劳务出资法律问题研究
摘要
随着知识经济的发展,公司的经营效益与劳动者的劳动能力、经营者经营管理素质以及技术人员技术水平的关系越来越密切。从19世纪中期开始,西方经济学界就已经展开了人力资本的研究,并随着时代对人才呼唤的趋势不断深入,迄今已经取得了瞩目的成果,形成了完备的人力资本理论。公司法在对公司运营规范的过程中也应该反映这种要求,承认劳务出资形式的合法地位,但是劳务出资制度的建立却不是一个简单的事,不仅仅涉及制度的安排,更需要理论的支持,需要重新反思公司法的立法价值,改造传统的出资理论,从而为劳务出资提供法理依据,也使得出资理论既完善又具时代精神。本文在对劳务出资概念进行详细的比较界定的基础上,针对劳务出资在理论上和实务中存在和将会面临的障碍,作了梳理和分析,从而论证了劳务出资的适格性,进而对劳务出资制度的建构提出了一些立法建议。
With the advancement of technology, economic growth increasingly depends on the people’s innovative ability and professional qualities. Especially in recent years after the appearance of the knowledge-based economy and informationization process of industry, people-oriented businesses displayed. Corporation Law, as the most important law to fine-tuning the market-based economy should reflect this trend, allowing the Labor Service Contribution.
The main structure of the paper is divided into four parts, including the definition of The Labor Service and Labor Service Contribution, The Contribution Qualification of The Labor Service, the legal analysis on the law of Labor Service Contribution home and abroad, and the suggestion of legislation about the system of The Labor Service Contribution.
The first part is to define the labor and the Labor Service Contribution. It mainly includes definition of the labor and comparison with other similar concepts and the choice about the concept of the Labor Service Contribution. For there is a chaos existed in economic and legal field. The scholars always argue for some meaningless thing from different concepts showing the same meaning. So I think before we do some researches we must know the nicely meaning. First, the paper considers Labor Service Contributions the correct concept to explain the Phenomenon of stockholder in exchange for shares with labor service, through comparing the concepts of labor service to technology, labor force, human capital contribution and intellectual contribution.
The second part is the most important part, which is mainly about Contribution Qualification of the Labor Service Contribution. The author draws the conclusion from three angles of view.
At first it analyzes the condition and request of Qualification of Contribution. Then expound the reflection of theories challenging the system of Labor Services Contribution, then illuminate dominance occurred in process of economic practice. Qualification of Contribution system refers to condition and competency that property invested into the company should be hold. Traditional theories in the west think it basically included attributes as follows: certainty, existence, to be exchanged, good for company and can be evaluated. In China for a long time this field had been blank, the theory in the west can undoubtedly help us to understand capital contribution category, but these theories all had been formed in the 1970s. Weather they also adapt to today's development are oppugned by many scholars, Professor li Yougen think that the Qualification of Contribution should include three attributes of serviceability, controllability, the possibility of creditor protection. I agree with him. The Labor Service Contribution fully holds these characters, so it can be invested to the company.
Scholar opposed to Labor Service Contribution challenged the question with following reasons: First, investor has not contributed anything to company, why they can possess of the corporation shares? Second, labor service can not exist without human body, but can the body be the object of the right? Third, the property of shareholders should be enforced by the courthouse when the company faces to bankruptcy, but labor service can’t be enforced, it is harmful to protect the safe transactions. In this paper I think the reason why these scholars question the Labor Service is they misunderstood the nature of the labor service and the theory of Contribution System. By correcting these error opinions it shows that there is no fatal obstacle to hinder Labor Service Contribution.
In recent years, more and more people calling for The Labor Service Contribution reflect the needs of it in practice. The reform of the income distribution to entrepreneurs is the main reason to explain Annual Salary and Stock Options. And the Labor Service Contributions is the way to remedy the deficiencies of those measures. And the Labor Service Contribution also can solve the most fundamental difficulty of the labor ESOP-workers don’t having much money to buy the shares.
In part three, it introduces and analyzes the legislation of The Labor Service Contribution home and aboard. In the west there have to be three attitudes. Italian Civil Code, Korea Commercial Law is as represented by the strict prohibition of Marxism; The German company law, EU Second Company Law, as well as Canada Business Companies Act are as represented by the distinction between labor service paid out and unpaid out. England case law is as represented by the absolutely acceptance. The first one shows the traditional value judgment, is not suited to today's economic development. Second one is a progress comparing to the first one. It admitted the labor services had paid out to invest to the company. The last mode is the most advanced one. This legislation keep up with the trend of diversification of the form of Capital. The Enlightenment of these three legislative attitudes is that the legislation should be open without ignoring establishing the system to protect the safe transaction. In china the Corporation Law forbid the Labor Service Contribution, but the demand for Labor Service Contribution practically exist. The local legislature also quietly made an attempt. However, we can not totally fence with the problem, because evading the issue is not the fundamental way to solve the problem. With the development of economy and technology, the environment of The Labor Service Contribution will become better and better. Allowing Labor Service Contribution is the best choice of the era.
Part four is the author’s legislative suggestion. The first is to recognize the legitimacy of the Labor Service Contribution. The second is to establish and improve the system of Labor Capital Evaluation. Including the master of evaluation and surveillance system to evaluation, the special rule of the evaluation way. This paper has no intention to build a comprehensive evaluation system, but only to create a reasonable institutional environment and put forward some abstract principle. The third is to improve the System of Liability of Labor Service Contribution. To establish Investment Guarantees System, the Adjustment of Labor Services Contribution system and the Mandatory Insurance system.
With the advancement of technology, economic growth increasingly depends on the people’s innovative ability and professional qualities. Especially in recent years after the appearance of the knowledge-based economy and informationization process of industry, people-oriented businesses displayed. Corporation Law, as the most important law to fine-tuning the market-based economy should reflect this trend, allowing the Labor Service Contribution.
The main structure of the paper is divided into four parts, including the definition of The Labor Service and Labor Service Contribution, The Contribution Qualification of The Labor Service, the legal analysis on the law of Labor Service Contribution home and abroad, and the suggestion of legislation about the system of The Labor Service Contribution.
The first part is to define the labor and the Labor Service Contribution. It mainly includes definition of the labor and comparison with other similar concepts and the choice about the concept of the Labor Service Contribution. For there is a chaos existed in economic and legal field. The scholars always argue for some meaningless thing from different concepts showing the same meaning. So I think before we do some researches we must know the nicely meaning. First, the paper considers Labor Service Contributions the correct concept to explain the Phenomenon of stockholder in exchange for shares with labor service, through comparing the concepts of labor service to technology, labor force, human capital contribution and intellectual contribution.
The second part is the most important part, which is mainly about Contribution Qualification of the Labor Service Contribution. The author draws the conclusion from three angles of view.
At first it analyzes the condition and request of Qualification of Contribution. Then expound the reflection of theories challenging the system of Labor Services Contribution, then illuminate dominance occurred in process of economic practice. Qualification of Contribution system refers to condition and competency that property invested into the company should be hold. Traditional theories in the west think it basically included attributes as follows: certainty, existence, to be exchanged, good for company and can be evaluated. In China for a long time this field had been blank, the theory in the west can undoubtedly help us to understand capital contribution category, but these theories all had been formed in the 1970s. Weather they also adapt to today's development are oppugned by many scholars, Professor li Yougen think that the Qualification of Contribution should include three attributes of serviceability, controllability, the possibility of creditor protection. I agree with him. The Labor Service Contribution fully holds these characters, so it can be invested to the company.
Scholar opposed to Labor Service Contribution challenged the question with following reasons: First, investor has not contributed anything to company, why they can possess of the corporation shares? Second, labor service can not exist without human body, but can the body be the object of the right? Third, the property of shareholders should be enforced by the courthouse when the company faces to bankruptcy, but labor service can’t be enforced, it is harmful to protect the safe transactions. In this paper I think the reason why these scholars question the Labor Service is they misunderstood the nature of the labor service and the theory of Contribution System. By correcting these error opinions it shows that there is no fatal obstacle to hinder Labor Service Contribution.
In recent years, more and more people calling for The Labor Service Contribution reflect the needs of it in practice. The reform of the income distribution to entrepreneurs is the main reason to explain Annual Salary and Stock Options. And the Labor Service Contributions is the way to remedy the deficiencies of those measures. And the Labor Service Contribution also can solve the most fundamental difficulty of the labor ESOP-workers don’t having much money to buy the shares.
In part three, it introduces and analyzes the legislation of The Labor Service Contribution home and aboard. In the west there have to be three attitudes. Italian Civil Code, Korea Commercial Law is as represented by the strict prohibition of Marxism; The German company law, EU Second Company Law, as well as Canada Business Companies Act are as represented by the distinction between labor service paid out and unpaid out. England case law is as represented by the absolutely acceptance. The first one shows the traditional value judgment, is not suited to today's economic development. Second one is a progress comparing to the first one. It admitted the labor services had paid out to invest to the company. The last mode is the most advanced one. This legislation keep up with the trend of diversification of the form of Capital. The Enlightenment of these three legislative attitudes is that the legislation should be open without ignoring establishing the system to protect the safe transaction. In china the Corporation Law forbid the Labor Service Contribution, but the demand for Labor Service Contribution practically exist. The local legislature also quietly made an attempt. However, we can not totally fence with the problem, because evading the issue is not the fundamental way to solve the problem. With the development of economy and technology, the environment of The Labor Service Contribution will become better and better. Allowing Labor Service Contribution is the best choice of the era.
Part four is the author’s legislative suggestion. The first is to recognize the legitimacy of the Labor Service Contribution. The second is to establish and improve the system of Labor Capital Evaluation. Including the master of evaluation and surveillance system to evaluation, the special rule of the evaluation way. This paper has no intention to build a comprehensive evaluation system, but only to create a reasonable institutional environment and put forward some abstract principle. The third is to improve the System of Liability of Labor Service Contribution. To establish Investment Guarantees System, the Adjustment of Labor Services Contribution system and the Mandatory Insurance system.
引文
[1]参见李友根:《人力资本出资问题研究》,人民大学出版社 2004 年第 1版,第 78 页。
[2]参见李友根:《人力资本出资问题研究》,人民大学出版社 2004 年第 1版,第 1 页。
[3]谈萧:《给人力资本出资以法律地位》,《天津日报》2005 年 12 月 16 日,第 18 版。
[4]参见周枏:《罗马法原论》(下册),商务印书馆 1994 年第 1 版,第159 页。
[5][意]彼得罗·彭梵得:《罗马法教科书》,黄风译,中国政法大学出版社1992 年第 1 版,第 379 页。
[6]参见[英]戴维·M·沃克:《牛津法律大辞典》,邓正来译,光明日报出版社 1988 年第 1 版,第 820-821 页。
[7]参见王全兴:《劳动法》,法律出版社 1996 年第 1 版,第 148 页。
[8]参见王建民、周滨:《资本中的人力资本》,《财经问题研究》1999 年第3 期,第 35 页。
[9][美]西奥多·舒尔茨:《论人力资本投资》,吴珠华译,北京经济学院出版社 1990 年第 1 版,第 25-40 页。
[10]参见[美]萨缪尔森·诺德奥斯:《经济学》,萧琛译,华夏出版社 1999年第 1 版,第 189 页。
[11]冯子标:《人力资本运营论》,经济科学出版社 2002 年第 1 版,第 44 页。
[12]参见李保元:《人力资本与经济发展》,北京师范大学出版社 2000 年第 1 版,第 20 页。
[13]金帆:《智力资本出资的理论分析与制度设计》,《中国工商经济》2005年第 1 期,第 35 页。
[14]徐冬根:《关于智力资本出资的法律思考》,《上海财经大学学报》2006年第 2 期,第 26 页。
[15]郭龙:《对完善人力资本出资制度的若干思考》,《兰州交通大学学报》2004 年第 5 期,第 93 页。
[16]赵旭东:《从资本信用到资产信用》,《法学研究》2003 年第 5 期,第109 页。
[17]薄燕娜:《股东出资形式法律制度研究》,法律出版社 2005 年第 1 版,第 29 页。
[18]参见中国企业家协会编:《经营制收入分配制度》,企业管理出版社2000 年第 1 版,第 115-116 页。
[19]参见宋农村、丁惠宇:《论我国不同所有制工人的利益状况》,《徐州教育学院学报》1999 年第 1 期,第 5 页。
[20]参见宁向东、黄垚:《职工持股的理论进展与国际经验》,《经济问题》2004 年第 9 期,第 36 页。
[21]参见蒋大兴:《人力资本出资观念障碍检讨及其立法政策》,《法学》2001 年第 3 期,第 67 页。
[22]参见冯果:《也谈人力资本与劳务资本》,《法商研究》1999 年第 2 期,第 29 页。
[23]参见冯果:《现代公司资本制度比较研究》,武汉大学出版社 2000 年第 1 版,第 68 页。
[24]参见刘宏:《浅论我国 2005 年版<公司法>资本制度的修改和完善》,“学说连线”, http://www.xslx.com/mzfz/fxtt/2006-01-06-19613.htm,2006 年 5 月 2 日。
[25]李友根:《人力资本出资问题研究》,中国人民大学出版社 2004 年第 1版,第 232 页。
[26]参见刘俊海:《欧盟公司法指令全译》,法律出版社 2000 年第 1 版,第 20 页。
[27]吴桑谨、周臣主编:《资产评估教程》,浙江大学出版社 1995 年第 1版,第 319-323 页。
[28]于玉林:《现代无形资产学》,经济科学出版社 2001 年第 1 版,第204-205 页。
1.薄燕娜:《股东出资形式法律制度研究》,法律出版社 2005 年第 1 版。
2.李友根:《人力资本出资法律问题研究》,人民大学出版社 2004 年第 1 版。
3.傅穹:《重思公司资本制原理》,法律出版社 2004 年第 1 版。
4.冯果:《现代公司资本制度比较研究》,武汉大学出版社 2000 年第 1 版。
5.赵旭东:《公司资本制度改革研究》,法律出版社 2004 年第 1 版。
6.石婷婷:《人力资本产权制度分析》,中国经济出版社 2005 年第 1 版。
7.赵旭东主编:《公司法学》,高等教育出版社 2003 年第 1 版。
8.[日]志村治美:《现物出资研究》,于敏译,法律出版社 2001 年第 1 版。
9.冯彦君:《劳动法学》,吉林大学出版社 1999 年第 1 版。
10.王全兴:《劳动法》,法律出版社 1997 年第 1 版。
11.吴汉东、胡开忠:《无形财产权制度研究》,法律出版社 2001 年第 1 版。
12.雷兴虎:《公司法新论》,中国法制出版社 2001 年第 1 版。
13.蒋大兴:《公司法的展开与批判》,法律出版社 2001 年第 1 版。
14.冯子标:《人力资本运营论》,经济科学出版社 2002 年第 1 版。
15.史际春:《公司法教程》,法律出版社 1997 年第 1 版。
16.刘俊海:《股份有限公司股东权的保护》,法律出版社 1997 年第 1 版。
17.朱慈蕴:《公司法人格否认法理研究》,法律出版社 1998 年第 1 版。
18.周枏:《罗马法原论》(下册),商务印书馆 1994 年第 1 版。
19.张维迎:《企业理论与中国企业改革》,北京大学出版社 1999 年第1 版。
1.郭龙:《对完善人力资本出资制度的若干思考》,《兰州交通大学学报》2004 第 5 期。
2.蒋大兴:《人力资本出资观念障碍检讨及其立法政策》,《法学》2001年第 3 期。
3.薄燕娜:《股东出资形式多元化趋势下的劳务出资》,《政法论坛》2005年第 5 期。
4.徐冬根:《关于智力资本出资的法学思考》,《上海财经大学》2006 年第 4 期。
5.张利国:《人力资本出资的合理性》,《大连民族学院学报》2005 年第 1期。
6.宁向东、黄垚:《职工持股的理论进展与国际经验》,《经济问题》2004年第 9 期。
7.陈雪萍:《人力资本出资的法律地位及相关问题探讨》,《华东政法学院学报》2006 年第 3 期。
8.马翠平:《出资制度的法哲学思考》,《黑龙江政法管理干部学院学报》2005 年第 1 期。
9.袁钢:《试论人力资本出资》,《合肥工业大学学报》2004 年第 10 期。
10.郭双焦、颜凌芳:《人力资本出资适格性的法学考察》,《湖湘论坛》2005 年第 2 期。
11.吴烈俊:《公司资本的构成——关于资本范畴的探讨》,《广西政治管理干部学报》2003 年第 5 期。
12.张慧霞:《构建我国人力资本出资制度之我见》,《黑龙江省政法管理干部学院学报》2004 年第 2 期。
13.徐鸣:《论人力资本的哲学基础及其与智力资本的分界》,《当代财经》2004 年第 11 期。
14.郭志明:《论人力资本出资的法律障碍及其克服》,《林区教学》2006年第 1-2 期。
15.徐辉鸿:《技术出资法律制度的若干问题浅析》,《南京工业大学学报》2004 年第 3 期。
16.朱效平:《完善人力资本出资制度的法律探讨》,《工会论坛》2002 年第 2 期。
17.刘焕军、张光宏:《出资制度中的立法价值取向分析》,《湖北经济学院学报》2004 年第 6 期。
[2]参见李友根:《人力资本出资问题研究》,人民大学出版社 2004 年第 1版,第 1 页。
[3]谈萧:《给人力资本出资以法律地位》,《天津日报》2005 年 12 月 16 日,第 18 版。
[4]参见周枏:《罗马法原论》(下册),商务印书馆 1994 年第 1 版,第159 页。
[5][意]彼得罗·彭梵得:《罗马法教科书》,黄风译,中国政法大学出版社1992 年第 1 版,第 379 页。
[6]参见[英]戴维·M·沃克:《牛津法律大辞典》,邓正来译,光明日报出版社 1988 年第 1 版,第 820-821 页。
[7]参见王全兴:《劳动法》,法律出版社 1996 年第 1 版,第 148 页。
[8]参见王建民、周滨:《资本中的人力资本》,《财经问题研究》1999 年第3 期,第 35 页。
[9][美]西奥多·舒尔茨:《论人力资本投资》,吴珠华译,北京经济学院出版社 1990 年第 1 版,第 25-40 页。
[10]参见[美]萨缪尔森·诺德奥斯:《经济学》,萧琛译,华夏出版社 1999年第 1 版,第 189 页。
[11]冯子标:《人力资本运营论》,经济科学出版社 2002 年第 1 版,第 44 页。
[12]参见李保元:《人力资本与经济发展》,北京师范大学出版社 2000 年第 1 版,第 20 页。
[13]金帆:《智力资本出资的理论分析与制度设计》,《中国工商经济》2005年第 1 期,第 35 页。
[14]徐冬根:《关于智力资本出资的法律思考》,《上海财经大学学报》2006年第 2 期,第 26 页。
[15]郭龙:《对完善人力资本出资制度的若干思考》,《兰州交通大学学报》2004 年第 5 期,第 93 页。
[16]赵旭东:《从资本信用到资产信用》,《法学研究》2003 年第 5 期,第109 页。
[17]薄燕娜:《股东出资形式法律制度研究》,法律出版社 2005 年第 1 版,第 29 页。
[18]参见中国企业家协会编:《经营制收入分配制度》,企业管理出版社2000 年第 1 版,第 115-116 页。
[19]参见宋农村、丁惠宇:《论我国不同所有制工人的利益状况》,《徐州教育学院学报》1999 年第 1 期,第 5 页。
[20]参见宁向东、黄垚:《职工持股的理论进展与国际经验》,《经济问题》2004 年第 9 期,第 36 页。
[21]参见蒋大兴:《人力资本出资观念障碍检讨及其立法政策》,《法学》2001 年第 3 期,第 67 页。
[22]参见冯果:《也谈人力资本与劳务资本》,《法商研究》1999 年第 2 期,第 29 页。
[23]参见冯果:《现代公司资本制度比较研究》,武汉大学出版社 2000 年第 1 版,第 68 页。
[24]参见刘宏:《浅论我国 2005 年版<公司法>资本制度的修改和完善》,“学说连线”, http://www.xslx.com/mzfz/fxtt/2006-01-06-19613.htm,2006 年 5 月 2 日。
[25]李友根:《人力资本出资问题研究》,中国人民大学出版社 2004 年第 1版,第 232 页。
[26]参见刘俊海:《欧盟公司法指令全译》,法律出版社 2000 年第 1 版,第 20 页。
[27]吴桑谨、周臣主编:《资产评估教程》,浙江大学出版社 1995 年第 1版,第 319-323 页。
[28]于玉林:《现代无形资产学》,经济科学出版社 2001 年第 1 版,第204-205 页。
1.薄燕娜:《股东出资形式法律制度研究》,法律出版社 2005 年第 1 版。
2.李友根:《人力资本出资法律问题研究》,人民大学出版社 2004 年第 1 版。
3.傅穹:《重思公司资本制原理》,法律出版社 2004 年第 1 版。
4.冯果:《现代公司资本制度比较研究》,武汉大学出版社 2000 年第 1 版。
5.赵旭东:《公司资本制度改革研究》,法律出版社 2004 年第 1 版。
6.石婷婷:《人力资本产权制度分析》,中国经济出版社 2005 年第 1 版。
7.赵旭东主编:《公司法学》,高等教育出版社 2003 年第 1 版。
8.[日]志村治美:《现物出资研究》,于敏译,法律出版社 2001 年第 1 版。
9.冯彦君:《劳动法学》,吉林大学出版社 1999 年第 1 版。
10.王全兴:《劳动法》,法律出版社 1997 年第 1 版。
11.吴汉东、胡开忠:《无形财产权制度研究》,法律出版社 2001 年第 1 版。
12.雷兴虎:《公司法新论》,中国法制出版社 2001 年第 1 版。
13.蒋大兴:《公司法的展开与批判》,法律出版社 2001 年第 1 版。
14.冯子标:《人力资本运营论》,经济科学出版社 2002 年第 1 版。
15.史际春:《公司法教程》,法律出版社 1997 年第 1 版。
16.刘俊海:《股份有限公司股东权的保护》,法律出版社 1997 年第 1 版。
17.朱慈蕴:《公司法人格否认法理研究》,法律出版社 1998 年第 1 版。
18.周枏:《罗马法原论》(下册),商务印书馆 1994 年第 1 版。
19.张维迎:《企业理论与中国企业改革》,北京大学出版社 1999 年第1 版。
1.郭龙:《对完善人力资本出资制度的若干思考》,《兰州交通大学学报》2004 第 5 期。
2.蒋大兴:《人力资本出资观念障碍检讨及其立法政策》,《法学》2001年第 3 期。
3.薄燕娜:《股东出资形式多元化趋势下的劳务出资》,《政法论坛》2005年第 5 期。
4.徐冬根:《关于智力资本出资的法学思考》,《上海财经大学》2006 年第 4 期。
5.张利国:《人力资本出资的合理性》,《大连民族学院学报》2005 年第 1期。
6.宁向东、黄垚:《职工持股的理论进展与国际经验》,《经济问题》2004年第 9 期。
7.陈雪萍:《人力资本出资的法律地位及相关问题探讨》,《华东政法学院学报》2006 年第 3 期。
8.马翠平:《出资制度的法哲学思考》,《黑龙江政法管理干部学院学报》2005 年第 1 期。
9.袁钢:《试论人力资本出资》,《合肥工业大学学报》2004 年第 10 期。
10.郭双焦、颜凌芳:《人力资本出资适格性的法学考察》,《湖湘论坛》2005 年第 2 期。
11.吴烈俊:《公司资本的构成——关于资本范畴的探讨》,《广西政治管理干部学报》2003 年第 5 期。
12.张慧霞:《构建我国人力资本出资制度之我见》,《黑龙江省政法管理干部学院学报》2004 年第 2 期。
13.徐鸣:《论人力资本的哲学基础及其与智力资本的分界》,《当代财经》2004 年第 11 期。
14.郭志明:《论人力资本出资的法律障碍及其克服》,《林区教学》2006年第 1-2 期。
15.徐辉鸿:《技术出资法律制度的若干问题浅析》,《南京工业大学学报》2004 年第 3 期。
16.朱效平:《完善人力资本出资制度的法律探讨》,《工会论坛》2002 年第 2 期。
17.刘焕军、张光宏:《出资制度中的立法价值取向分析》,《湖北经济学院学报》2004 年第 6 期。