日本的现金管理[文献翻译]

合集下载

毕业论文(设计)外文文献翻译及原文

毕业论文(设计)外文文献翻译及原文

金融体制、融资约束与投资——来自OECD的实证分析R.SemenovDepartment of Economics,University of Nijmegen,Nijmegen(荷兰内梅亨大学,经济学院)这篇论文考查了OECD的11个国家中现金流量对企业投资的影响.我们发现不同国家之间投资对企业内部可获取资金的敏感性具有显著差异,并且银企之间具有明显的紧密关系的国家的敏感性比银企之间具有公平关系的国家的低.同时,我们发现融资约束与整体金融发展指标不存在关系.我们的结论与资本市场信息和激励问题对企业投资具有重要作用这种观点一致,并且紧密的银企关系会减少这些问题从而增加企业获取外部融资的渠道。

一、引言各个国家的企业在显著不同的金融体制下运行。

金融发展水平的差别(例如,相对GDP的信用额度和相对GDP的相应股票市场的资本化程度),在所有者和管理者关系、企业和债权人的模式中,企业控制的市场活动水平可以很好地被记录.在完美资本市场,对于具有正的净现值投资机会的企业将一直获得资金。

然而,经济理论表明市场摩擦,诸如信息不对称和激励问题会使获得外部资本更加昂贵,并且具有盈利投资机会的企业不一定能够获取所需资本.这表明融资要素,例如内部产生资金数量、新债务和权益的可得性,共同决定了企业的投资决策.现今已经有大量考查外部资金可得性对投资决策的影响的实证资料(可参考,例如Fazzari(1998)、 Hoshi(1991)、 Chapman(1996)、Samuel(1998)).大多数研究结果表明金融变量例如现金流量有助于解释企业的投资水平。

这项研究结果解释表明企业投资受限于外部资金的可得性。

很多模型强调运行正常的金融中介和金融市场有助于改善信息不对称和交易成本,减缓不对称问题,从而促使储蓄资金投着长期和高回报的项目,并且提高资源的有效配置(参看Levine(1997)的评论文章)。

因而我们预期用于更加发达的金融体制的国家的企业将更容易获得外部融资.几位学者已经指出建立企业和金融中介机构可进一步缓解金融市场摩擦。

日本的财务管理制度有哪些

日本的财务管理制度有哪些

日本的财务管理制度有哪些日本是一个世界上经济最发达的国家之一,其财务管理制度在日本的社会文化、经济发展和政治体制等多方面因素的影响下形成了独特的特点。

日本的财务管理制度在保证国家财政收支平衡的同时,也试图成为社会和经济发展的推动力。

本文将就日本的财务管理制度的特点进行分析,以期了解日本的财务管理制度在国内和国际经济发展和影响方面的作用。

1. 税收制度日本的税收制度主要分为直接税和间接税两大类。

直接税主要包括个人所得税、法人税和资产税等,间接税主要包括消费税、关税、酒税和烟草税等。

日本的税收体系相对完善,征收税种较多,税制比较综合,虽然税率并不是很高,但依然可以保持财政的收支平衡。

此外,日本税收收入的使用较为透明,符合税收使用的公平和合理原则。

2. 支出管理日本的支出管理主要包括预算编制和执行、政府采购管理、项目拨款管理等。

日本的财政预算编制比较科学、民主,并且有多种督导和监督机制。

政府的采购管理严格遵守合规原则,公开透明、公平利用税金,项目拨款管理也较为规范,确保公共支出的合理性和效益性。

3. 资金管理日本的资金管理主要包括财政资金的收支管理、政府债务管理等。

日本的财政资金的收支管理体制相对较为完善,综合运用财政资金、政府债券、公共资金和银行托管资金等进行资金管理,保障政府运行资金的安全、有效和灵活使用。

4. 财务监督日本的财务监督主要包括审计监督和会计监督两大方面。

审计监督主要包括财务审计、政府采购审计和项目拨款审计等,会计监督主要包括财务会计、政府会计和项目会计等。

日本的审计机构和会计监督机构分工明确,相互监督、相互配合,形成了相对完善的财务监督体系。

5. 公共财政改革日本的公共财政改革主要包括国债管理、减税和增收等多方面措施。

日本在减少财政赤字、控制政府债务、提高财政收入等方面采取了多种政策和措施,力图稳定政府财政和推动经济发展。

总的来说,日本的财务管理制度在保证财政收支平衡的同时,也在促进经济发展和提高社会福利上发挥了积极的作用。

日本有没有外汇管理制度范文

日本有没有外汇管理制度范文

日本有没有外汇管理制度范文日本外汇管理制度是指日本政府对外汇交易的管理和监管体系。

该体系由一系列法律法规、政策和机构构成,旨在维护国家经济安全、稳定汇率和促进国际贸易。

在日本,外汇管理制度的核心是《外汇法》(Foreign Exchange and Foreign Trade Act)。

该法于1979年颁布,经过多次修订和补充,成为日本外汇管理的基础法律。

《外汇法》的目的是确保日本财政稳定、经济发展和促进国际贸易,同时也为国内外企业提供了外汇交易的法律基础。

日本外汇管理制度主要由以下几个方面组成:1. 外汇交易许可制度:日本政府对企业进行外汇交易进行监管,并通过外汇交易许可制度进行管理。

根据《外汇法》,在日本进行外汇交易需获得外汇交易厅(Ministry of Finance)的许可。

企业需满足一定条件才能取得外汇交易许可,如具备一定的资本实力、有稳定的经营基础等。

2. 外汇交易报告制度:为了监督外汇市场的运行和预防非法资金流动,日本政府实行了外汇交易报告制度。

根据该制度,企业和个人需要向日本金融厅报告其外汇交易的信息,包括交易类型、金额、国家/地区等。

3. 外汇管制措施:在特定情况下,日本政府可以采取外汇管制措施来调整外汇市场的供求关系和控制资本流动。

例如,在金融危机或经济困难时期,政府可以限制资本流出,以维护汇率稳定和财政安全。

4. 外汇市场监管机构:日本金融厅(Ministry of Finance)是负责监管和管理日本外汇市场的主要机构。

金融厅负责批准和管理外汇交易厅、制定外汇政策、监督外汇市场的运行等。

日本外汇管理制度的实施,旨在保护日本的金融市场稳定、维护国家的经济安全,以及促进国际贸易发展。

通过外汇管理制度,日本政府可以掌握外汇市场的运行情况,调整汇率和资本流动,保持国内外汇市场的稳定和可持续发展。

需要注意的是,日本的外汇管理制度是不断调整和完善的,以适应经济形势和国际环境的变化。

财务管理外文文献及翻译

财务管理外文文献及翻译

附录A财务管理和财务分析作为财务学科中应用工具。

本书的写作目的在于交流基本的财务管理和财务分析。

本书用于那些有能力的财务初学者了解财务决策和企业如何做出财务决策。

通过对本书的学习,你将了解我们是如何理解财务的。

我们所说的财务决策作为公司所做决策的一部分,不是一个被分离出来的功能。

财务决策的做出协调了企业会计部、市场部和生产部。

无论企业的形式和规模如何,财务原理和财务工具均适用。

就像对小规模的私营企业而言存在如何筹资的问题,大企业面临所有权和经营权分离时出现的代理问题。

不管公司的规模和形式是如何的,公司财务管理的基本原理是一样的。

例如,无论是独资企业做出的决策还是大企业做出的决策,今天一美元的价值都高于未来一美元的价值。

我们所说的财务原理和财务工具适用于全球的企业,不仅限于美国的企业。

虽然国家习惯和法律可能与国家的原则理论存在着不同,但财务管理用到的工具是一样的。

例如,在评估是否要买一个特殊设备的价值时,你需要评估企业未来现金流的发生(设备成本和支出的时间和设备的不确定性),这个企业位于美国、英国还是在其他的地方?此外,我们相信拥有强大的财务原理和数学相关工具的依据对于你了解如何做出投资和财务决策十分必要。

但是建立这种依据比不费力。

我们试图帮你建立这种依据的途径是通过直觉提出财务原理和财务理论。

而不是原理和证据。

例如,我们引导你通过数字和真实例子对资本结构原理产生直觉,而不是利用公式和证据。

再者我们试图帮助你通过仔细的逐步的例子和大量数据处理财务工具。

财务管理和财务分析分为7个部分。

前两个部分(第一部分和第二部分)涉及到基础部分,它包括财务管理、估价原则的目标以及风险和回报之间的关系。

财务决策涉及到第三、四、五部分的内容,我们提出了长期投资管理(通常被称为资本预算)的长期来源、管理和资金管理工作。

第六部分涉及到财务报表分析,它包括财务比率的分析,盈利分析和现金流量分析。

最后一个部分(第七部分)涉及到一些专业论题:国际财务管理,金融结构性金融交易(例如资产证券化),项目融资,设备租赁贷款和财务规划策略。

外文翻译--欧元区跨国公司的现金管理和集团内的折扣

外文翻译--欧元区跨国公司的现金管理和集团内的折扣

本科毕业论文(设计)外文翻译原文:Multinational Cash Management and Conglomerate Discounts in theEuro ZoneIntroductionWe discuss in this paper the consequences of the changing financial market circumstances for multinational companies. In particular we will concentrate on the consequences for cash management within multinational euro zone firms.Cash management is a topic that is addressed mainly by practitioners and by scholars who study cash management practices or conduct financial modelling, but it can also be approached from a theoretical perspective. In this respect two distinct approaches can be distinguished. Firstly, cash management can be considered as a stand-alone topic within the management of short-term assets and the question is addressed how much cash is needed in comparison to other liquid assets. It is the main approach in textbooks on short-term financial management (e.g. Hill and Sartoris, 1995; Maness and Zietlow, 1998). Secondly, cash management theories can start with the perfect markets assumptions of Modigliani and Miller (Modigliani and Miller, 1958; Miller and Modigliani, 1961). The theory then suggests that companies need no cash at all unless market imperfections urge companies to hold it (Van Horne, 2002). Transaction costs involved in frequently attracting additional debt and/or equity -e.g. if cash funds are needed to pay suppliers or employees- are high. Therefore it may be worthwhile to hold cash funds, even if these funds do not generate any return. Also bankruptcy costs come to the fore as a reason for cash holdings. If creditors are not paid in time, they may force the company into bankruptcy and the shareholders and managers try to avoid the concomitant costs.In this paper we follow the latter approach. The developments within the eurozone have reduced market imperfections and we evaluate how these have affected cash management in multinationals. We add the context of a multinational, a firm that has operating subsidiaries in at least four countries, because major developments in the financial markets of the euro zone have their impact across countries and do not only affect local companies. Moreover, multinationals are more complex than single country companies and it is usual to find a corporate headquarter and local subsidiaries. Managers of local subsidiaries can be considered to be the agents of the board members at the multinational headquarter, while the board members in their turn are agents of the shareholders. In particular the agency relationships between local and headquarter managers is important here because the control of cash is a determinant in exercising power. Managers of local subsidiaries might like to keep as much cash as possible within their realm. According to Jensen (1986), free cash (flows) may introduce agency costs. Moreover, the investment in cash, bank accounts and short term paper does not give high returns. For these reasons the value of the multinational may decline if unnecessary amounts of cash are left at the local level. In that case the internal financial market within the multinational is inadequate and the company may show a "conglomerate discount" when compared to a comparable set of stand-alone companies.Centralization and disintermediationTypically, the cash management system of a multinational in the euro zone has traditionally been structured in a simple way. In every country where the company had substantial operating facilities, the treasury of the affiliate often largely did its own cash management (Soenen and Aggarwal, 1989; Tse and Westerman, 1997). This was a rational approach because of the imperfections in the European capital markets. After liberalization, deregulation and the introduction of a single currency, these market imperfections have diminished quite significantly along with the costs of centralizing the finance function.CentralizationCentralization offers various advantages (Kenyon et. al., 1992; Brown, 1997; Miles,1997). Firstly, concentrating financing gives economies of scale and negotiatingpower. Secondly, because cash balances, cash flows and risk exposures are decreased, financing costs are reduced further. Thirdly, leading and lagging of intracompany cash flows can more easily be traced and controlled. Fourthly, an overall reduction of treasury personnel throughout the firm may be possible. Fifthly, the services of banks in transferring cash may be reduced and the concomitant costs can be reduced. Moreover, the benefits of internal financing may be more easily reaped, as the concentration of financial know-how helps to improve investment decision making.There are, however, also various disadvantages. Local managers may lose the motivation to control cash flows adequately. When the cash management and finance functions are in the hands of headquarters, the co-ordination between the financial disciplines and the local knowledge may more easily be frustrated. Moreover, a centralized cash system requires a highly formalized cash balance control system, thus raising regulative, administrative and information costs. Finally, internalizing and reorganizing the cash balances may disturb relationships of subsidiaries with local banks.The disadvantages of centralized European cash management, however, decline (Van Alphen, 1998). Moreover, netting and pooling of cash positions gain attractiveness and a trend towards centralized treasuries is already apparent (Peters, 1999). In fact even non-European multinationals have reorganized their European treasury operations along Pan-European lines. For example, the Goodyear Tyre and Rubber Company formally incorporated a European treasury centre in Luxembourg. That treasury now provides access to capital markets, establishes and maintains bank relationships, manages currency exchange risk, develops intercompany transaction strategies, negotiates credit terms with banks, evaluates cash utilization and establishes guidelines for SBU cash management, among others (Brown, 1997, p.36). We expect that deregulation and liberalization as well as the introduction of the Euro may have helped to tip the balance in favour of centralization and may still be continuing to do so.DisintermediationThe form a cash management system takes is not only determined by internalcharacteristics. It also involves external relationships, in particular with banks and it is not surprising that European firms consider their relationship with a bank almost as important as banks’ prices and service quality (Tse and Westerman, 1997).The external relationships evolve with centralization over time. First the banking system is used to collect receivables and to pay accounts. The relationship with the "house banks" is asymmetrical: the house bank provides a wide array of products that firms can use. Then the tendency may evolve to centralize cash management and the multinational will aim at processing efficiently the various financial transactions of the operational units. This may lead to a substantial decrease in the number of bank accounts, since little used accounts will be closed. The finance department of a multinational will be starting to act as a purchasing unit and the relationships with banks will be loosened as "shopping" with other banks grows and financial knowledge at headquarters is enlarged.Still later, the cash function within the multinational may develop into a corporate finance function that acts in balancing conflicting objectives like minimizing tax and interest payments, reducing interest risks and providing liquidity. Banks with international networks, know-how and information systems skills may then shift to providing services instead of products to such departments. In fact, some large financial institutions have picked up the recent trends, by expanding their services to more countries and by investments in sophisticated information systems to be used in the operation of European cash management systems. Finally, the corporate finance function of a multinational may act as an in house bank (Hagemann, 1991). Such an in-house bank provides intra company products and services by itself, issues short-term financial instruments like commercial paper, competes with other banks for the business of third-party customers and has thus become an equal partner for licensed banks. It will be clear that the aforementioned centralization trend goes to the detriment of the intermediary function of banks.Headquarters' control and conglomerate discountsThe joint trends of centralizing the cash function and of disintermediation will have their impact on the power of the Multinational's headquarter. Centralization will,generally, take place at headquarters, and may positively influence the power of headquarters with respect to cash management. As the headquarters' lack of power in financing and investing was a major reason for corporate discounts, the centralization of cash management may reduce these discounts.Headquarters' power may further increase with disintermediation. Firstly because fewer banks are involved and the bank that remains most relevant for the multinational will have its main ties with headquarters. Secondly, if the cash management function develops into a corporate finance function also external financing will be channelled through headquarters and then -again- the financial power of headquarters will increase. For these reasons, we expect that the liberalization, deregulation and introduction of a single currency will improve the internal financing function and that conglomerate discounts will decrease.However, not all multinationals will be able to centralize the cash function directly (Gruiters and Bergen, 1998) and the centralization of European cash management still differs between companies (Tse and Westerman, 1997). Moreover, not all multinationals will be able or willing to develop the cash management function into a corporate finance function. Finally, even if a corporate finance function is managed centrally at the corporate headquarter, it is not necessarily the case that also decisions on fixed assets will -or should- be centralized. Conglomerate discounts based on a lack of power of headquarters with respect to internal financing and investments will thus not vanish within all multinationals. Nevertheless, it is likely that the developments in the financial markets assist in reducing conglomerate discounts for some multinationals in the euro zone.ConclusionsLiberalization and deregulation of financial markets as well as the introduction of the single currency in Europe will reduce transaction and bankruptcy costs for multinationals. This gives rise to two trends in Europe. Firstly, internal transfers of cash and the management of residual cash positions will become cheaper and easier. Therefore, the centralization of cash management activities gains attractiveness. This may even result into a full-fledged corporate finance function at headquarters.Secondly, the centralization will affect the relationship of multinationals with banks. It is likely that the number of bank relations will be reduced, as more money is managed internally within multinationals and that one major bank will provide most of the cash management services to the treasuries at multinationals' headquarters.These trends will have an impact on the internal financing function of multinationals and if cash management is centralized, conglomerate discounts may diminish. Multinationals in the euro zone may benefit further if they also operate in countries that will join the European Union or the euro zone in the future. Because multinationals have different backgrounds and different reasons for empowering subsidiaries, the corporate discounts will not vanish completely.Until now, academics have largely focused on cash management models and on cash management surveys. Our paper is different as we link the cash management function to mainstream theory of corporate finance. First we suggest that institutional changes within the euro zone have reduced market imperfections. Then we show that the reduction of these imperfections could trigger centralization and disintermediation. Finally, we suggest that centralization followed by disintermediation may improve the internal financing function within multinationals. This may eventually diminish conglomerate discounts and improve the value of the multinational.It is outside of the scope of this paper to answer the empirical question whether the centralization of cash management is beneficial to multinationals. Nevertheless, further empirical research might be interesting. In particular, it would be interesting to learn whether multinationals that centralize their cash management function do indeed outperform in terms of value the comparable multinationals that did not. Our analysis not only suggests that centralization creates value, but that the concomitant disintermediation adds value too. Researchers could therefore, also try to measure the amount of disintermediation and study its impact on conglomerate discounts. Of course, such research may create multicollinearity problems because disintermediation will be related to centralization. Moreover, econometric simultaneity problems may arise: disintermediation is considered to create value, but at the same time higher valued companies may be better able to avoid bankingproducts. Despite of these problems, we hope that our qualitative approach may not only trigger related theoretical but also empirical research.Source: Henk von Eije and Wim Westerman,2002.“Multinational Cash Management and Conglomerate Discounts in the Euro Zone”.International Business Review. August. pp.453-464.译文:欧元区跨国公司的现金管理和集团内的折扣简介本文我们讨论了不断变化的金融市场的情况,给跨国公司现金管理所带来的后果。

论跨国公司的现金管理

论跨国公司的现金管理

跨国公司营运资金管理是跨国公司财务管理的重要内容之一,其目的是通过跨国公司资金在母公司以及子公司之间合理有效的流动,实现其流动资产持有水平的最优化,降低流动资产余额,保证公司全球战略目标的实现;跨国公司营运资金管理的内容主要包括营运资金的存量管理和营运资金流量管理;对营运资金存量管理的目的是确定现金、应收账款、存货等流动资产最佳持有水平,而对营运资金流量管理目的是通过跨国公司内部资金转移机制实现资金最佳配置,降低资金成本;一.跨国公司现金管理的意义跨国公司现金管理是跨国公司财务管理的重要内容之一,主要是对跨国公司生产经营过程中的货币资金包括备用金、银行存款、存单等的管理;现金的共同特点就是流动性强而赢利能力差;现金管理的主要目的是通过确定现金最佳投量,促进现金在母公司以及子公司之间合理有效流动,在保证生产经营需要前提下,节约现金,加速流动,降低余额,降低风险,降低成本,提高现金的使用效率和公司的经济效益;二.跨国公司现金管理的特殊性在跨国公司现金管理过程中主要呈现出:1、跨国公司现金数量大;跨国公司一般规模较大,世界上500强企业,基本上为跨国公司,公司的业务特点决定了其现金数量较大;2、管理目标具有全球战略性;现代企业财务管理目标是财富最大化,跨国公司考虑到外汇汇率风险和各国现金管制情况有时会牺牲局部利益以公司整体利益为核心,保证公司战略目标的实现;3、现金管理体制双重性;跨国公司管理要遵循跨国公司所在母国财务管理的规定,又要遵从跨国公司内部管理规定;4、现金管理风险多样性;跨国公司的经营环境复杂性决定了现金管理的风险具有多样性;如汇率变动风险、利率变动风险,还有政治风险,战争风险等,这就要求跨国公司现金管理要采用科学方法减少风险损失;三.跨国公司现金管理方法1、集中现金管理跨国公司财务管理的环境非常复杂,资金的流动受汇率、利率变动的影响;为了实现跨国公司全球战略性目标,跨国公司往往选择高度集中的现金管理体制,对母公司及诸国子公司的现金余缺统一调度,采取主要方法是设立现金管理中心,象国内企业现金管理制度要求一样现金管理中心为每个子公司设定最低现金需要余额,超过部分必须汇往现金管理中心;设立现金管理中心,实行集中现金管理有利于跨国公司财务管理目标的实现,使整个公司上下协调,正确决策,降低了公司现金持有量,减少资金持有成本;同时资金在各子公司间进行调剂使用可以降低筹资成本;特别是子公司设在外汇管制的国家,尽可能地降低了公司的损失,减少了资金因汇率变动,利率变动的损失,提高了资金使用效益;2、双边或多边净额结算跨国公司为了集中现金管理,对于母公司与子公司以及子公司与子公司之间购销业务、劳务服务等造成结算活动,跨国公司需要对整个公司内部的收付款项统一调度,公司间的结算最终按净额进行,这种方法称为净额结算法;在净额结算法中,有两个结算主体称为双边净额结算,有多个结算主体称为多边净额结算;现以双边净额结算为例,ABC公司是一家美国的跨国公司,该公司在日本和韩国各有一家子公司,在日本的子公司甲销售20万美元的商品给韩国子公司乙,而韩国子公司向日本的子公司销售40万美元的配件;若甲、乙两个公司不是跨国公司的子公司,或者是跨国公司的子公司但没有采用双边净额结算,需要流动资金60万美元;而采用双边净额结算,只需日本的子公司甲向韩国的子公司乙支付20万美元的净额,可以节约流动资金40万美元;假设资金的转移成本包括汇费、机会成本、手续费为资金转移额的1%,则可降低转移成本4000美元40×1%;双边或多边净额结算可以减少资金转移规模,降低资金转移成本,而且交易越频繁,数额越大,成本节约效益越明显;同时净额结算有利于加强风险管理;母公司把各子公司独立承担的结算风险统一管理,集中承担,减少了外汇汇率变动的风险,但要注意各子公司所在东道国对外汇管制情况,要了解该国金融和结算法规;3、现金预算预算和计划是现代财务管理的重要手段;跨国公司的现金管理中心更需要在全面、系统、准确了解子公司的财务信息基础上对母公司或子公司未来财务状况,未来现金余缺和未来现金流量作出科学的计划和预算;现代网络与信息技术的发展为现金管理中心掌握各公司每月每周甚至每日财务信息提供了技术支持,使得现金管理中心科学地编制现金预算变成了现实的现金管理方法;4、全局资金调度跨国公司为充分发挥集中管理现金制度的作用,要在准确把握各子公司现金余额情况下合理调度资金,统一调配、调剂资金;以上是跨国公司现金管理呈现出的特点和管理方法,作为跨国公司的财务管理者,应遵循其客观规律、严格管理现金的流量和存量,才能促使跨国公司的现金有序、低成本的有效周转,从而大大提高跨国公司财务管理的效率,促进跨国公司效益的快速、持续、稳定发展;。

日本货币交易管理制度

日本货币交易管理制度

日本货币交易管理制度一、日本的货币体系日本的货币体系主要由日本银行和财务省共同管理。

日本银行作为中央银行负责发行货币、制定货币政策和维护金融稳定,财务省则负责监督和管理银行业务、控制货币供应和汇率等。

此外,日本还设立了金融管理委员会负责监管金融市场,保护投资者权益和维护金融秩序。

二、日本的货币政策日本的货币政策主要包括货币供应管理、利率调控和外汇政策等。

货币供应管理是指通过控制货币供应量来影响通货膨胀、经济增长和汇率等。

利率调控是指中央银行通过调整利率来影响货币供求关系和经济活动。

外汇政策是指政府通过干预汇市、维护汇率稳定来促进国际贸易和外汇储备。

三、日本的货币交易监管日本的货币交易监管主要包括货币流通管理、外汇管理和金融犯罪打击等。

货币流通管理是指日本银行通过发行货币、管理支付系统、监督金融机构来保障货币流通畅通和金融稳定。

外汇管理是指财务省通过设立外汇管理法、管理外汇市场、监管跨境资金流动来维护外汇市场秩序和汇率稳定。

金融犯罪打击是指警方、监管机构和金融机构合作打击洗钱、非法交易、金融诈骗等违法行为。

四、日本的货币交易制度日本的货币交易制度主要包括货币发行、支付结算、银行业监管和金融风险管理等。

货币发行是指日本银行负责发行纸币和硬币,维护货币供应平衡。

支付结算是指银行负责提供支付、结算服务,促进资金流转和贸易活动。

银行业监管是指金融管理委员会负责监管银行业务,保护存款人利益和维护金融系统稳定。

金融风险管理是指银行通过风险管理、资产负债管理、资本充足率监管来预防金融危机和保障银行安全。

五、日本的货币政策调整日本的货币政策调整主要包括宽松货币政策和紧缩货币政策等。

宽松货币政策是指中央银行通过减少利率、增加货币供应来刺激经济活动和抑制通货膨胀;紧缩货币政策是指中央银行通过提高利率、减少货币供应来稳定通货膨胀和控制经济泡沫。

日本政府根据经济形势和通货膨胀等因素来调整货币政策,以实现经济增长和稳定。

六、日本的货币交易市场日本的货币交易市场主要包括外汇市场、股票市场、债券市场和期货市场等。

日本货币交易所管理制度

日本货币交易所管理制度

日本货币交易所管理制度一、前言随着全球一体化的步伐不断加快,货币交易和金融市场成为国际经济发展的重要组成部分。

在这样一个复杂的交易环境下,货币交易所管理制度的完善显得尤为重要。

日本作为一个经济发达的国家,其货币交易所管理制度的完善对于维护国家金融稳定和提升国际金融声誉起着至关重要的作用。

本文将着重探讨日本货币交易所管理制度的形成背景、主要内容和未来发展趋势。

二、日本货币交易所管理制度的形成背景1. 历史渊源日本货币交易所管理制度的形成历史可追溯至19世纪末的明治维新时期。

随着日本经济的现代化和工业化,对金融市场的需求日益增长,使得货币交易所的发展势在必行。

1899年,日本政府正式成立了东京商品交易所,这标志着日本货币交易所的管理制度正式开始建立。

此后,随着日本金融市场的不断壮大,货币交易所的数量和规模也逐渐扩大,管理制度得到了进一步的完善和发展。

2. 国际金融市场的影响日本货币交易所管理制度的形成受到了国际金融市场的影响。

随着全球化进程的不断加深,国际金融市场的波动对日本金融市场产生了深远的影响。

为了应对国际金融市场的变化,加强对货币交易所的监管和管理成为日本政府的重要举措。

因此,日本货币交易所管理制度的形成也是国际金融市场发展的必然产物。

三、日本货币交易所管理制度的主要内容1. 法律法规日本货币交易所管理制度的主要内容包括相关的法律法规。

日本政府通过立法形式确立了针对货币交易所的管理制度,并规定了交易所的组织结构、运营规则、监管措施等内容。

其中,最具代表性的法律是《金融商品取引法》,该法规定了货币交易所的基本要求和监管制度,为货币交易所的正常运作提供了法律保障。

2. 交易所管理机构日本货币交易所管理制度的主要内容还包括交易所管理机构。

日本政府设立了专门的金融监管机构,如金融厅和金融服务厅,负责对货币交易所进行监管和管理。

这些机构不仅对交易所的组织结构和运营规则进行审查和监督,还负责对交易所的风险管理和投资者保护进行监管,确保交易所的正常运作和金融市场的稳定发展。

  1. 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性,平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
  2. 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
  3. 3、如文档侵犯您的权益,请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间:9:00-18:30)。

原文:Cash Management in JapanOVERVIEW:In August 2005, the government and the Bank of Japan declared that the Japanese economy had rebounded from over 10 years of stagnation.Japanese traditional banks still continue to dominate the corporate banking area, while the growing numbers of online banks have rapidly come to the forefront in consumer banking business.The government is showing an inclination towards promoting foreign direct investment into Japan, having shifted its focus toward foreign inward investment.With growing investment into Japan, major foreign banks have been offering their cash management services mostly to international non-Japanese corporate customers on the strength of their higher credit ratings, globally consistent expertise and robust security technologies, while still supporting selected Japanese multinationals in their offshore cash management requirements.Cash management in Asia Pacific varies by country, not region. This is particularly true of Japan, where local knowledge and experience is of prime importance. Market practices, the language and the culture are unique; and this is a consideration when contemplating the implementation of cash management solutions in Japan, where a spirit of practicality often trumps theoretical or internationally accepted solutions.Macroeconomically, the world's second-largest economy in terms of gross domestic product (GDP) has been showing signs of real recovery. The government and the Bank of Japan (BOJ) have declared in August 2005 that the Japanese economy has emerged from the temporary lull after the long downturns known as the 'lost decade', however some economists have refrained from such optimistic comments because of continuing inventory corrections in the information technology sector. The Nikkei stock index has showed bank stocks rising to their highest levels in more than five years.The government has demonstrated a willingness to promote foreign direct investment into Japan, with JETRO (Japan External Trade Organisation), a government-related organisation originally established principally to promote Japanese exports abroad now shifting its focus towards encouraging foreign direct investment into the country. An imperative based on Prime Minister Koizumi's target to double this level of foreign direct investment within the five years from 2003 to 2008.In terms of treasury management, Japanese multinational companies (MNCs) continue to develop and demand increasingly sophisticated cash management practices. Domestically, Japanese banks still dominate in terms of payment volumes. However, increasing investments into Japan have given major overseas banks the upper hand in offering their cash management services locally to non-Japanese corporate customers because of advantages such as their higher credit ratings, globally consistent expertise and robust security technologies.Banking System:Japanese major banks are still the prime players in the banking system, particularly in the corporate banking area. Mizuho is currently the largest domestic bank in terms of total assets but will be relegated to second place by the planned merger between Mitsubishi Tokyo Financial Group Inc (MTFG) and UFJ Holdings Inc (UFJ) in January 2006. The merger will form the world's largest bank in terms of total assets with JPY190 trillion.As well as these 'city banks', there also exists a large network of provincial banks consisting of 64 first-tier institutions and 48 in a second tier banks, as well as 28 trust and long-term credit banks. This entire sector should slowly shrink because of ongoing consolidation.Opportunity is also being grasped by a further seven-strong emergent group of banks, including: the IY Bank Co of the Ito Yokado group, eBank, the Japan Net Bank and Sony Bank. These institutions are operating internet and automated teller machine-focused business models for financial consumer services.The outstanding bad loans at Japanese banks have declined for the thirdconsecutive year, especially at major banks, which have exhibited a 45% decrease to a current figure of JPY7.6 trillion. However, the BOJ is still using cheap money to tackle deflation and stimulate growth, with official interest rates remaining at or close to zero, and the BOJ's monthly average collateralised overnight deposit call rate still stalled at 0.001% as it has been since 2001.Clearing Systems:Japan boasts three systems for yen electronic funds transfers and maintains a single main paper-based system.BOJ-NET:BOJ-NET is mainly used for interbank settlements, and also covers Japanese government bond settlements. However, customers can also conduct business on a real-time gross settlement basis. The system is owned and operated by the BOJ, with settlement occurring between member banks' current BOJ accounts. As of March 2004, 435 financial institutions were participating in BOJ-NET. Interbank transfers account for just over 90% of payment volumes through BOJ-NET, with the Foreign Exchange Yen Clearing System (FXYCS), Zengin and clearing houses being responsible for the remaining portion with 3.6%, 2.5% and 2.4% respectively, a ratio that has remained unchanged since March 2003.Foreign Exchange Yen Clearing SystemThe Foreign Exchange Yen Clearing System (FXYCS) handles yen (JPY) payments resulting from international financial transactions and payments involving non-resident entities, including foreign exchange transactions, JPY-denominated bond transactions and import and export settlement.FXYCS is similar to the CHIPS (the bank-owned Clearing House Interbank Payment System for large-value payments) and operates as a net settlement system, and the data format used is similar to that used by SWIFT. The cut-off time for sending payments is 1.45pm, with final settlement through BOJ-Net at 2:30pm. The Tokyo Bankers Association (TBA) owns and operates FXYCS, and also takes on the counterparty risk for payment settlements on a transaction-by-transaction basis. As of June 2005, there were 225 participants in FXYCS, however only 33 members weredirect participants, including HSBC.Early cut-off times and unfavourable time differentials with London, means that the net settlement mode of FXCYS does not facilitate payment through CLS, but it does operate on a gross basis until 5:00pm. However, use of late payments by gross mode is limited, and can create problems if a receiving bank refuses to accept the late payment as the underlying customer may then face overnight overdraft costs. In addition, some banks have started charging intra-day liquidity charges based on the intra-day overdrawn positions created prior to receiving funds from the CLS Bank late in the afternoon.A further reason for the decrease in the value of transactions handled by FXYCS appears to be the activities of the CLS. Figures for 2004 declined 11% compared with 2003, and quarterly figures continue to fall with 2005 numbers looking to be 12% lower than 2004 figures. Other responsible factors could be market consolidation and the outsourcing of some large foreign FXCYS members to Japanese banks.Zengin system:The unique Zengin system is the dominant domestic JPY payment system, characterised by formats based on Japanese katakana characters. As with the FXYCS, it is managed by the TBA and is a net-settlement system, with 4:15pm daily settlement, 45 minutes subsequent to the payment cut- off time between members. As of June 2005, it boasted 1,595 member institutions including four foreign direct bank members, including HSBC. In addition to single payments, bulk payments are also supported for payroll, dividends and pension payments. Zengin volumes may fall following the upcoming MTFG-UFJ's major merger as a larger percentage of payments will be processed in-house, not via the Zengin system.Common Cash Management Problems and Issues:The Zengin's importance as the main domestic JPY payment system makes the fact that it is solely a Japanese language system even more critical. Many of the major international enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems have Japanese-language modules that allow the generation of payment files in the Japanese Zengin bulk payment format. Japanese banks, as well as a select number of foreign banks, canaccept a payment file in this format and straight-through process these payments. If a company does not have access to an ERP system that can generate a payment file in the Zengin format, international banks have developed mapping tables, where pre-registered beneficiary names in English are automatically mapped to the correct name in Japanese when the payment is submitted for processing.Residency of accounts:The payment systems are segregated between resident and non-resident, thus reducing the rationale for non-resident entities to hold accounts in Japan. Not only are the 'know your customer' requirements growing more restrictive on companies wishing to open accounts in Japan, but the cost of making an international cross-border payment by telegraphic transfer is similar to making an FXYCS payment. As such, there may not be a clear cost-benefit reason for non-residents to open non-resident accounts in Japan.Cash concentration vs notional pooling:While cash concentration on an automated or manual basis between accounts within and across banks in Japan is common, notional pooling remains effectively impossible as the tax treatment remains quite vague. While several banks can technically offer notional pooling, cash concentration with zero or pegged balances remains the most widely used liquidity management technique. A couple of major Japanese banks have developed in-house bank systems called 'cash management systems' which track inter-company positions, produce reports and calculate interest payments between entities. Some can also effect the sweeping instructions and generate interest entries.Reconciliation:One of the biggest differences in corporate market practices between Japan and elsewhere in the rest of the world is in the treatment of the reconciliation of accounts receivable. Historically, important Japanese corporate purchasers frequently pay ad hoc amounts at their own convenience, often disregarding the particulars of invoiced amounts. This creates problems for suppliers who wish to reconcile payments against invoices, particularly since even when there is payment against a specific invoice, theonly information routinely supplied in Zengin payments is the payer's name.While the Zengin system has a dedicated Zengin EDI (electronic data interchange) field that could be used for reconciliation purposes, it rarely is, and indeed some bank systems do not even support this field for payments or reporting. In an effort to assist reconciliation, one local bank has patented a system where virtual accounts are used. However, this only really assists the supplier in identifying who has paid, rather than what they have paid for.Tax and utility payments:The payment of clients' tax and utility bills remains a problem for foreign banks, and the lack of this ability means such a bank's client will have to open an account with a local bank to handle this business. The difficulty in tax collection is because approval to collect a given tax is required from the appropriate tax-collecting authority for each type of tax. There are both government and local tax layers with over 50 different tax offices, as well as several different types of taxes (e.g. land tax, income tax, corporate tax, withholding tax, road tax, etc.). Each tax-collecting authority has to give approval to collect the type of tax for which proven volume estimates are required. Naturally, it is difficult for foreign banks with their small market presence to meet the minimum volume requirements, thus preventing foreign banks from gaining approval to collect taxes and hence being able to offer their customers a single banking solution.Interbank liquidity:Finally, there are two almost contradictory issues in the market in Japan that have developed over the past couple of years. First, with the low-interest environment and easy monetary policy, the banking system is awash with liquidity. Some foreign banks, whose higher credit ratings have led to large increases in their deposit base over the past few years, coupled with the negative overnight rate, have developed a practice of discouraging large depositors by levying fees on holding large balances. Second, while overnight liquidity is high, at times, intra-day liquidity can be tight. Particularly as a result of large CLS receipts which are not received until after the close of FXYCS. This has led banks to develop systems to measure and charge for intra-day liquidityusage. Market practice is still being developed, and no one method of charging for intra-day liquidity has been agreed upon. Indeed, the same bank may have different charging mechanisms for different clients.Cash Management Developments:Electronic bankingSome foreign banks have developed both English and Japanese Internet delivery channels. This is particularly useful for MNCs because expatriate management can view screens in English while the local staff can view in Japanese for payment input. Dual-language customer service also aids such an arrangement.Japanese banks' electronic banking, generically called 'firm banking', generally lags behind international banks' delivery channels with separate systems for domestic and international payments and at times.New payments system under consideration:A high-value, low-value payment system has been under review by the JBA, the JBA and the BOJ. The latest discussions appear to show that the Zengin will remain in place as the low-value payments system with a new BOJ-NET hybrid settlement system being introduced for payments over JPY5bn. The target date for implementation is 2008.Requests for proposals:There is little doubt that Japanese corporations are becoming more sophisticated and demanding in their cash and treasury management aspirations. Issuance of formal requests for proposals (RFPs) are becoming a more common means of selecting partner banks, and the scope of RFPs is getting wider.Foreign banks may have the edge in terms of global investment in payments and cash management product ranges, but domestic banks have the historic relationships and market dominance in Japan. A small number of foreign banks can, however, hold their own in the local market and offer both Japanese and MNCs solutions, which cover the Asia-Pacific region, including Japan. As far as Japanese names go, capabilities and presence in China are key areas at present and competition here is expected to be fierce.Despite its 'lost decade', Japan is still the world's second-largest economy. Itsrecent signs of recovery, stock rise and reduced bad debts of Japanese banks have finally started helping bolster the domestic banking market. While foreign banks still have only a small share of the cash management market in Japan, they have been buttressed by growing inward investment and are offering their cash management services more frequently to international non-Japanese corporate customers as well as continuing to support selected Japanese multinationals in their offshore cash management requirements.Source: Solomon , the Asia-pacific regional politics and cash management guide, vol. 32, ACA News , 2006 (9) : P 104-115.译文:日本的现金管理整体形势:2005年8月,日本政府和日本央行宣布日本经济出现了超过10年的经济停滞后的反弹。

相关文档
最新文档