本文選題：銀行不良貸款評(píng)估 + 假設(shè)清算法��； 參考：《西南財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：自1999年我國政府相繼成立四家政策性資產(chǎn)管理公司以來,通過幾次大規(guī)模剝離以及政府對(duì)銀行不良貸款控制方面所做的努力,我國銀行不良貸款問題有所減輕,不良貸款率有所降低,但不良貸款的增量仍舊沒有控制住。且在我國的不良貸款評(píng)估實(shí)踐中,沒有統(tǒng)一的金融不良貸款評(píng)估準(zhǔn)則和技術(shù)規(guī)程,評(píng)估質(zhì)量取決于評(píng)估人員的專業(yè)水平,并因我國市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)體制原因,絕大部分評(píng)估人員不能做到準(zhǔn)確把握銀行不良貸款市場(chǎng),機(jī)械的運(yùn)用固有的評(píng)估方法,直接導(dǎo)致評(píng)估價(jià)值和銀行不良貸款的實(shí)際處置價(jià)格出現(xiàn)較大偏離。另外,銀行不良貸款評(píng)估過程中,存在一定程度的價(jià)值操縱行為,使評(píng)估脫離了市場(chǎng)實(shí)際狀況。因此,完善我國金融不良貸款評(píng)估體系刻不容緩。在銀行不良貸款的評(píng)估方法上,自國際評(píng)估資產(chǎn)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)提出成本法、收益法和市場(chǎng)法三種金融不良貸款評(píng)估方法后,就被各國的資產(chǎn)評(píng)估機(jī)構(gòu)廣泛運(yùn)用。但由于我國銀行不良貸款的特殊復(fù)雜性和不良資產(chǎn)市場(chǎng)的發(fā)展情況,上述三種方法并不能直接運(yùn)用于我國銀行不良貸款的評(píng)估實(shí)踐中�；谝陨锨闆r,我國學(xué)者都紛紛探討符合中國金融不良資產(chǎn)特殊性質(zhì)和市場(chǎng)狀況的方法體系,并提出了各種類型的評(píng)估模式,如運(yùn)用數(shù)理統(tǒng)計(jì)、層次分析來評(píng)估金融不良資產(chǎn),比較典型的屬信用評(píng)價(jià)法、假設(shè)清算法、交易案例比較法和專家打分法等評(píng)估方法,不同方法代表著不同的評(píng)估口徑,且使用起來具有一定的優(yōu)劣勢(shì),一旦運(yùn)用不當(dāng)便會(huì)導(dǎo)致評(píng)估結(jié)果的偏離。因此,構(gòu)建我國金融不良資產(chǎn)評(píng)估方法體系,探究每種方法的適用性和局限性,討論其在實(shí)踐中的具體運(yùn)用,顯得尤為重要。因此,本文從銀行不良貸款入手,圍繞銀行不良貸款的價(jià)值分析、評(píng)估方法和應(yīng)用三個(gè)問題展開研究,在認(rèn)真對(duì)比分析銀行不良貸款各評(píng)估方法的基礎(chǔ)上,結(jié)合具體案例來說明各種方法的應(yīng)用,以期提高評(píng)估實(shí)務(wù)中銀行不良貸款評(píng)估方法的可操作性。 在基礎(chǔ)理論層次,本文從我國的傳統(tǒng)“一逾兩呆”不良貸款界定方式和五級(jí)分類界定方式入手,對(duì)不良貸款進(jìn)行范圍界定和特征分析,并對(duì)兩種貸款界定方式的優(yōu)缺點(diǎn)進(jìn)行介紹；然后,從政府、銀行和企業(yè)三個(gè)角度探討銀行不良貸款的歷史成因,并通過對(duì)我國銀行不良貸款的特性和不良資產(chǎn)市場(chǎng)的發(fā)育程度的分析,探討適用于我國國情的銀行不良貸款價(jià)值類型和價(jià)值影響因素。本文指出,由于不良資產(chǎn)形成的歷史原因,我國的銀行不良貸款不具備清晰的法律權(quán)屬,且在本質(zhì)上屬于一種限制性資產(chǎn),評(píng)估中存在依據(jù)不足、評(píng)估程序不到位、評(píng)估方法受限等問題,使得無法直接使用市場(chǎng)價(jià)值進(jìn)行評(píng)估。其次,我國金融不良資產(chǎn)的處置方式包括債務(wù)重組、債轉(zhuǎn)股、債權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)讓、委托包銷和證券化等多達(dá)十幾種形式,處置方式的多樣性,決定了使用市場(chǎng)價(jià)值的困難。另外,我國市場(chǎng)不完整,參與者稀少,不具備有效的價(jià)格形成機(jī)制,也沒有足夠的時(shí)間讓不良資產(chǎn)進(jìn)行市場(chǎng)展示。因此,評(píng)估人員應(yīng)當(dāng)以市場(chǎng)價(jià)值為基礎(chǔ),考慮評(píng)估目的、待估資產(chǎn)狀態(tài)、評(píng)估條件等因素,從在用價(jià)值、有限市場(chǎng)價(jià)值、投資價(jià)值、持續(xù)經(jīng)營價(jià)值、殘值和強(qiáng)制變現(xiàn)價(jià)值等非市場(chǎng)價(jià)值中選擇合適的價(jià)值類型對(duì)待估不良資產(chǎn)進(jìn)行評(píng)估。在對(duì)銀行不良貸款價(jià)值影響因素的分析上,主要介紹了企業(yè)規(guī)模、資產(chǎn)質(zhì)量、運(yùn)營狀況、所有制差別、行業(yè)狀況、區(qū)域經(jīng)濟(jì)狀況和貸款方式等幾種影響因素。其次,本文介紹了美國和其他在不良資產(chǎn)處置方面獲得較大成績(jī)的國家的實(shí)踐和成功經(jīng)驗(yàn),然后對(duì)比介紹我國的評(píng)估現(xiàn)狀,進(jìn)而從比較分析中得到對(duì)完善我國金融不良資產(chǎn)評(píng)估實(shí)踐的啟示。接著,本人著重對(duì)我國銀行不良貸款的評(píng)估技術(shù)與方法進(jìn)行探討和對(duì)比分析,對(duì)符合我國銀行不良貸款特殊性質(zhì)和市場(chǎng)情況的四種評(píng)估方法進(jìn)行了應(yīng)用操作。這四種評(píng)估方法分別是假設(shè)清算法、信用評(píng)價(jià)法、交易案例比較法和專家打分法。其中,假設(shè)清算法主要適用于不具有持續(xù)經(jīng)營能力但尚有償債意愿和相關(guān)財(cái)務(wù)資料的企業(yè),或者是仍持續(xù)經(jīng)營但凈現(xiàn)金流不穩(wěn)定或很小的企業(yè)；對(duì)于雖資不抵債或由于其他原因不能按時(shí)還債,但仍有增長(zhǎng)潛力和持續(xù)經(jīng)營能力,且能夠取得連續(xù)幾年經(jīng)審計(jì)的財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)表的債務(wù)企業(yè)來說,信用評(píng)價(jià)法則是最適合的評(píng)估方法；而當(dāng)無法獲知債務(wù)人的財(cái)務(wù)資料,用假設(shè)清算法和信用評(píng)價(jià)法無法評(píng)估,但可以對(duì)債權(quán)資產(chǎn)進(jìn)行因素定性分析并具有相似的債權(quán)資產(chǎn)交易案例時(shí),可選用交易案例比較法；專家打分法則適用于財(cái)務(wù)、信貸資料不完備或無法獲取、同時(shí)僅靠評(píng)估師的能力難以對(duì)待估債權(quán)進(jìn)行定量分析,需要借助于專家們的集體判斷才能有效評(píng)估的債權(quán)。最后,基于目前我國金融不良貸款評(píng)估理論欠缺系統(tǒng)性、評(píng)估價(jià)值與實(shí)際交易價(jià)格差異較大和定價(jià)功能被過分夸大等現(xiàn)狀,特提出了六條完善我國金融不良資產(chǎn)評(píng)估的建議。首先,建議政府應(yīng)從銀行不良貸款的歷史成因中吸取教訓(xùn),避免因社會(huì)利益而影響銀行的商業(yè)性運(yùn)作,加大對(duì)資產(chǎn)評(píng)估行業(yè)健康發(fā)展的政策引導(dǎo),盡快以法律的形式對(duì)不良資產(chǎn)評(píng)估體系做出規(guī)范,并大力支持中國資產(chǎn)評(píng)估協(xié)會(huì)在人才培養(yǎng)、評(píng)估體系完善、評(píng)估思路創(chuàng)新等方面的工作,以充分發(fā)揮政府在資產(chǎn)評(píng)估行業(yè)的作用。其次,建議中國資產(chǎn)評(píng)估協(xié)會(huì)從以下幾個(gè)方面強(qiáng)化行業(yè)建設(shè)：(1)注重金融不良資產(chǎn)評(píng)估研究的引導(dǎo)工作,總結(jié)發(fā)現(xiàn)評(píng)估實(shí)踐中出現(xiàn)的新問題,并加強(qiáng)對(duì)相關(guān)評(píng)估準(zhǔn)則的完善,盡快建立起一套參考性強(qiáng)的評(píng)估操作規(guī)則；(2)加強(qiáng)行業(yè)執(zhí)業(yè)質(zhì)量的監(jiān)管,提高評(píng)估人員的專業(yè)勝任能力和職業(yè)道德水平,強(qiáng)化行業(yè)自律管理能力,創(chuàng)造良好的執(zhí)業(yè)環(huán)境；(3)完善人才培養(yǎng)機(jī)制；(4)統(tǒng)一計(jì)費(fèi)標(biāo)準(zhǔn),制定比較合理的收費(fèi)方法,以激發(fā)評(píng)估機(jī)構(gòu)進(jìn)行評(píng)估創(chuàng)新研究的積極性。第三、建議評(píng)估機(jī)構(gòu)和資產(chǎn)管理公司加快評(píng)估數(shù)據(jù)庫的建立,注重積累銀行不良貸款處置案例,并通過對(duì)搜集到的案例的分析構(gòu)建起合理規(guī)范的評(píng)估參數(shù)體系。第四、建議評(píng)估機(jī)構(gòu)和評(píng)估人員加強(qiáng)對(duì)非財(cái)務(wù)因素的量化,注重非財(cái)務(wù)指標(biāo)對(duì)待估不良貸款變現(xiàn)價(jià)值的影響,進(jìn)而不斷的補(bǔ)充和完善金融不良資產(chǎn)評(píng)估模型。第五,建議政府或資產(chǎn)評(píng)估協(xié)會(huì)著手建立起一個(gè)評(píng)估溝通合作平臺(tái),以促進(jìn)金融不良資產(chǎn)評(píng)估行業(yè)的健康發(fā)展,充分發(fā)揮其在資產(chǎn)定價(jià)和金融風(fēng)險(xiǎn)防范中的作用。最后,建議評(píng)估行業(yè)管理部門引導(dǎo)評(píng)估結(jié)論使用方正確認(rèn)識(shí)評(píng)估結(jié)論的局限性,讓其認(rèn)識(shí)到,金融不良資產(chǎn)的交易價(jià)格應(yīng)該通過市場(chǎng)來發(fā)現(xiàn),而不是直接的適用評(píng)估價(jià)格。 本文的不足和局限主要表現(xiàn)為以下幾個(gè)方面： (1)由于國內(nèi)對(duì)銀行不良貸款的研究十分匱乏,文獻(xiàn)資料很少,國外最新理論研究成果搜集不充分,致使本文不能全面的借鑒和吸收前輩們的研究成果。 (2)在案例的具體操作中,因資料搜集渠道不暢以及數(shù)據(jù)采集受到限制,致使結(jié)論分析不能量化所有影響因素,影響結(jié)論的普遍適用性。 (3)在結(jié)合定量指標(biāo)和定性指標(biāo)的評(píng)估體系中,由于個(gè)人能力限制,不能對(duì)兩者應(yīng)占權(quán)重多少做進(jìn)一步研究,而是借鑒了前輩們的研究成果,在確定取值范圍時(shí)也難免不合理,從而本文研究的深度尚有欠缺；所以設(shè)計(jì)一個(gè)適用于大多數(shù)不良債權(quán)的評(píng)估方法對(duì)未來的不良資產(chǎn)評(píng)估至關(guān)重要。 (4)銀行不良貸款評(píng)估是一項(xiàng)專業(yè)性很強(qiáng)的實(shí)踐工作,擬進(jìn)行的研究在實(shí)踐工作中的適用性還須進(jìn)行實(shí)證檢驗(yàn),而且因?qū)嵺`經(jīng)驗(yàn)的短缺,本人在寫作中深感困惑,分析方法的科學(xué)性方面有待改善。 (5)本文是選擇了銀行不良貸款評(píng)估基礎(chǔ)理論的幾個(gè)方面進(jìn)行深入,并沒有建立起一個(gè)完整的評(píng)估框架,后續(xù)研究可以進(jìn)一步的完善銀行不良貸款評(píng)估理論框架。
[Abstract]:Since 1999, China's government has set up four policy Asset Management Co, through several large-scale stripping and the efforts made by the government on the control of non-performing loans in the bank, the problem of non-performing loans in China's banks has been reduced and the rate of non-performing loans has been reduced, but the increment of the bad loan is still not controlled. In the practice of good loan assessment, there is no unified evaluation criteria and technical regulations for the financial non-performing loans. The quality of the assessment depends on the professional level of the assessors. Because of the market economic system in China, the vast majority of the evaluators can not accurately grasp the bank's non-performing loan market. The assessment method inherent in the application of machinery leads directly to the evaluation. In addition, there is a certain degree of value manipulation in the evaluation process of bank non-performing loans, which makes the evaluation out of the actual situation of the market. Therefore, it is not slow to improve the evaluation system of non-performing loans in China. After evaluating the standard of the three kinds of non-performing loans of the cost method, the income law and the market law, it is widely used by the assets evaluation institutions of various countries. But because of the special complexity of the bad loans and the development of the bad assets market, the above three methods are not directly applied to the non-performing loans of our banks. In the evaluation practice, based on the above situation, Chinese scholars have discussed the method system which conforms to the special nature and market situation of Chinese financial non-performing assets, and put forward various types of evaluation models, such as the use of mathematical statistics and analytic hierarchy process to assess the financial assets, the typical credit evaluation method, the assumption of liquidation, and the transaction cases. The different methods, such as comparison method and expert scoring method, represent different caliber and have certain advantages and disadvantages in use. If they are not used properly, the evaluation results will be deviated. Therefore, the evaluation method system of non-performing financial assets in China is constructed, and the applicability and limitations of each method are explored, and the practice is discussed in practice. The concrete use of the bank appears particularly important. Therefore, this paper, starting with the bank's bad loans, focuses on the value analysis of the bank's non-performing loans, the evaluation method and the application of the three problems. On the basis of careful comparison and analysis of the evaluation methods of non-performing loans in the bank, the application of various methods is explained with specific cases, in order to improve the evaluation. The feasibility of the evaluation method of non-performing loans in China's banks.
On the basis of the basic theory, this article starts with the definition and classification of the traditional "more than two" non-performing loans and the five level classification, and introduces the scope and characteristics of the non-performing loans, and introduces the advantages and disadvantages of the two types of loan definition, and then discusses the non-performing loans of the banks from the three angles of the government, the bank and the enterprise. Through the analysis of the characteristics of non-performing loans and the development of non-performing assets in China's banks, this paper discusses the value types and value factors that are applicable to the national conditions of our country. This article points out that, because of the historical reasons of the formation of non-performing assets, the bank non-performing loans in our country do not have clear legal rights. And in essence, it belongs to a kind of restrictive assets. There are some problems in the evaluation, such as insufficient basis, poor evaluation procedure and limited evaluation method, which make it impossible to use the market value directly to evaluate. Secondly, the disposal methods of non-performing financial assets of our country include debt restructuring, debt transfer shares, transfer of creditor's rights, entrusting underwriting and securitisation. In addition, the market is incomplete, the participants are scarce, there is no effective price formation mechanism, and there is not enough time to show the bad assets in the market. Therefore, the evaluators should be based on the market value, consider the purpose of evaluation, and estimate the state of the assets. In the analysis of the factors affecting the value of the bank's non-performing loans, this paper mainly introduces the scale of the enterprise, the quality of the assets, the quality of the assets, and the quality of the assets. The situation, the ownership difference, the industry situation, the regional economic situation and the way of the loan. Secondly, this paper introduces the practice and successful experience of the United States and other countries which have achieved great achievements in the disposal of bad assets, and then contrasts the status of our country, and then improves our country's gold from the comparative analysis. Then, I emphatically discuss and compare the assessment techniques and methods of non-performing loans in China's banks, and carry out the application of the four evaluation methods that conform to the special nature and market situation of our bank's non-performing loans. The four evaluation methods are the hypothesis of liquidation and the credit evaluation method, respectively. Transaction case comparison and expert scoring, which assume that the liquidation law is mainly applicable to enterprises that do not have the ability to continue to operate but still have the willingness to pay and the relevant financial information, or to continue to operate but the net cash flow is unstable or very small. The law of credit evaluation is the most suitable evaluation method for a debt enterprise with long potential and continuous operating capacity and capable of obtaining financial statements that have been audited for several years. And when the financial information of the debtor is not known, it can not be evaluated with the assumption of liquidation and credit evaluation. When there are similar cases in the transaction of creditor's rights and assets, the case comparison method can be used. The expert scoring rule is applicable to the finance, the credit data is incomplete or cannot be obtained. At the same time, the quantitative analysis of the estimated creditor's right is difficult to be treated by the ability of the appraiser, and the creditor's right to be effectively evaluated by the collective judgment of the experts is needed. Finally, based on the eyes In our country, the former evaluation theory of non-performing loans is lack of systematicness, the value of evaluation and the actual price of transaction and the overstate of pricing function are overstated. Six suggestions are put forward to improve the evaluation of non-performing assets in our country. First, the government should draw lessons from the historical causes of the non-performing loans of the bank and avoid the social benefits. It will affect the commercial operation of the bank, strengthen the policy guidance for the healthy development of the asset evaluation industry, standardize the system of non-performing assets assessment in the form of law as soon as possible, and vigorously support the work of the Chinese Asset Appraisal Association in the training of talents, the perfection of the evaluation system, the innovation of the evaluation ideas and so on, so as to give full play to the government's evaluation of the assets. Secondly, it is suggested that the China Association of assets assessment strengthen the construction of the industry from the following aspects: (1) pay attention to the guidance of the research on the assessment of the financial non-performing assets, summarize the new problems in the evaluation of the evaluation practice, and strengthen the improvement of the relevant evaluation criteria, and establish a set of reference and strong evaluation operation rules as soon as possible; (2) Strengthen the supervision of the professional quality of the industry, improve the professional competence and professional ethics of the appraisers, strengthen the self-discipline management ability of the industry, create a good practice environment; (3) improve the training mechanism of talents; (4) unify the accounting standard and make a more reasonable charge method, so as to stimulate the enthusiasm of the evaluation institutions to evaluate the innovation research. Third, recommend evaluation institutions and Asset Management Co to accelerate the establishment of the evaluation database, pay attention to the accumulation of bank non-performing loan disposal cases, and build a reasonable and standardized evaluation parameter system through the analysis of the collected cases. Fourth, recommend evaluation institutions and evaluators to strengthen the quantification of non-financial factors and pay attention to non financial indicators. To evaluate the impact of the value of the undesirable loans, and to continue to supplement and improve the evaluation model of the financial non-performing assets. Fifth, it is suggested that the government or the asset assessment Association set out to establish an evaluation communication platform to promote the healthy development of the non-performing assets evaluation industry and give full play to its asset pricing and financial risk prevention. Finally, it is suggested to assess the limitations of the industry management department to guide the evaluation conclusions to use the positive recognition assessment conclusions to make it realize that the transaction price of the undesirable assets should be found through the market rather than the direct application of the evaluation price.
The shortcomings and limitations of this paper are mainly manifested in the following aspects:
(1) because of the lack of research on non-performing loans to banks in China, few documents and insufficient collection of the latest theoretical research results in foreign countries, this paper can not fully draw on and absorb the achievements of the predecessors.
(2) in the specific operation of the case, because the data collection channel is not smooth and the data collection is restricted, the conclusion analysis can not quantify all the influencing factors and affect the universal applicability of the conclusion.
(3) in the evaluation system which combines quantitative and qualitative indicators, because of the limitation of individual ability, we can not do further research on the weight of the two, but draw lessons from the research results of the predecessors. The evaluation method of good creditor's rights is very important for future non-performing assets evaluation.
(4) the evaluation of non-performing loans in the bank is a very professional practice. The applicability of the research in practice must be tested empirically, and because of the shortage of practical experience, I am deeply confused in writing, and the scientific aspects of the analytical method need to be improved.
(5) this paper has selected several aspects of the basic theory of bank non-performing loan assessment, and did not establish a complete framework for evaluation, and further research can further improve the theoretical framework of bank non-performing loan assessment.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：F832.4

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前5條

1 李曉彥;;優(yōu)化交易案例比較法在金融不良資產(chǎn)評(píng)估中的應(yīng)用研究[J];企業(yè)導(dǎo)報(bào);2011年11期

2 孫國珍;談假設(shè)清算法在不良資產(chǎn)評(píng)估中的應(yīng)用[J];濟(jì)南金融;2003年06期

3 汪柏林;;采用德爾菲法評(píng)估金融不良資產(chǎn)時(shí)的收斂性檢驗(yàn)[J];中國資產(chǎn)評(píng)估;2006年07期

4 吳春林;;采用專家打分法對(duì)債權(quán)價(jià)值進(jìn)行分析的探討[J];中國資產(chǎn)評(píng)估;2007年11期

5 張曉松;;金融不良債權(quán)估值問題探討[J];中國資產(chǎn)評(píng)估;2010年01期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 肖齡;不良貸款價(jià)值評(píng)估理論研究[D];西南財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2008年

，

本文編號(hào)：1884662