Huang Xiangyuan: The Reform Of Delisting System Should Be Combined With Registration System Reform.

Generally speaking, if the problem of delisting is only a matter of not being in place, then the solution to this problem will be difficult to be resolved even at the present stage of the new round of reform of the delisting system. Sooner or later, it will be possible to follow the amendment of the securities law to the agenda and the "incident will be shifted". However, the reason why companies that should be delisting according to law fail to appear "one or a delisting" in the press response of the SFC in response to this soliciting manuscript is obviously not only that the law is not in place, but the main reason should be. Registration system The reform is not in place.

The real difficulty is not in accordance with the conditions of listing. Delisting company It is difficult to withdraw from the market. Instead, the administrative audit system gives way to the registration system that allows the market to play a decisive role in the allocation of resources, and the administrative power is difficult to withdraw the listed companies' protection mechanism under the market positioning of "heavy financing and light return". Otherwise, why not only in the new delisting system reform measures, the new Zhongji handling of the right time to apply the mandatory delisting rules to major illegal conditions is still the same as before.

If the guiding ideology of "restoring the original status" in civil tort is still like the saying of "Nanfang share" and "new China Foundation", it can not be corrected in time, the principal parties are punished, and the investors' losses are properly compensated and compensated. How can the new issue curb the excessive rent seeking and how to protect the interests of investors?

The ancients said, "it's better to make a difference than to make a difference." Major violations of law Significant information It is obviously more important to eliminate major illegal activities and major information disclosure before the listing. If the administrative power can withdraw from the substantive examination of the new issue in accordance with the requirements of the registration system at an early date, only a single listing condition will play a decisive role in the listing of the enterprises. Is it necessary for the listed companies to meet the requirements of the administrative examination and approval in order to meet the requirements of the listing conditions?

What else can we say about the delisting that is not in line with the listing conditions? In other words, the substantive advance of the reform of the delisting system can not wait for the revision of the securities law, it must be combined with the reform of registration system, and actively reform and actively push forward according to the requirements of the registration system reform. Any institutional protection policy that is conducive to the withdrawal of listed companies which are not conducive to listing conditions should be changed. Any administrative examination and approval system or audit system which is not conducive to the protection of investors' rights and interests should be refunded.

So long as administrative power really goes to the side of safeguarding investors' interests, instead of protecting the vested interests of large shareholders, two shareholders and their related interest groups of listed companies, and no longer continues to protect the interests of investors in the name of doing everything possible to set up the "finishing period" and "create a new listing" opportunity for the delisting, it will not be too difficult to change the difficulty of delisting.

Under the sunshine of registration system, the difficulty of delisting will not only continue to be difficult for three times, but will also make investors more confident in the integrity and mutual trust of the market because of the marketization, legalization, normalization and initiative of delisting.