| Summary: | 開發型不動產證券化制度，定義上係以未開發完成之不動產之權利，透過特殊目的機構，在破產隔離之法律關係下，加以小口化、規格化，並發行有價證券表彰該權利且對外募集或私募有價證券之行為。在我國法規範之下，制度上則可包括「不動產投資信託基金投資於開發型不動產」以及「不動產資產信託以開發型不動產作為信託財產私募有價證券」二種型態。證券化對於不動產之開發而言，係一相當有利之融資管道，且同時亦提供了小額投資人投資大型不動產開發案共享獲利之機會。一般均認為開發型不動產係對於證券化需求最大之標的，然而，因開發性不動產本質上具有較已開發不動產更高之風險，故學說、實務及立法上之討論亦有眾多見解主張對於開發型不動產之證券化應予禁止或限制。
我國不動產證券化條例於民國92年公布施行時，對於開發型不動產納入規範係採所謂「分階段立法」之模式，而在民國98年1月6日始由立法院三讀通過不動產證券化條例之修正案，正式將開發型不動產納入我國不動產證券化之法制，惟現行法基於道德危險之防止、風險控管與投資人保護等考量，對於開發型不動產之證券化仍設有多數禁止或限制規範。然而，本文認為風險控管與投資人保護之並非不動產證券化制度唯一或絕對之考量；並且，制度上之限制或禁止應屬投資人保護之最後手段，若尚可透過主管機關之有效監理降低投資風險並保障投資人時，仍應儘量朝「興利同時防弊」之方向運作，不應過度限制該制度之適用範圍，否則反而將使制度之立法目的無法達成。
綜上所述，本文嘗試從開發型不動產證券化之本質、特性與優缺點出發，參酌國外相關立法例，並考量我國民情與資本市場之特色後，分析提出我國開發型不動產證券化制度之走向，主張應修法開放募集之不動產投
資信託基金得投資於一般開發型不動產。另外，針對都市更新及BOT等開發案適用不動產證券化條例之議題，本研究採取否定見解，認為應於各該法律另行立法規範此種特別法上之開發型不動產證券化，而不應以不動產證券化條例規範之。故本研究尚針對現行不動產證券化條例、都市更新條例、促進民間參與公共建設法等法律規範提出修正建議。期能提供開發型不動產證券化制度將來修法及運作上之參考。
=== The “development-oriented real estate securitization” could be defined as an arrangement that subdivides and standardizes the right of real estate which is undeveloped or under development, into separate shares through a special purpose vehicle and the bankruptcy-remoteness structure, and the public offering or private placement of the real estate securities representing ownership of such shares. Under the Real Estate Securitization Act of Taiwan, R.O.C. (the “Act”), so called development-oriented real estate securitization could also be construed as either 1) fund investment of REIT into real estate(s) under development, or 2) entrusting real estate(s) under development or to be developed to a REAT. Securitization is a favorable way to finance the development project, also it provides opportunities for investors with limited fund to invest in and profit from the same. Generally, development projects have the strongest needs for securitization financing. However, due to the risks accompanied with development, there are opinions from researchers and legislators for the restriction of their securitization.
Upon the Act’s promulgation in 2003, the Legislative Yuan also resolved the guidelines for future amendment that the real estate under development or to be developed shall be included upon the maturity of real estate securitization operation. However, due to legislators’ concerns on moral hazard, risk control and investor protection, the amendment promulgated in 2009 formally adapting the development-oriented real estate securitization was still quite restricted. It is held by this thesis that risk control and investor protection are not the only or supreme purposes of the Act. Meanwhile, the restriction shall be deemed the last resort of investor protection, it is to say, if the monitoring and supervision of competent authority is operable, we shall use them to protect investors instead of legislative restriction. Or some objectives of the Act would be therefore hindered.
Based on the analysis of the nature, advantages, disadvantages, comparative law study of development-oriented real estate securitization, and also referring to the customs and capital market structure of Taiwan, this thesis has provided some thoughts and suggestions for other researchers and legislators’ reference. Firstly, it is held that the restriction on publicly offered REIT’s investment in development project shall be removed. Also, the urban renewal and BOT project shall not be applicable under the Act as which shall be exceptional types respectively legislated in Urban Renewal Act and the Law for Promotion of Private Participation in Infrastructure Projects. It is expected that the issues, thoughts and opinions raised or provided by this thesis could encourage further discussions toward the subject to ensure the sound and stable development of real estate securitization in Taiwan.
|
|---|
