| 摘要: | 融資收購(Leveraged Buyouts)為美國八○年代紅極一時之併購方式，在1982年收購中佔15-20%，在1983年甚至佔有50%之多；九○年代時，因融資槓桿過高而失敗之融資收購不在少數，呈現下降趨勢。然而二十一世紀後，隨著利率低迷、融資限制鬆綁以及沙氏法案之規定，促使許多公開發行公司選擇下市，2002~2007年大型併購潮(mega-buyout)中亦大量運用融資收購作為併購方式，融資收購之所以如此受到廣泛運用，主要來自收購方得快速發動、以小搏大之特質，縮短籌資時間，有助於活絡控制權市場。 然而，融資收購以目標公司之資產作為收購價金之擔保，大量現金卻用於收購目標公司股票，致使目標公司之財務結構一步步走向懸崖，其既存債權人之權益尤其令人擔憂。融資收購不該獨厚收購公司及目標公司股東，而將既存債權人之權益拋諸腦後，否則債權人未來必將公司債務人可能進行融資收購之風險，轉嫁在節節升高之利息中，最終亦不利資金之流動。周全保障債權人之權利，方得健全資本市場機制。 本文探討美國法制及我國法制如何保障融資收購下既存債權人之權益。美國法部分，目標公司原有債權人在其瀕臨破產邊緣或破產時，得代位公司向董事主張「受任人義務」之違反，以及藉「詐欺性移轉」撤銷融資收購交易。而我國法部分，本文由公司法「受任人義務」、民法「主觀給付不能」、「保全債權」、「詐欺性移轉」，以及破產法「詐害債權」、「偏頗行為」之角度切入，比較美國法與我國法之差異，在我國體制下提出修法建議，俾使我國引進融資收購時，得適當保障正當融資收購及既存債權人之權益。 Leveraged Buyout was all the rage in 1980s in America. As a major method of M&A, it was accounted for 15-20% of all M&A in 1982, even up to 50% in 1983. Although dropped to a low point in 1990s, in the 21th century, with decreasing interest rates, loosening lending standard, and the amendment of Sarbanes-Oxley Act, LBO became prevalent in the age of Mega-buyout (2002-2007) again. With large ratio of loan, acquirer can launched LBO immediately; on the other hand, chances for small firms acquiring big ones was higher, stimulating the market for corporate control. However, the acquisition debt secured upon most of target company’s asset and most of cash were obtained by the shareholders of target company, not the aquiring firm. Therefore, put its financial structure in danger, so did target company’s creditors. LBO should not only favor to acquirer and shareholders of target company, otherwise creditors can’t be well-protected. The interest rate of loan will definitely go up to compensate the risk, which is unfavourable at financial liquidity in capital market. We will discuss both American law and Taiwanese law according to protect existing creditors of target company in LBO in this thesis. In the part of American law, when debtor (target company) faces the crisis of possibly closing down or being bankruptcy, the existing creditors have the right to bring a derivative action against directors who breach their fiduciary duty; or set aside the LBO through the fraudulent conveyance/ transfer. In the part of Taiwanese law, creditors can claim their right through Civil Code, Company Act, and Bankruptcy Law. After analyzing and comparing them, we will give some advices to Taiwanese law to enhance the right of creditor and protect the reasonable LBO. |
