【摘要】：美國的內幕交易法律制度起源于20世紀初期,到現(xiàn)在已發(fā)展了近百年,在這近百年里內幕交易這一證券市場的丑惡現(xiàn)象始終就伴隨著證券市場的發(fā)展而發(fā)展,而美國政府打擊內幕交易的活動一刻也沒有停歇,由于法律制度的完善和具體執(zhí)法的操作細節(jié)的較好銜接,美國被世界各國看作是打擊內幕交易學習的楷模,尤其是美國證券交易委員會執(zhí)法的嚴厲性和法律實施的有效性一直被世人所稱道。中國的證券市場剛剛建立不過20年,這20年中證券業(yè)行業(yè)獲得了巨大發(fā)展,中國股票市值規(guī)模已躋身世界前列,中國股票市場在不斷壯大的同時也存在許多的問題,尤其值得注意的是近年來內幕交易頻發(fā),數(shù)額之巨,形態(tài)之多樣讓人為之震驚。而中國規(guī)制內幕交易的法律雖然在不斷的完善,但內幕交易司法實踐中成效并不顯著,或者因為許多的法律制度過于僵化和教條或者因為法律制度規(guī)定的過于粗略,在法律實踐上難以操作,這一定程度上就導致政府執(zhí)法部門的行政惰性。于是會出現(xiàn)一種惡性循環(huán)那便是法律制度的缺陷導致行政惰性的發(fā)生,從而導致內幕交易案件不斷增加,投資者信心喪失,證券市場萎縮經濟發(fā)展受到影響。為了避免這一惡性循環(huán)的發(fā)生,筆者試圖通過比較中美內幕交易相關法律制度的異同,吸取美國打擊內幕交易經驗教訓,借鑒其成功經驗,來完善我國有關內幕交易的法律制度,以更好的打擊內幕交易行為,維護證券市場的公平公正,保護投資者利益,繁榮我國經濟。 本文共分三個部分: 第一部分介紹了中美內幕交易法律制度的歷史由來和早期有關內幕交易理論爭議,讓讀者對中美內幕交易法律制度的歷史有一個起碼的了解,同時對內幕交易理論爭議進行介紹讓人們反思并認識到內幕交易的危害,指出打擊內幕交易已成為世界各國的共識。 第二部分主要分為三節(jié)內容:第一節(jié)內容主要闡述了中美對內幕交易內涵的的不同理解,從三個方面予以比較:內幕交易的主體、內幕交易的對象、內幕交易的行為方式;第二節(jié)內容主要對中美內幕交易監(jiān)管機構的進行比較,指出中國證監(jiān)會獨立性不強,證券業(yè)協(xié)會和證券交易所自律組織對內幕交易監(jiān)管作用沒有充分發(fā)揮出來;第三節(jié)對比了中美內幕交易的三種法律責任:行政責任、刑事責任、民事責任,指出中國內幕交易在三種法律責任上的缺陷。 第三部分主要闡述了筆者對完善我國內幕交易的幾點建議。分三節(jié)內容,第一節(jié)介紹了中國內幕交易的現(xiàn)狀與面臨的困境;第二節(jié)闡述了中國出現(xiàn)內幕交易的歷史、文化和社會原因;第三節(jié)筆者在立法上、司法上、執(zhí)法上、社會監(jiān)督上提出了幾點完善我國內幕交易建議。
[Abstract]:The legal system of insider trading in the United States originated in the early 20th century and has been developed for nearly a hundred years. In this century, the ugly phenomenon of insider trading in the securities market has always been accompanied by the development of the securities market. However, the US government's activities to crack down on insider trading have not stopped for a moment. Due to the perfection of the legal system and the better convergence of the operational details of the specific enforcement of the law, the United States is regarded by all countries in the world as a model for the study of combating insider trading. In particular, the severity of the SEC's enforcement and the effectiveness of its enforcement have been praised by the world. China's securities market has just been established for only 20 years. During these 20 years, the securities industry has gained tremendous development. The scale of China's stock market has become one of the highest in the world. While the Chinese stock market is growing, there are also many problems. It is especially noteworthy that insider trading has occurred frequently in recent years, the amount of insider trading is huge and the variety of forms is shocking. However, although the law governing insider trading in China is constantly improving, the judicial practice of insider trading has not achieved significant results, or because many legal systems are too rigid and dogmatic, or because the legal system is too rough. It is difficult to operate in legal practice, which to some extent leads to the administrative inertia of government law enforcement departments. There will be a vicious circle that the defects of the legal system lead to the occurrence of administrative inertia, which leads to the increasing number of insider trading cases, the loss of investor confidence, and the impact on the shrinking economic development of the securities market. In order to avoid this vicious circle, the author tries to compare the similarities and differences between Chinese and American insider trading related legal systems, draw lessons from American experience in cracking down on insider trading, and draw lessons from its successful experience. In order to perfect the legal system of insider trading in our country, we can better crack down on insider trading, safeguard the fairness and justice of the securities market, protect the interests of investors, and prosper our economy. This paper is divided into three parts: the first part introduces the historical origin of the legal system of insider trading in China and the United States and the early disputes about the theory of insider trading, so that readers can have a basic understanding of the history of the legal system of insider trading in China and the United States. At the same time, introducing the theory controversy of insider trading makes people reflect on the harm of insider trading and point out that cracking down on insider trading has become a consensus in the world. The second part is mainly divided into three sections: the first section mainly expounds the different understanding of the connotation of insider trading between China and the United States, and compares it from three aspects: the subject of insider trading, the object of insider trading, the behavior mode of insider trading; The second section mainly compares the Chinese and American insider trading regulators, pointing out that the CSRC is not independent, and the securities industry association and the self-regulatory organization of the stock exchange have not given full play to the role of insider trading supervision. The third section compares three kinds of legal liability of insider trading in China and America: administrative liability, criminal liability and civil liability, and points out the defects of Chinese insider trading in three kinds of legal liability. The third part mainly elaborated the author to consummate our country insider trading several suggestions. The first section introduces the current situation and difficulties of insider trading in China; the second section expounds the history, culture and social reasons of insider trading in China; the third section introduces the author's legislation, judicature and enforcement of the law. Social supervision puts forward several suggestions to perfect insider trading in our country.
【學位授予單位】：華東政法大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D971.2;D922.287

【相似文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 孔博;毛一竹;;內幕交易:“權錢合體”的腐敗新動向[J];法治與社會;2011年07期

2 張慶俠;馮建生;;中美內幕交易界定的比較研究[J];河北法學;2011年08期

3 孫瑞灼;;官員屢涉案:別讓“內幕信息”淪為腐敗工具[J];決策探索(上半月);2011年06期

4 黃丹華;;碩鼠何其多[J];金融博覽(財富);2011年06期

5 蔣學躍;;境外市場“董、監(jiān)、高”買賣本公司股票的規(guī)定及其啟示[J];證券法苑;2010年02期

6 ;內蒙古自治區(qū)人民政府辦公廳轉發(fā)內蒙古證監(jiān)局等四部門關于建立自治區(qū)打擊和防控資本市場內幕交易工作機制意見的通知[J];內蒙古自治區(qū)人民政府公報;2011年12期

7 ;一周人物[J];中國經濟周刊;2011年29期

8 龍治芳;李曦;;第四屆中美知識產k 模擬法庭比較活動[J];中國專利與商標;2011年03期

9 武俊橋;;2010年中國證券市場法治述評[J];證券法苑;2011年01期

10 吳偉央;普麗芬;;2009年中國證券法治評述[J];證券法苑;2010年01期

相關會議論文 前10條

1 劉迪;王賢文;;美籍華裔科學家在中美科學合作中的作用:以納米技術領域為例[A];第七屆中國科技政策與管理學術年會論文集[C];2011年

2 虞和平;;論清末民初中美商會的互訪和合作[A];中國商會發(fā)展報告 No.1(2004)[C];2005年

3 王曉先;;中美服務貿易糾紛引發(fā)的對策思考[A];WTO法與中國論叢（2011年卷）[C];2010年

4 周舟;;國際談判中的議題聯(lián)系因素——以中美戰(zhàn)略與經濟對話為例的研究[A];國際關系研究：新領域與新理論——2010年博士論壇[C];2010年

5 紀托;;中美家庭道德比較研究[A];吉林省行政管理學會“提高政府執(zhí)行力”學術研討會論文集（《吉林政報》2009·理論�？C];2009年

6 黃飛雪;李延喜;何艷;;基于事件研究法的杭蕭鋼構的內幕交易[A];第五屆（2010）中國管理學年會——會計與財務分會場論文集[C];2010年

7 趙志剛;;Ⅰ類新藥中美創(chuàng)新對比[A];2011年中國藥學大會暨第11屆中國藥師周論文集[C];2011年

8 徐勇;;中美快遞產業(yè)對比分析研究[A];2011’中國快遞論壇論文集[C];2011年

9 曾堅;;美國禁止內幕交易立法中存在的問題及理論對策[A];首屆貴州法學論壇文集[C];2000年

10 韓立余;;中美出版物市場準入案的影響[A];《WTO法與中國論壇》文集——中國法學會世界貿易組織法研究會年會論文集（八）[C];2009年

相關重要報紙文章 前10條

1 記者 尹婕;中美旅游戰(zhàn)略性合作協(xié)議簽署[N];人民日報海外版;2008年

2 吳銘;深南電稱不存在任何內幕交易[N];中國證券報;2008年

3 ;李明博女婿涉嫌內幕交易遭查[N];新華每日電訊;2009年

4 本報記者 龔小磊;懲治內幕交易還需“全民動員”[N];中國證券報;2009年

5 萬勇　盧榮;“券商內幕交易第一案”一審判決[N];證券時報;2009年

6 中國社科院金融所金融市場研究室副主任 尹中立;“券商內幕交易第一案”反思[N];南方周末;2009年

7 本報記者 周，

本文編號：2209291