本研究探討資產管理公司對不動產擔保不良債權之評價。以不良債權評價模型實證結果：一、每一案例採用一種可處理模式進行評價發現：(一)每個個案計算出之淨現值(即出價)低於總債權金額之折價率不同係因每一不良債權案件之信用風險程度及擔保品類型與區位均不同所致；(二)個案處理時間短者，其計算出之淨現值(即出價)低於估計總回收金額之折價率較低，惟會受個案處理費用多寡之影響，費用率高者相對其計算出之折價幅度較大。二、同一個案採用協議清償(出售債權)模式、持續法拍至拍定模式、承受後出售模式三種不同處理模式，設定總回收金額相同情形下進行評價發現：土地增值稅對於採用不同處理模式有重大影響，三種處理模式中以協議清償(出售債權)模式之折價率最低，次高為持續法拍至拍定模式，最高為承受後出售模式，影響折價率高低係因每種處理模式所需負擔的費用及稅額不同所致。折價率高低與資產管理公司出價成反比。 This paper is investigating the evaluation on the non-performing loan based on the real estate collaterals for the Assets Management Corporations. The results for the evaluation on the model of the non-performing loan (NPL) as follow:(A)Each case only used one method to do the evaluation and the result as follow:(a) The net present value (the biding price) will always lower than the discounted rate on the total non-performing loan due to the credit risk, different types of collaterals, and the location of the collaterals.(b) For shorter duration on handling the case, the possibility on the calculated net present value (biding price) lower than the total discounted returns will be lower. It will also depend on the expenses expenditure. For the higher expenses, the range of the discounted rate will be larger relatively. (B) The evaluation result on the same case with different methods; such as the negotiated pay-off by selling the creditor’s rights to third party, continuation on the auctions until sold out the real estate, or assumed the real estate and sells it later in the market; as follow:The property taxes on the increase value of the property will have great influenced on the method of the handling. The discounted rate will be lowest for the negotiated pay-off by selling the creditor’s rights to third party, followed by the continuation on the auctions until sold out the real estate, and then the assumed the real estate and sells it later in the market as the highest discounted rate. The variation on the discounted rate will influence the handling method, due to difference on the expenses and the tax bracket. The discounted rate will be opposite to the biding price offer by the Assets Management Corporation.
