【摘要】：《期貨法》的調(diào)整范圍是我國期貨立法的核心問題。通過比較研究美國、澳大利亞、新加坡等境外主要金融市場國家期貨立法,可歸納出境外有"期貨單獨(dú)立法"、"證券和期貨一體立法"、"所有金融商品統(tǒng)一立法"三種立法模式。境外對"期貨"的界定主要以市場為導(dǎo)向,具有功能性特征,基礎(chǔ)工具非常廣泛,期貨的范圍比較寬泛。界定方式上采取列舉和概括相結(jié)合的方式,注重期貨的實(shí)質(zhì)性要素。我國《期貨交易管理?xiàng)l例》調(diào)整范圍與《證券法》調(diào)整范圍的劃分不明確,未將場外標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化衍生品納入調(diào)整范圍。建議立法將《期貨法》調(diào)整范圍根據(jù)金融市場需要適當(dāng)放寬,通過列舉將可明確的期貨合約標(biāo)的納入其調(diào)整范圍,將核心場外衍生品納入《期貨法》調(diào)整,并對《期貨法》的調(diào)整范圍做出兜底性規(guī)定。
[Abstract]:The adjustment scope of the Futures Law is the core problem of China's futures legislation. Through a comparative study of the futures legislation of the major overseas financial markets, such as the United States, Australia and Singapore, the author concludes that there are three legislative models, namely, "separate legislation on futures", "legislation on the integration of securities and futures", and "uniform legislation on all financial commodities". The definition of "futures" abroad is mainly market-oriented, with functional characteristics, broad basic tools and broad range of futures. Define the way to take the combination of enumeration and generalization, pay attention to the substantive elements of futures. The adjustment scope of China's Futures Trading regulations is not clear from that of Securities Law, and the over-the-counter standardized derivatives are not included in the adjustment scope. It is suggested that the adjustment scope of the Futures Law should be relaxed appropriately according to the needs of the financial market, and the core over-the-counter derivatives should be included in the adjustment of the Futures Law by enumerating the subject matter of the futures contract that can be clearly defined. And the scope of the adjustment of the Futures Law to make a bottom of the provisions.
【作者單位】： 上海外國語大學(xué)賢達(dá)經(jīng)濟(jì)人文學(xué)院;復(fù)旦大學(xué)金融法研究中心;
【分類號】：D922.287
，

本文編號：2290637