论文部分内容阅读
美国法上的“安全港”制度本质上是一种豁免安排,但又与一般意义上的法律豁免制度相区别,是一种动态的、较具确定性的、非排他的豁免,同时又有其独特的适用理念。我国针对前瞻性信息披露的监管虽含免责规定,却与美国法上的“安全港”制度相去甚远,且我国当前并不具备移植美国法上“安全港”条款的制度基础和理论基础。基于此间差别,可管窥中美两国在证券监管理念上的差异。以美国的成熟监管经验作为视角,可以充分探寻“安全港”的制度价值。
The “safe harbor” system in the United States law is essentially a kind of exemption arrangement but is distinguished from the general regime of legal immunity and is a dynamic, more specific and non-exclusive exemption. At the same time, Another unique concept of its application. Although China’s regulation of forward-looking information disclosure includes exemption provisions, it has a far cry from the “safe harbor” system in U.S. law and does not currently have the institutional basis for transplanting the “safe harbor” provisions of the US law And theoretical basis. Based on the differences between the two countries, they can grasp the differences between China and the United States in the concept of securities supervision. From the perspective of mature regulatory experience in the United States, we can fully explore the institutional value of “safe harbor.”