(gòu)建問(wèn)題,在構(gòu)建安全審查程序時(shí),應(yīng)當(dāng)注意引入預(yù)約商談程序、風(fēng)險(xiǎn)緩和措施等柔性措施,不要?jiǎng)虞m禁止外資的進(jìn)入,這與我們對(duì)外開(kāi)放的初衷不符。同時(shí),要注意對(duì)安全審查機(jī)構(gòu)的監(jiān)督,防止安全審查機(jī)構(gòu)利用職權(quán)進(jìn)行權(quán)力尋租,滋生腐敗。作為發(fā)展中大國(guó),我們急需引入外資來(lái)推動(dòng)國(guó)內(nèi)產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)的優(yōu)化升級(jí),但是也不能忽視外資引入可能帶來(lái)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn),需要對(duì)本國(guó)的關(guān)鍵產(chǎn)業(yè)、薄弱產(chǎn)業(yè)進(jìn)行合理的保護(hù),防止外資壟斷市場(chǎng)。為了在對(duì)外開(kāi)放與保護(hù)本國(guó)利益之間尋求平衡,我們應(yīng)當(dāng)在推行“準(zhǔn)入前國(guó)民待遇”的同時(shí),構(gòu)建“負(fù)面清單”與“國(guó)家安全審查制度”,以實(shí)現(xiàn)對(duì)本國(guó)重大利益、國(guó)家安全的保護(hù)。外資準(zhǔn)入制度的重構(gòu),任重而道遠(yuǎn)。筆者將在分析法理以及借鑒國(guó)內(nèi)外先進(jìn)經(jīng)驗(yàn)的基礎(chǔ)之上,對(duì)外資準(zhǔn)入制度的重構(gòu)提出建議。
[Abstract]:Compared with many developed countries in foreign countries, our foreign capital access system has always been relatively conservative, "three capital enterprises law", "foreign investment industry guidance catalogue >" and other laws and regulations. The policy has jointly constructed the system of China's foreign investment access system. Although they have played an important role in the active and effective use of foreign capital, however, along with the world The promotion of economic integration and the expansion of China's further opening to the outside world, there are many factors that are not in line with the demand of the times, such as the inefficiency of the "case by case approval system", the lack of transparency in the "positive list" model, the lack of operability of the national security review system, and so on. In the world, the new rules of international trade and investment are introduced, and more and more countries have begun to adopt the foreign management model of "national treatment before access + negative list". In the negotiations between China and the United States, the model of foreign capital management is the premise and foundation in the BIT negotiations between China and the United States. With this open type of foreign investment management model in Shanghai The successful pilot implementation of the FTA will be expected to be promoted throughout the country. The reform is a field attack. The reform and reconstruction of the foreign access system will involve major adjustment of the domestic system. Then why should we implement the management model of "national treatment before access" and "negative list"? At the same time, how do we maintain our national security? The implementation of the "national treatment before access" model will give the national treatment of foreign capital from the previous stage to the establishment stage, that is to say, the entry of foreign capital into the domestic market will not require further approval from the examination and approval authorities, only the record will be required. This will be greatly reduced. The time and cost of foreign investment into the domestic market, the promotion of the success rate of foreign investment and the great incentive to give foreign investment to China's investment. At the same time, to simplify administrative examination and approval and to transfer the market to the market, the government will no longer interfere with the government. It is also consistent with the transformation of our government functions and the goal of building a service-oriented government. In the input country, the entry of foreign capital can bring a lot of positive effects, but the risk of foreign capital influx can not be ignored. The introduction of foreign capital is not the more, the more the better, we should introduce foreign capital to the weight, more important; while China is giving foreign capital encouragement and protection, we should also make reasonable restrictions on foreign investment. When we use foreign capital to promote domestic economic development and optimize the industrial structure, we should also pay attention to the national security and economic security protection. Therefore, when we carry out the "national treatment before access", we should formulate a "negative list" to restrict foreign capital into the key industries in the country, the weak industry and the current China. Compared with the "positive list" model, the "negative list" model is more transparent and fewer restrictions on foreign investment. The government will prohibit and restrict the business of foreign investment. The field is listed in the form of a list. In the field within the "negative list", foreign investment still needs to apply to the foreign investment authorities to apply for permission, in the "negative". In the field outside the list, the principle of agreement between domestic and foreign capital is carried out, and the entry of foreign capital into the domestic market is to cancel the approval of access, only to fulfill the prescribed record and information reporting procedures. This is in line with the modern rule of law concept of "no prohibition of law is free", which is conducive to fully playing the role of the market in the allocation of resources and promoting the government's simple administration. Right. There is still a lot of work to be done from the "positive list" model to the "negative list" model in China. First, the formulation of "negative list" is based on domestic laws and regulations. Therefore, the premise and basis of formulating "negative list" is to make a unified combing of domestic legal laws and regulations, and it will really need foreign capital. At the same time, we need to note that the restrictive measures for admittance to foreign capital in the "negative list" are not considered by the parties concerned, and the formulation of the negotiations between the state and the state, compromise and profit has the final say. As soon as the "negative list" is formulated, China will be constrained when implementing relevant policies. So, in order not to be passive in future negotiations, we should pay attention to the right to retain the new incompatible measures in the "negative list". It is also important to note that in the formation of "negative list", we should pay attention to the fact. The promotion of transparency, comprehensibility and operability is mainly to specify the laws and regulations on which restrictive measures are based, and to give a specific description of the restrictive measures. The national security review system, together with a "negative list", gives some restrictions on attracting foreign investment. Once mentioned the contents of the national security review, only these references are only principles of principle, such as the "antitrust law", which only refers to the national security review when it refers to "national security". But what is the trial? How? No concrete explanation is made, which leads to these laws, and the national security review in the policy is not practical. The national security review system of the United States has been perfected, and its mountain stone can be used to attack jade. China should also learn from the experience of the United States in the formulation of the specific rules for the operation of the national security review system. The national security review of foreign investment projects should be carried out in the first place, and the first is the definition of foreign investment, that is, the country. The question of the object of home security review. The definition of the foreign investment is to adopt a narrowing explanation or an explanation of expansion, which directly determines the scope of the review of our national security review. In the end, it is controlled by our nationals, which will also be regarded as foreign capital and will lead to a national security review. On the contrary, the enterprises registered in our country, even if they are ultimately controlled by foreign capital, will not be regarded as foreign capital and will not lead to a national security review process. In the United States, the national security review takes the actual control doctrine. Under this standard, even if a company is registered and operated abroad, it will not be regarded as a foreign entity as long as it is ultimately controlled by a United States or entity, and its investment in the United States will certainly not involve a national security review process. On the contrary, it is a company that is registered and operated in the United States, but it is finally in the end. It is controlled by foreign nationals, governments and entities, which will be regarded as foreign entities, and their investment behavior in the United States will lead to national security review. Comparing the standard of establishment and the standard of actual control, it is obvious that the interpretation of the expansion of foreign capital is more effective to safeguard our national security. The tradition of site standard exists in our country, the interpretation of China's interpretation of foreign and foreign capital is suitable to adopt the standard of setting up land, while taking into account the standard of practical control. The actual control standard also involves the identification of "control". In the cognizance of "control", it is not only to see the proportion of the real stock, but also to see if the foreign capital can pass the trust, The specific measures such as contract and other specific measures have a decisive influence on the important matters of the enterprise, that is, more inclined to "control" functional properties. Secondly, to determine the scope of the security review, we should pay attention to the complexity and variability of the concept of "national security". Therefore, it is suggested to adopt a list and supplement the flexible terms to the content of the security review. To define it, this will help our country to change the situation at home and abroad, or when the domestic emerging industry needs to be protected, to master the dominant power and provide more extensive protection for the national security. Third is the construction of the security review procedure. In the construction of the security review procedure, we should pay attention to the introduction of the appointment negotiation procedure, the risk mitigation measures, and so on. At the same time, we should pay attention to the supervision of the security review institutions, prevent the security review institutions to use their powers to rent the power and create corruption. As a developing country, we need to introduce foreign capital to promote the optimization and upgrading of the domestic industrial structure. We should not ignore the possible risks brought by the introduction of foreign investment. We need to protect the key industries and weak industries in the country and prevent the monopoly of foreign capital. In order to seek a balance between opening up and protecting our own interests, we should build a "negative list" and "national security" while carrying out the "national treatment before access". The whole system of examination is to realize the great interests of the country and the protection of national security. The reconfiguration of the system of foreign investment access is a long way to go. On the basis of analyzing the jurisprudence and drawing on the advanced experience at home and abroad, the author puts forward some suggestions on the reconstruction of the system of foreign investment access.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D922.295

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 聶平香;戴麗華;;美國(guó)負(fù)面清單管理模式探析及對(duì)我國(guó)的借鑒[J];國(guó)際貿(mào)易;2014年04期

，

本文編號(hào)：2173956