外文翻譯--金融服務(wù)貿(mào)易自由化對(duì)中國(guó)的影響（節(jié)選）

1、<p>　　中文3090字,1750單詞，1萬英文字符</p><p><b>　　外文翻譯 原文 </b></p><p>　　The Impact of Financial Services Trade Liberalization on China</p><p>　　Material Source: The Impa

2、ct of Financial Services Trade Liberalization on China[J]. Discussion Papers, 2005.</p><p>　　Author: Li-Gang Liu</p><p><b>　　Abstract </b></p><p>　　This paper shows that

3、 financial services trade liberalization in China has set impetus for accelerated domestic financial liberalization. Foreign banks, though still relatively small in size, have already exerted considerable influence on Ch

4、ina’s capital flows. Empirical finding from the cross-country study indicates that financial services trade liberalization under the WTO promotes bank loans to developing economies strongly though not evenly conditional

5、on country characteristics. </p><p>　　Keywords: Financial services trade liberalization, capital flows, financial and capital account liberalization, gravity model </p><p>　　I. Introduction <

6、/p><p>　　China is undertaking a set of simultaneous, though gradual, domestic financial and capital account liberalization. At the same time, its financial sector is also experiencing increased foreign competit

7、ion as the country has already started to allow considerable foreign participation in its domestic financial sector. 2007 will be a watershed year as China will have to fully implement its WTO commitments on financial se

8、rvices trade liberalization. </p><p>　　While foreign banks in emerging markets promote efficiency through enhanced competition and transfer of skills (Claessens, et al … 2001, Committee on the Global Financi

9、al System (CGFS), 2004), they also pose challenges to policy makers in areas of managing liberalization pace, upgrading supervision skills, and conducting monetary policy. Empirical findings suggest that with more countr

10、ies embarking upon financial liberalization, the risk of financial crises has also increased. It was observed th</p><p>　　Because financial services trade liberalization often involves capital flows, foreign

11、 participation will certainly complicate the ongoing process of domestic financial and capital account liberalization in emerging market economies. It is hypothesized that foreign bank participation would accelerate both

12、 domestic financial and capital account liberalization and in particular, it would make a host country’s capital control regime progressively more ineffective, thus leading to de facto capital ac</p><p>　　Th

13、is paper intends to examine these issues raised above in two segments: First, it examines the impact of foreign bank presence on China’s rapidly evolving domestic and external financial liberalization. Using China as a c

14、ase study, the paper intends to shed light on whether foreign participation helps accelerate China’s domestic financial and capital account liberalization. The paper then examines the impact of the WTO financial services

15、 trade liberalization commitments and especially the banki</p><p>　　The paper proceeds as follows: Section II provides an updated review on the General Agreement of Trade in Services with a focus on the fina

16、ncial services. Section III examines whether foreign bank presence in China helps accelerate domestic financial and capital account liberalization. Section IV presents some empirical findings on whether the financial ser

17、vices trade liberalization commitments promote bank loans to emerging market economies. Section V discusses implications for policy. </p><p>　　II. Financial Services Trade Liberalization under the GATS </

18、p><p>　　II. 1: GATS Rules: An updated review </p><p>　　Financial services trade liberalization negotiations (FSTLN), under the General Agreement on Trade and Services (GATS), aims at reducing or ev

19、en totally removing all trade barriers in financial services sector by allowing foreign financial firms in insurance, banking, securities industry and other related financial services sectors to enter a host country and

20、enjoy national treatment. The GATS, launched in the Uruguay Round in 1986, was not able to reach any agreement until April 1994, several m</p><p>　　FSTLN specifies general commitments, specific exemptions, a

21、nd modes of supply of services. These commitments governing modes of financial services supplied and they can differ from country to country and can be phased in over time depending on the initial agreements. However, th

22、e general commitments of GATS also apply to FSTLN have the following features (Kono, et al …, 1997)</p><p>　　? Most favored nation (MFN): All liberalization measures must be extended to all WTO members equal

23、ly. </p><p>　　? Market access and national treatment: WTO member countries can not discriminate between domestic and foreign firms, except when explicitly indicated at the time of joining the GATS. </p>

24、;<p>　　? Transparency: Local regulations should be published and made accessible to all. </p><p>　　? Progressive liberalization: Member states agree to increase the number of liberalized sectors and t

25、o eliminate exceptions within sectors by committing to future negotiating rounds. </p><p>　　? Dispute settlement mechanism: All commitments are legally binding. Harmed states can initiate an arbitration proc

26、edure. If found harmed, the country can impose sanctions against the violating country. </p><p>　　However, FSTLN also has some important exemptions: </p><p>　　? Exemption for government services

27、: Activities of the central banks or other government authorities carrying out monetary and exchange rate policies are excluded from GATS. </p><p>　　? Prudential carve-out: It is exempted from GATS and is de

28、signed to ensure that host country governments can protect their domestic financial system and participants of the financial system through the application of the host country prudential standards. These prudential measu

29、res in principle do not have to comply with the national treatment, market access commitments and its most favored nation responsibility (Key, 2003). However, the prudential carve-out is not meant to be an overriding exc

30、ep</p><p>　　? Some non-prudential related government regulations (for example, practices related to industrial policy to provide credit to certain industries) are also exempted from the commitments of the GA

31、TS unless such policies violate the general commitments as specified above (Kono, et al …, 1997). </p><p>　　Similar to other types of services, FSTLN also covers four modes of supply: cross-border, consumpti

32、on abroad, commercial presence, and movements of natural persons. </p><p>　　?? Mode 1 or cross-border supply: If a consumer in country A and a supplier in country B, the service crosses the border to meet th

33、e need of the consumer in Country A (e.g., A Japanese bank in Tokyo lends to a Chinese firm in Shanghai). Depending on the nature of transactions, this mode of supply in financial services will often involve not only fin

34、ancial services but also capital flows (Table 1). </p><p>　　? Mode 2 or consumption abroad: It refers to a scenario that a consumer in Country A will have to travel to Country B where the service supplier is

35、 located in order to conduct a transaction (e.g., A Japanese company opens a bank account with a bank in China (a Japanese, other foreign, or even a domestic Chinese bank) for transactions occurring in China). </p>

36、<p>　　? Mode 3 or commercial presence: It refers to a service in country A provided by a supplier in country B took place at a permanent place of business located in country A (e.g., A Japanese bank lends firms in

37、 China through its branch in China) (Table 2). </p><p>　　? Mode 4 or movement of natural persons: It refers to a service in country A is provided by country B with personnel imported from country B (e.g., A

38、branch of a Japanese bank draws its management from its headquarters in Tokyo). </p><p>　　As discussed above, measures undertaken for prudential purposes are exempted from the basic rules. Because there is n

39、o necessity test of validity, such “carve-outs” could be potentially used as restrictions or barriers for foreign entry. In addition, only a sovereign, not a private bank, can bring complains to the WTO dispute panel (Ke

40、y, 2003). </p><p>　　Although financial services often involve capital flows, the FSTLN under GATS does not have any authority to override the measures of capital controls in a host economy. Under capital con

41、trols, a cross-border financial service trade may occur but not necessarily the capital flows associated with the service. This is because FSTLN under GATS has to be consistent with the current account transactions of th

42、e IMF Articles of Agreement. It does not, however, cover capital account transactions. In pri</p><p>　　Table 3 uses the banking business as an example to highlight the areas in which foreign bank entry not o

43、nly brings financial services trade but also cross-border capital flows. Out of 17 categories of banking business in Mode 1, only three types of banking business can take place without involving capital flows (financial

44、leasing, provision of financial information, and financial advisory). Only in Mode 3 (Commercial Presence), most financial services trade can occur so long as foreign capitals </p><p>　　Despite these perceiv

45、ed limitations, FSTLN under GATS is an important step forward in liberalizing the financial service trade worldwide as it provides national treatment to foreign financial firms, promotes transparency of financial regulat

46、ions, and promises further liberalization in financial services. Similar to foreign direct investment in manufacturing sectors, the impact of foreign participation in a host country may be much larger than one can contem

47、plate based only on the existing WTO ru</p><p>　　III. China’s WTO Financial Services Commitments and their Implications </p><p>　　China signed the GATS upon its WTO accession at the end of 2001.

48、 Although there is a phasing-out period of five years with respect to business scope (local currency vs. foreign exchange banking business), customers (resident vs. nonresident, consumer vs. firms), and geographic locati

49、on (Appendix I), its overall commitment is relatively liberal compared with countries in East Asia and most of the developing economies (Figure 1). Even before its WTO commitments, foreign banks have already been all<

50、/p><p><b>　　譯文 </b></p><p>　　金融服務(wù)貿(mào)易自由化對(duì)中國(guó)的影響</p><p><b>　　作者:劉利剛</b></p><p>　　摘要本文表明，在中國(guó)金融服務(wù)貿(mào)易自由化已經(jīng)成為加速國(guó)內(nèi)金融自由化的推動(dòng)力量。外資銀行雖然比較小，但已經(jīng)對(duì)中國(guó)的資本流動(dòng)產(chǎn)生相當(dāng)大的影響?？鐕?guó)

51、家研究的實(shí)證結(jié)果表明，在WTO下金融服務(wù)貿(mào)易自由化促進(jìn)了銀行貸款在國(guó)家特點(diǎn)不均衡的條件下發(fā)展經(jīng)濟(jì)。</p><p>　　關(guān)鍵詞:金融服務(wù)貿(mào)易自由化、資本流動(dòng)、金融和資本賬戶的自由化、重力場(chǎng)模型</p><p><b>　　1導(dǎo)言</b></p><p>　　中國(guó)正在發(fā)展的同時(shí)，雖然逐漸的對(duì)國(guó)內(nèi)金融和資本帳戶自由化的進(jìn)行設(shè)置。但與此同時(shí)，其金融部

52、門也正在經(jīng)歷更多的外國(guó)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)，我國(guó)已經(jīng)開始允許外國(guó)涉及國(guó)內(nèi)相當(dāng)大范圍的金融部門。2007年將是一個(gè)分水嶺，因?yàn)樵撃曛袊?guó)將要全面落實(shí)金融服務(wù)貿(mào)易自由化對(duì)世貿(mào)組織的承諾。</p><p>　　而在新興市場(chǎng)的推動(dòng)下，通過提高競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力和技能轉(zhuǎn)移(Claessens等人2001，全球金融系統(tǒng)委員會(huì)(CGFS)，2004)效率的外資銀行，他們也在管理領(lǐng)域開放步伐，挑戰(zhàn)決策者，提高監(jiān)管技能和執(zhí)行貨幣政策。實(shí)證研究結(jié)果表明，更多的國(guó)

53、家著手金融自由化，金融危機(jī)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)也有所增加。據(jù)指出，20世紀(jì)80年代以來，超過三分之二的基金組織成員國(guó)都經(jīng)歷過銀行界的重大問題(林格倫等人1996)。金融自由化和銀行危機(jī)關(guān)系的研究還表明，金融自由化引發(fā)了銀行危機(jī)(Demirguc-Kunt&Detragiache，1998)。此外，在新興市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)體制下，國(guó)家的資本帳戶開放，銀行業(yè)的危機(jī)常常伴隨著支付危機(jī)的平衡(卡明斯基和萊因哈特，2000)。</p><p&

54、gt;　　由于金融服務(wù)貿(mào)易自由化往往涉及資本的流動(dòng)，外資一定會(huì)在新興市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)體復(fù)雜的國(guó)內(nèi)金融和資本帳戶自由化的進(jìn)程中進(jìn)行參與。據(jù)推測(cè)，外資銀行的參與將加快國(guó)內(nèi)金融和資本帳戶的自由化，特別是將使東道國(guó)的資本管制制度逐步無效，從而導(dǎo)致事實(shí)上的資本帳戶自由化。如果沒有必要就其匯率制度和他們實(shí)施貨幣政策的方法進(jìn)行修改，新興市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)體可能會(huì)遇到與其固有的政策不一致，最終可能導(dǎo)致資本賬戶危機(jī)。</p><p>　　本文旨在探

55、討上述兩部分提出的這些問題:首先，它探討了外資銀行的存在對(duì)中國(guó)快速發(fā)展的對(duì)內(nèi)和對(duì)外金融自由化的影響。把中國(guó)作為一個(gè)案例研究，本文打算揭示外資參與有利于加快中國(guó)的國(guó)內(nèi)金融和資本帳戶自由化。進(jìn)而探討WTO金融服務(wù)貿(mào)易自由化的影響，特別是銀行對(duì)銀行貸款部門發(fā)展經(jīng)濟(jì)的承諾。具體來說，本節(jié)實(shí)證研究希望揭示金融服務(wù)貿(mào)易自由化是否有利于促進(jìn)銀行貸款發(fā)展經(jīng)濟(jì)。</p><p>　　論文的撰寫步驟如下:第二節(jié)提供了服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定對(duì)

56、金融服務(wù)的重點(diǎn)的最新評(píng)述。第三節(jié)探討了在中國(guó)外資銀行的存在是否有利于加快國(guó)內(nèi)金融和資本賬戶的自由化。第四節(jié)提出了一些實(shí)證研究結(jié)果證實(shí)金融服務(wù)貿(mào)易自由化的承諾是否促進(jìn)了銀行貸款發(fā)展新興市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)體。第五節(jié)探討了政策的影響。</p><p>　　2服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定下的金融服務(wù)貿(mào)易自由化</p><p>　　2.1服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定規(guī)則:一種最新評(píng)述</p><p>　　金融服務(wù)

57、貿(mào)易自由化談判(FSTLN)根據(jù)服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定(GATS)，目的是減少甚至完全消除金融服務(wù)部門的所有貿(mào)易障礙，允許在保險(xiǎn)、銀行、證券業(yè)和其他相關(guān)金融服務(wù)部門的外國(guó)金融公司進(jìn)入東道國(guó)和享受國(guó)民待遇。服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定，在1986年烏拉圭回合中提出，但未能達(dá)成任何協(xié)議，直到1994年4月，烏拉圭回合在1993年年底結(jié)束后的幾個(gè)月。關(guān)于金融服務(wù)協(xié)議的談判也被延長(zhǎng)遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超出了烏拉圭回合，最后在1997年達(dá)成協(xié)議。在當(dāng)前新的世貿(mào)組織多哈回合談判中，金融

58、服務(wù)和其他服務(wù)將是一個(gè)“內(nèi)置”的議程，從而重新強(qiáng)調(diào)了利益。</p><p>　　FSTLN指定一般承諾、特定豁免及服務(wù)供應(yīng)模式。這些承諾提供的理事，他們可以因國(guó)家和金融服務(wù)方式的不同，隨著時(shí)間的推移逐步取消最初的協(xié)議。然而，服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定的一般承諾也適用于FSTLN，具有以下特點(diǎn):</p><p>　　?最惠國(guó)待遇(MFN):所有的開放措施必須擴(kuò)大到所有WTO成員中平均分配。</p&

59、gt;<p>　　?市場(chǎng)準(zhǔn)入和國(guó)民待遇:世貿(mào)組織成員國(guó)不能在國(guó)內(nèi)和外國(guó)公司中存在歧視，除非明確表示加入服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定的時(shí)間。</p><p>　　?透明度:地方法規(guī)應(yīng)予以公布，并對(duì)所有人作出公開。</p><p>　　?逐步自由化:會(huì)員國(guó)同意增加自由化部門的數(shù)量，并消除部門內(nèi)部異常，承諾今后的談判回合。</p><p>　　?爭(zhēng)端解決機(jī)制:所有的承諾具

60、有法律約束力。受損國(guó)家可以啟動(dòng)仲裁程序。如果受到了傷害，該國(guó)可以對(duì)違反的國(guó)家施加制裁。</p><p>　　然而，F(xiàn)STLN也有一些重要的例外。</p><p>　　?豁免政府服務(wù):中央銀行或其他政府機(jī)關(guān)開展貨幣和匯率政策的活動(dòng)被排除在服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定外。</p><p>　　?審慎例外:這是從服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定中豁免，旨在確保東道國(guó)政府可以通過保護(hù)東道國(guó)的審慎標(biāo)準(zhǔn)適用于

61、其國(guó)內(nèi)金融體系和金融體系的參與者。這些原則上的審慎監(jiān)管措施并沒有遵守國(guó)民待遇、市場(chǎng)準(zhǔn)入的承諾及其最惠國(guó)的責(zé)任。然而，審慎例外不是意味著一個(gè)要壓倒一切成員的義務(wù)是例外，作為審慎的措施不應(yīng)該被用來避免成員的義務(wù)或承諾。</p><p>　　?一些非審慎性相關(guān)的政府法規(guī)(例如，有關(guān)工業(yè)政策對(duì)某些行業(yè)提供貸款的做法)也獲得豁免服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定的承諾，除非這種政策違反上述規(guī)定的一般性承諾。</p><p&

62、gt;　　類似的其他服務(wù)，還包括四個(gè)FSTLN供應(yīng)模式:跨境供應(yīng)、國(guó)外消費(fèi)、商業(yè)存在和自然人流動(dòng)。</p><p>　　?模式一跨境供應(yīng):如果一個(gè)消費(fèi)者在A國(guó)，一個(gè)供應(yīng)商在B國(guó)，服務(wù)跨越邊境，以滿足在A國(guó)(例如，在東京日本銀行借給在上海中國(guó)公司)的消費(fèi)需求。根據(jù)交易的性質(zhì)而定，這種金融服務(wù)模式的供應(yīng)，往往不僅涉及金融服務(wù)還有資本流動(dòng)(見表1)。</p><p>　　?模式二國(guó)外消費(fèi):它是指

63、一個(gè)場(chǎng)景，一個(gè)在A國(guó)的消費(fèi)者將不得不前往B國(guó)服務(wù)供應(yīng)商所在地，以便進(jìn)行交易。</p><p>　　?模式三商業(yè)存在:它是指一個(gè)服務(wù)在A國(guó)，提供的供應(yīng)商在B國(guó)，發(fā)生長(zhǎng)期的業(yè)務(wù)在A國(guó)所在地的地方(例如，日本的銀行貸款給中國(guó)分公司通過其在中國(guó)的公司)(見表2)。</p><p>　　?模式四自然人流動(dòng):它是指一個(gè)在A國(guó)的服務(wù)由B國(guó)從B國(guó)提供引進(jìn)人才(例如，一個(gè)銀行分行吸引了來自日本在東京總部的管

64、理)。</p><p>　　綜上所述，為謹(jǐn)慎起見而采取的措施豁免的基本規(guī)則。因?yàn)闆]有必要的有效性測(cè)試，例如“瓜分出局”可能會(huì)產(chǎn)生限制或作為外資進(jìn)入的障礙。此外，只有一個(gè)主權(quán)，而不是私人銀行可以向世貿(mào)組織提出申訴爭(zhēng)端解決小組。</p><p>　　盡管金融服務(wù)往往涉及資本流動(dòng)，F(xiàn)STLN根據(jù)服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定沒有任何權(quán)力覆蓋在東道國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)上采取的資本控制措施。在資本管制下，跨境金融服務(wù)貿(mào)易可能發(fā)生

65、，但資本流動(dòng)不一定與服務(wù)關(guān)聯(lián)。這是因?yàn)樵诜?wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定下FSTLN要同貨幣基金組織協(xié)定條款的經(jīng)常項(xiàng)目交易一致。但是，這不包括資本帳戶交易。原則上，已經(jīng)簽署了關(guān)于在金融服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定的國(guó)家可以繼續(xù)從事他們的資本控制措施和做法。</p><p>　　表3使用銀行業(yè)務(wù)作為一個(gè)例子來凸顯其中外資銀行的進(jìn)入不僅帶來了金融服務(wù)貿(mào)易，而且?guī)砜缇迟Y本流動(dòng)地區(qū)。除了銀行業(yè)務(wù)模式一中的17類，只有三個(gè)銀行業(yè)務(wù)類型可以采取不涉及資本

66、流動(dòng)(金融租賃，金融信息服務(wù)及財(cái)務(wù)顧問)下發(fā)生。只有在模式三(商業(yè)存在)中，大多數(shù)金融服務(wù)貿(mào)易只要外資不涉及就可能發(fā)生。</p><p>　　盡管有這些明顯的局限性，在服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定下，F(xiàn)STLN在自由化的全球金融服務(wù)貿(mào)易中是重要的一步。因?yàn)樗鼮橥鈬?guó)金融公司提供國(guó)民待遇，促進(jìn)了金融法規(guī)的透明度，并承諾了進(jìn)一步自由化的金融服務(wù)。類似外國(guó)制造業(yè)的直接投資，外資參與在東道國(guó)的影響可能遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)大于我們只在現(xiàn)行WTO規(guī)則和條例

67、中可以考慮的。</p><p>　　3中國(guó)的WTO金融服務(wù)貿(mào)易的承諾及其意義</p><p>　　中國(guó)簽署了2001年年底加入WTO后的服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定。雖然有關(guān)于經(jīng)營(yíng)范圍五年的逐步淘汰期(當(dāng)?shù)刎泿胖鲌?chǎng)迎戰(zhàn)外匯銀行業(yè)務(wù))，客戶(居民主場(chǎng)迎戰(zhàn)非居民，消費(fèi)對(duì)比公司)，以及地理位置(附錄I)，其整體承諾與多數(shù)的發(fā)展中經(jīng)濟(jì)體的東亞國(guó)家相比，相對(duì)寬松(圖1)。即使在加入WTO的承諾之前，外資銀行已獲準(zhǔn)