近年來逾放比率屢創新高，導致各銀行面臨相當可觀的授信風險，顯示出「問題放款」管理的重要性。本研究旨在探討問題放款案件的形成、解決途徑與執行效果，在實證研究方面，乃以民國81 至90 年，作為實證期間。首先，是以上市上櫃的問題放款公司與正常公司為樣本，利用t、無母數方法的Wilcoxon Rank Sum 與Median 檢定及Logit 迴歸方法，驗證這兩種公司的投資決策、融資決策、股權結構與其他經營管理變數是否存在顯著的差異。其次，為瞭解問題放款公司的解決途徑主要是受哪些因素所影響，進而將解決方式分為協商和解與非協商和解（包括重整、拍賣與破產清算、其他）兩類；鑒於協商和解仍有親疏寬嚴之別，本文遂將「展延本息或調降利率」的協商和「提高額度或以股還債」的協商加以區分，使用t、無母數檢定方法及Logit 迴歸方法，驗證其彼此間在借款公司的經營體質、債權銀行之信用管理決策，和經濟環境 此三大構面是否存在顯著的差異。本研究也視分析需要，以卡方列聯表分析方法，驗證某兩項分類變數或屬性變數的相關程度。最後，為觀察問題放款的解決途徑是否有效，擬根據協商和解後兩年，這些企業的資產報酬率、負債比率、利息保障倍數、每股市價對帳面價值比及事件研究法之累積異常報酬，利用t或無母數方法驗證協商和解之執行效果。 由實證結果發現：1.本業及轉投資績效愈高、風險愈低，研究發展費用率愈高，借款期間愈短，往來銀行家數愈少，經營績效佳、競爭能力強的公司，愈不會產生問題放款。2.當問題放款公司有過低的銀行借款佔總負債比率、偏高的未還清餘額、不長的借款期間，愈少使用董監事股票質押借款，債權銀行遂會傾向選擇較強烈的非協商和解。逾放比率高的債權銀行，傾向採用非協商方式解決問題放款。經濟成長率高之總體環境雖有利於艱困企業度過難關，對於傳統產業佔絕大部分樣本的問題放款公司，為了確保債權，銀行仍會採取非協商和解。3.債權銀行若本身的淨利息利潤已低，客戶的借款期間不長、銀行借款佔總負債比重高，則會優先選擇給予借款客戶「提高額度或以股還債」。銀行會在經濟成長率高或失業率低時，甘冒信用風險提昇之挑戰，「提高信用額度」支應問題放款 客戶的融資需求，或在看好股市未來走勢，或基於健全客戶財務結構考量，而願意以問題放款公司的股票，抵償未還清的借款。4.協商和解的問題放款公司，歷經兩年整頓，仍無法顯著改善獲利及償債能力，也不能提昇股價表現，雖能使累積異常報酬率比協商當時來得高，但仍停滯在負值水準，且此種現象並不隨協商內容不同而有所改變。5.「提高額度或以股還債」的公司，協商確定之後與協商當時之累積異常報酬率的差幅，顯著高於「展延本息或調降利率」（以21 個事件窗口的累積異常報酬率差幅平均來衡量）。 Management of non-performing loans is one of the most critical aspects of the commercial banking business. The importance of the task is further heightened by increased loan defaults due to a decline in the economy in Taiwan. In 2001, for example, loan write-offs at all Taiwan banks had 11.29 percent of the outstanding credit was classified as nonaccrual and past due. This research presents the first empirical work on the topic using actual non-performing loan files from Taiwan local banks. This study performs an empirical analysis from the period 1992-2001. The targets of the research are organized as follows：(1) provides a review of the related literature. (2) describes data collection and presents logit model that explain the non-performing loan cause.(3) describes data collection and presents logit model that explain the resolution choices.(4) evaluate the effectiveness of a renegotiable resolution from the perspective of the lender. Major research findings include: (1) when evaluating the non-performing loan cause , those with higher result of a business and investment and the lower risk, higher R&D expenses rate and shorter maturities , fewer number of lender bank are less likely to produce non - performing loan. (2) when evaluating the choice between renegotiation and non-renegotiable, those with lower bank debts weigh, large remaining balances and short maturities and fewer stocks as hypothecation are more likely to be non-renegotiated than renegotiated. The higher loan write-offs of bank and economic growth rate, the bank tends to choose non-renegotiable. (3) when evaluating the choice between lengthe n principal and interest or descend interest rate and extension of additional credit or as stock to repay a debt, those with shorter maturities and higher bank debts weigh, The lower net interest margin of bank and higher economic growth rate and lower une mployed rate , the bank tend to choose extension of additional credit or as stock to repay a debt under these circumstances. (4) renegotiable resolution’s company reorganize to go through two years, still unable improve profit and debt-paying ability, cumulative abnormal returns also still stand negative value. (5) CAR differences of extension of additional credit or as stock to repay a debt are larger than lengthen principal and interest or descend interest rate.
