韩国财阀的特权还能享受多久

Screws start to tighten on the chaebol

Judging by the howls from the chaebol, one would think South Korea's corporate giants were being hung, drawn and quartered. Instead it is their stakes in their affiliates that will be limited to a quarter of their net assets.

From next month, many of South Korea's business conglomerates will have to sell down their stakes in their units to comply with the newly revised Fair Trade Act. The change will prohibit groups with assets of more than Won6,000bn ($6bn) from investing more than 25 per cent of their net assets in other companies.

The rule, designed to prevent the groups from moving into non-core businesses, is aimed at creating a fairer playing field for Korean businesses, and help reduce the “Korea discount” the approximately 20 per cent undervaluation of the country's shares because of investors' concerns about corporate governance.

That is certainly one of the aims of the Fair Trade Commission. “I think that corporate governance and transparency in Korea has largely improved, due to structural reform,” says Kang Chul-kyu, commission chairman. “However, it has not yet reached the standard of other advanced countries where it will attract market confidence.”

A key part of President Roh Moo-hyun's election platform two years ago was cleaning up South Korea's messy political and business past.

A recent Morgan Stanley report suggested the Korea discount could be gone within three to four years, partly as earnings quality increases as accounting transparency and corporate governance improves.

But the chaebol, which have grown used to special treatment after decades of easy credit and help to become exporting giants, are not happy.

The Federation of Korean Industries, the chaebol club, has come out guns blazing against the FTC. In a report last month, the FKI called on the competition watchdog to abolish its policy to “restrain concentration of economic power” and focus on promoting market competition.

Chu Woo-sik, a vice-president at Samsung, said the government was taking the wrong approach. “The authorities feel the ceiling is needed to keep our economic concentration in check but we think the fair trade policies should be geared more towards spurring competition rather than hindering growth in business.”

All the leading newspapers which have close links to the chaebol, who are leading advertisers have lobbied vociferously against the changes. “The commission must listen to the business community and relax the application of investment ceilings,” said the JoongAng Daily, a mass circulation newspaper owned by Samsung, in a recent editorial.

Through their lobbying, the chaebol managed to have the asset ceiling lifted slightly, so only 10 conglomerates will have their equity investment in other companies limited.

Lee Ji-soo of the Centre for Good Corporate Governance, a Seoul-based think-tank, said the chaebol were using “all available channels” to put pressure on the government to water down the proposals.

“ Without question, the chaebol have to be reformed,” Mr Lee said. “My concern is the pace of change in government policies has slowed down. At the beginning of 2002 Roh Moo-hyun vowed a lot of reforms but this has faded, which is a big disappointment.”

But the shareholding limit is not the only change the chaebol have been protesting. The government instituted a securities class action law in January, under which minority shareholders would be able to sue a company for accounting irregularities and stock price manipulation.

After intense pressure from big business, the National Assembly has agreed to postpone the policy for two years to allow companies to admit to or clean up any misdemeanours.

Groups have argued that account “window dressing” was the result of South Korea's rapid industrialisation, under which the chaebol paid politicians for preferential treatment. They have urged past irregularities to be excluded from class action suits to allow them to concentrate on running their businesses.

But Hank Morris, a business adviser at Industrial Research Consultants, says the groups need not fear massive change.

“ The chaebol are so important to the economy that no Korean government would want to cripple them in the name of spreading wealth in a more egalitarian manner,” Mr Morris said. “What they are going to try to do is make changes at the margins that won't upset the system but will gradually push it in the direction of greater fairness. That inevitably means a role for government in the oversight of change.”
韩国财阀的特权还能享受多久

从财阀们的抗议声来判断，人们会认为，韩国的企业巨头正被处以绞刑或四马分尸。其实，只不过是这些集团在其附属企业的股权将受到限制，不得超过其净资产的四分之一。

从下月开始，韩国的许多企业集团必须减持在子公司的股份，以遵守新近修订的《公平贸易法》 (Fair Trade Act) 。这一变动将禁止资产超过 6 万亿韩元（合 60 亿美元）的企业集团将逾 25% 的净资产投资于其它公司。

该规定旨在防止这些企业集团进入非核心业务，目的是为韩国企业创造一个更公平的竞争环境，并帮助降低“韩国折扣”，即由于投资者对公司治理感到担心，韩国公司的股票被低估 20% 左右。

这当然是公平贸易委员会的目标之一。“我认为，由于进行了结构性改革，韩国公司的治理状况和透明度已大大改善，”该委员会主席姜哲圭 (Kang Chul-kyu) 表示，“但还未达到其它发达国家的水平。达到这一水平将提高市场信心。”

在卢武铉 (Roh Moo-hyun) 总统两年前的竞选纲领中，一个关键部分是清理韩国混乱的政治和商业记录。

摩根士丹利 (Morgan Stanley) 最近的一份报告显示，韩国折扣可能会在 3 至 4 年内消失，部分原因是随着会计透明度的提高，公司治理状况的改善，公司收益质量将会提高。

但在享受了数十年的宽松信贷和政府帮助，而成为出口巨头后，财阀们已习惯于获得特殊待遇，因而对此感到不悦。

韩国全国经济人联合会 (Federation of Korean Industries) 是一个财阀团体。该联合会已对公平贸易委员会大肆抨击。在上月的一份报告中，该联合会呼吁竞争监管机构废除其“制约经济力量集中”的政策，并将焦点放在促进市场竞争上。

三星 (Samsung) 的一位副总裁朱禹息 (Chu Woo-sik) 说，政府正在采取错误的方式。“当局觉得，需要设定上限来控制我们的经济集中度，但我们认为，公平贸易政策应该更多向激励竞争倾斜，而不是阻碍企业的增长。”

韩国所有主流报纸都大造舆论，反对这些改革措施。这些报纸和财阀有着紧密的联系，后者是它们的主要广告客户。“公平贸易委员会必须听取企业界的声音，放宽投资上限规定的应用，”三星公司旗下发行量很大的《中央日报》 (Joong-Ang Daily) 在近期一篇社论中表示。

经过游说，财阀成功地将资产上限略微提高了一些，这样仅有 10 家企业集团在其它公司的股权投资将受到限制。

汉城智囊机构“优良公司治理中心“ (Centre for Good Corporate Governance) 的李智素 (Lee Ji-soo) 说，财阀正利用“一切可用的渠道”来向政府施加压力，以求冲淡改革建议的力度。

“毫无疑问，财阀必须进行改革，”李先生说，“我担心的是，政府政策的改革步伐已经放慢。 2002 年年初，卢武铉发誓要进行很多改革，但现在势头已消退，令人大失所望。”

持股限制并非唯一遭到财阀抗拒的改革措施。 1 月份，韩国政府制定了一项证券集体诉讼法。根据该法，少数股股东能以会计违规和股价操纵为由起诉公司。

在大企业的强大压力下，韩国国民大会 (National Assembly) 已答应推迟两年实施上述政策，以便企业承认或整治不轨行为。

企业集团声称，帐目“门面粉饰”是韩国快速工业化的结果，在工业化过程中，韩国财阀收买政界人士，以求获得优惠待遇。它们已敦促当局，将过去的违规行为排除在集体诉讼对象之外，让它们集中精力经营企业。

但工业研究咨询公司 (Industrial Research Consultants) 的企业顾问汉克?莫里斯 (Hank Morris) 说，企业集团无需害怕会有大规模变化。

“财阀对经济而言如此重要，没有哪届韩国政府会以均等分配财富的名义来削弱它们，”莫里斯先生说，“它们将试图做的是进行小幅度的改革，这不会搅乱系统，但会逐步将系统朝更公平的方向推进。这是政府在监督改革的过程中必然要扮演的角色。”

Seoul clamps down on chaebol

South Korea's competition regulator has vowed to press ahead with wide-ranging reforms to dilute the power of chaebol, in spite of protests from the family-run business conglomerates that dominate the economy.


The chaebol say the reforms will leave them vulnerable to foreign takeover but Kang Chul-kyu, chairman of the Fair Trade Commission, said well-run groups had nothing to fear.

“Chaebol which have high transparency and good business performance will not have their managerial rights threatened,” Mr Kang told the Financial Times. “But if business groups have low transparency and poor business performance, they will be exposed to more risk.”

Regulations aimed at curbing the chaebol's influence will come into force next month, with the revised Fair Trade Act limiting the amount the conglomerates can invest in affiliate companies. From April 1, conglomerates with more than Won6,000bn ($6bn) in assets will be prohibited from investing more than 25 per cent of their net assets in other companies, including their own units. The ceiling was initially set at Won5,000bn but was lifted after protests from the chaebol. Many chaebol wanted it raised to Won20,000bn and the FTC said some even lobbied for Won40,000bn.

Ten conglomerates including SK, Hyundai Motor, Kumho Asiana, Doosan and Korea Telecom will have their equity investments restricted. The powerful Samsung group and Lotte, the retail and consumer products giant, will not face restrictions until next year because the government decided to exempt groups with a debt-to-equity ratio of less than 100 per cent for one more year.

Mr Kang said the rules were necessary to avoid excessive cross shareholdings in affiliates, which he said had increased risk to the Korean economy. “A bankruptcy of one or two chaebol would have a huge impact on the economy but the collapse of even one or two affiliates would set off a chain reaction,” he said.

Companies will be able to avoid the restrictions by meeting any one of four standards: if they have excellent corporate governance with effective internal monitoring systems; have adopted a holding company structure; have uncomplicated cross shareholdings; or the gap between voting rights and cash flow rights is less than 25 percentage points.

“I can understand why the chaebol are worried about hostile takeovers because that kind of situation can be possible in the short term,” Mr Kang said.

“However, in the medium and long term, if there is a huge gap between cash flow and management rights then they will be more vulnerable.”

Screws tighten on chaebol, Page 17
韩国发誓推进改革 弱化财阀影响力

韩国的竞争监管机构发誓要推进范围广泛的改革，以求弱化财阀(chaebol)的影响力，尽管遭到这些家族企业集团的抗议。这些企业在韩国经济中占据主导地位。


这些财阀表示，改革措施将让它们易于受到外国投资者并购的威胁，但韩国公平贸易委员会(Fair Trade Commission)主席姜哲圭(Kang Chul-kyu)说，经营良好的企业集团没什么好担心的。

“对透明度高、业绩良好的财阀而言，它们的管理权将不会受到威胁，”姜先生对《金融时报》说，“但如果企业集团透明度低，业绩表现差，那它们将面临更多风险。”

旨在限制财阀影响力的规定将在下月生效。修改后的《公平贸易法案》(Fair Trade Act)将限制企业集团对关联公司的投资数额。自4月1日起，资产超过6兆韩元(合60亿美元)的企业集团将被禁止在其它公司投资超过该集团净资产额的25%，投资对象范围包括集团的子公司。上述资产总额上限最初被设定为5兆韩元，但在财阀的抗议之下被提高到6兆。很多财阀希望将这一数字提高到20兆，公平贸易委员会表示，有些财阀甚至为提高到40兆进行游说。

包括鲜京(SK)、现代汽车(Hyundai Motor)、锦湖韩亚(Kumho Asiana)、斗山(Doosan)、韩国电信(Korea Telecom)在内，10家大型企业集团的股权投资将得到限制。强大的三星集团(Samsung)和零售及消费品巨擘乐天(Lotte)到明年才会受到限制，因为政府决定，对资本负债比率不到100%的企业将另给一年的豁免。

姜先生说，这些法规对于避免关联企业的过度交叉持股是必需的，而他说，交叉持股已加大了韩国经济所面临的风险。“一两家大集团的破产事件，将对经济造成巨大冲击，即使一两家关联企业崩溃，也将引发一场连锁反应，”他表示。

各家公司达到四个标准中的一个，就可以避免上述限制。这四个标准是：如果它们拥有优秀的公司治理，具备有效的内部监督体系；已采用了控股公司的结构；交叉持股状况不严重；或者投票权与现金流权利之间的差异不到25个百分点。

“我可以理解，为什么大公司集团担心敌意收购，因为这种情况在短期内是可能发生的，”姜先生说道。