國內有關採購案件之決標金額與底價金額之實證研究文獻，多將相關資料逕以迴歸方式直接處理而獲致相關結論，未曾考量樣本偏誤對迴歸結果的影響。本研究利用內政部99年1月至104年8月資訊服務勞務採購案件數據，針對1,061件採購案件資料進行分析，為避免因樣本選擇不當可能產生的估計誤差，我們利用Heckman二階段估計法，先估計押標金對採購案件是否決標的影響，再進一步分析影響決標金額與底價金額的要因。經過選樣誤差修正後，我們發現決標金額與底價金額都有受到選樣誤差的影響，表示過往以計量模型進行決標金額與底價金額影響因素的實證研究，由於未考量押標金的扭曲效果，其研究結果似有再檢視必要。而實證結果也發現，勞務與工程案件之決標金額與底價金額的影響因素並不完全相同，故現行以工程思維為架構的政府採購法，確有再修正之必要。

本研究主要探討台灣上市櫃公司從事首次現金增資之決策受何種公司特徵所影響，並進一步探討進行其首次現金增資的宣告效果影響因素。 本研究針對1981年至2010年共30年期間於台灣上市上櫃之公司其首次現金增資之情形做為探討對象，採用Cox-proportional Hazard Regression檢定影響上市櫃公司進行首次現金增資時程之公司特徵。實證結果顯示，營收成長率越高、規模越大且獲利能力較差的公司會傾向越快進行首次現金增資。同時也針對上市櫃年度其市場情形加以探討，發現於市場處於熱市時上市櫃的公司傾向越快進行首次現金增資，顯示市場時機也會影響公司進行首次現金增資的決策。此外，對其首次現金增資之宣告效果進行迴歸分析同時以Heckman Two-Stage Model方法考慮樣本選擇偏誤之修正，結果發現規模越大的公司宣告效果越差而負債比率較大的公司宣告效果越佳。然而上市櫃後進行首次現金增資之時程與其增資宣告效果間則無顯著關係。 / This study examines how fast companies have their first seasonal equity offerings after their IPOs and further analyses the announcement effects of first SEOs. First, we adopt Cox-proportional Hazard Regression Model to see what firm characteristics make IPO firms decide to conduct first SEOs shortly after their IPOs. Using a sample of IPO firms in Taiwan from 1981 to 2010, we find firms that are larger, less profitable and higher growth potential would conduct their first SEOs faster. Also, market timing plays an important role for SEO decisions. Moreover, the announcement effect of their first SEOs shows that elapsed time to conduct first SEOs after IPOs has no influence on the cumulated abnormal returns. By correcting sampling bias, Heckman Two-Stage Model is adopted to reveal better explanation of the results.

本論文主要由三大研究主題組合而成：第一個主題是依照中國金融體系的現況，針對國有銀行、政策性銀行、股份制商業銀行及城市商業銀行等四種不同類型銀行的獲利績效進行比較實證研究。其中的股份制商銀與城市銀行，其資本組成除少數仍有國務院持股（即中央政府持股）外，股東成員擴及地方政府、國有企業及民間企業，股本結構明顯較國有商業銀行及政策銀行多元化。不同的股本結構，尤其是官股比例（政府持股比例）是否對各家銀行的獲利能力產生影響，是本文主要研究興趣所在。本文採用Bankscope資料庫，涵蓋1997至2004年中國大陸49家銀行的財務及股東資料。結果發現：銀行股權結構中，中央政府持股比例越高，銀行獲利表現越差，地方政府持股的影響則較不明顯；而四類銀行中，股份制商銀與城市商銀的表現遠優於國有銀行及政策銀行。但1999年以後中國國有銀行的財務整頓措施的確使得國有銀行的相對表現有所提升。 鑑於外商銀行大舉進入中國金融市場，勢必對中國銀行帶來更多的競爭壓力，本論文第二個研究主題進一步將研究範圍擴及至世界資產排名前一百大的銀行，企圖比較中國銀行與世界百大銀行經營績效的差異。在這個主題中，延續前一主題「股權結構」的重要性，除了官股比例，同時考慮外資持股及本國人持股，分析三類持股對績效的影響，又鑑於總體面的政府治理因素可能對股權與銀行績效的關係產生變化，本研究也將政府治理變數，包括文獻中經常提到的證券市場內線交易情況、政府政策透明度及政府貪污情況等因素納入考量，比較這些因素對中國銀行與百大銀行影響有何差異。實證結果如下：對中國銀行及世界百大銀行而言，政府持股對銀行獲利的影響是負向的，而外資持股的影響則恰相反，開放程度愈高、銀行自由度愈高越有利於銀行績效提升。中國政府越無貪污情況時，越有助於外資持股對銀行績效的正向影響。對世界百大銀行而言，政府越無貪污情況時，越有助於外資持股對銀行績效的正向影響。而政府政策透明度越高，越有助於政府持股與本國人持股的正向影響。 第三個主題探討我國上市櫃公司不同的對外與大陸投資決策對母公司獲利性的影響。本文將投資決策對公司獲利的影響視為內生，也就是投資決策受公司特性因素的影響。同時，我們進一步假設公司的投資決策是分兩階段完成，第一步會先決定是否進行海外投資，一旦確定後，再決定是否赴大陸投資。因為有兩層的投資決策，本文以延伸的Heckman’s Two Stage Method進行估計。 實證結果顯示，在投資決策的影響因素方面，對第一層赴海外投資而言，規模愈大、國際化程度愈高、愈勞力密集的公司愈傾向赴海外投資；對第二層赴大陸投資的決策，影響因素也類似，只是公司規模不再是重要影響因素。至於獲利的影響因素方面，第一類「赴大陸投資的公司」與第二類「未赴大陸但赴其他國家投資的公司」的利潤型態較類似，長期負債對獲利都有負向顯著影響，總資產也傾向負向影響，至於第三類「未從事任何海外與大陸投資公司」的利潤型態則與前兩類不同，總資產與研發支出都呈現顯著負向影響。而三類公司的績效比較部分，第一類公司的平均預期資產報酬率雖若高於第二類，第二類公司又高於第三類公司，但三類公司兩兩之間平均預期資產報酬率的差距並未達統計上的顯著性。 / This dissertation contains three main parts. The first part studies the effects of government owned share on Chinese banks’ performance. After a series of financial reforms in the 1990s, joint stock commercial banks and city commercial banks started to boom and play an increasingly important role in China’s banking industry which had previously been monopolized by four state-owned commercial banks. These two new bank-types are considerably more diversified in that the primary shareholders include the central government, local governments, state-owned enterprises and private enterprises, not just the central government. Using 49 Chinese banks’ financial data retrieved from Bankscope, this part examines the effect of different ownership structures, in general, and government-owned-shares, central vs. local, in particular, affect the profitability and risk of banks in China. It also compares the profitability of four types of banks, namely state-owned banks, policy banks, joint-stock commercial banks and city commercial banks. We conclude that, without equivocation, the higher the ratio of state-owned shares is, the worse is the profitability of the bank. And we also note the profitability of joint-stock commercial banks and city commercial banks is much better than that of state-owned and policy banks. In light of the ever-growing foreign competition facing Chinese banking industry, the second part expands the sample banks to World’s top 100 banks and studies the differences between Chinese banks and foreign banks from the respects of ownership structure, government governance and bank regulations. Our empirical results reveal that for both Chinese banks and top 100 banks, government owned share has a negative effect on banks’ profitability, while foreign owned share has an opposite effect. For both of them, the more the foreign institutions have access to the banking market and the more freedom the banking industry enjoys, the better the bank performs. For Chinese banks, lesser corruption helps strengthen foreign share’s positive effect on banks’ performance. Furthermore, higher transparency would increase the positive effect of government owned share and domestic owned share. The third part studies the profitability of Taiwan’s listed companies with and without investment in China. Unlike past studies which deal with the decision of investment in overseas and China as exogenous, the decision is endogenous in this paper. That is, the decision making is based on the firm’s characteristic factors. We further assume that there are two hierarchy decisions made by firms when they decide in investing in overseas and China. The first decision is whether it should invest overseas. Once the first decision is made, the next one is whether a firm should invest in China. This two decision model, which allows us to extend Heckman’s two-step method, is referred to as an extended-Heckman method in this paper. Our empirical results regarding the determinants of investing overseas and China are as follows. With respect to the investment in overseas, firm size and export ratio show positive influence on the decision of investment, while capital labor ratio shows negative effect. Next, with respect to the investment in China, determinants are similar except that firm size is no longer significant. Our results regarding the profit performance reveal that for ‘the firms with investment in China’ and ‘the firms without investing in China, only investing other countries’, long term liability ratio has a significantly negative impact on profitability, whereas total asset, R&D expenditure show a negative effect on profitability for ‘the firms without investing overseas, nor investing in China’. As for the performance comparison among firms of these three investment types, the differences are insignificant. This result implies that there are still considerable individual differences among the firms of the same investment type.

本文以2003到2006年美國上市之不動產投資信託（REITs）的資產稅賦遞延交換做研究，並用資產出售交易作為比較，觀察稅賦遞延交換對股票報酬和股利的影響，研究結果發現稅賦遞延交換對於股票報酬有負的宣告效果，然而出售資產的交易有正的且顯著的宣告效果，由於美國REITs基於稅法規定，作為免稅體，每年要以股利的形式分配百分之九十的盈餘給股東，稅賦遞延交換並不能像資產出售交易一樣帶來現金流入，因此對於未來股東的股利所得有所影響，股東對於股票報酬沒有正向的反應，但是股東會考慮稅賦遞延交換會帶來資產重配置的效率，再加上REITs通常會支付比規定還要多的股利，因此稅賦遞延交換的對於股票報酬的負影響會因此而減弱，進一步針對交易方式還有REITs股利分配進行研究，研究的結果支持稅賦遞延交換後的股利比起直接出售交易後所發放的股利還要少。本文除了研究股東對於交易宣告的反應之外，也綜觀不同資產交易方式的現金流量和REITs股利的關連性，藉此瞭解影響REITs選擇交易方式的內涵因素，以及對股票報酬和股利的影響。 / This research examines the tax deferred exchanges made by public U.S. Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) over 2003-2006 as well as the transactions of sell-off. The purpose of this study attempts to explore the effects of tax deferred exchange on stock returns and dividend distribution. Result of this study shows that announcement effect of tax deferred exchange is negative in stock value. On the contrary, the relationship between sell-offs and stock value is significantly positive. The reason to explain the difference on announcement effect between two types of property transaction is the specific taxable earning distribution restriction on REITs. U.S REITs have to pay out 90 % of taxable earnings in the form of dividends to their shareholders to exempt from tax. As a result, tax deferred exchange doesn’t bring cash inflow contributing to dividend increase and then shareholders react a lower stock return on tax deferred exchange than on sell-offs. However, the negative effect is weakened by the efficiency of asset reallocation and the regular dividend distribution over tax law restriction. In the analysis of dividend payment, the result of dividend examination supports the hypothesis that tax deferred exchange without cash inflow make dividend fewer than sell-offs. This study may be of importance in explaining the reaction of shareholders on tax deferred exchange of REITs’ property, as well as in providing shareholders with a better understanding of the relationship between cash flow and dividend distribution in order to clarify the cause that affect REITs to utilize different types of transaction and the factors that affect stock return and dividend.