摘要
股票期权产生于现代公司激励机制的安排，它以“取得无偿性、行权的收益性、可选择性与限制性”为基本特点而区别于其它激励机制，它的法律性质不可一概而论，应视不同阶段作不同分析，即在授予日至可行权日之前，为既得权；在可行权日至发出行权通知日之前，为形成权；在发出行权通知日至实际行权日，为请求权。
欧美财务丑闻引起了对股票期权实用价值的质疑，因此，构建股票期权法律制度须首先面对的就是股票期权价值的评断问题。本文通过对欧美财务丑闻根本原因的比较分析与对当今世界成功实施股票期权公司的实例统计，肯定了股票期权仍具有降低代理成本、吸引与稳定经理人才并消除其短视心理、缓解内部人控制的激励价值。
但是，目前我国实施股票期权计划还存在着诸多法律障碍。在我国公司中已仓促上台多年的“期股”似股票期权出现了或无法可依或有悖现行法律制度或具体操作紊乱等诸多问题。究其原因就在于：我国立法层对股票期权的司法实践迟迟未做出积极的回应，我国不仅没有一部关于股票期权的单行立法，而且现行的公司、证券、税收、会计、劳动等主要经济法律制度并没有为股票期权的实施提供任何法律依据，甚至成为障碍。因此，如何从法律的角度科学地构建我国的股票期权制度，已成为我国法学界须进一步探索与研究的极具时代意义的法学课题。
我国立法机构应与时俱进，积极回应股票期权在中国的法律实践，以行政法规形式的单行立法为主导，以完善涉及股票期权的现行法律制度为辅助，同时以欧美财务黑洞事件教训为戒，准确把握科学性、系统性与协调性的立法要求，着重健全以下基本内容：标的股票来源制度、股票期权授予与行权制度、股票期权信息披露制度、股票期权的税收征收与会计制度、股票期权变更与丧失的法定事由、股票期权的民事法律责任以及证券监管制度、公司治理制度。
The theory firstly indicates that stock option stemmed from stimulation institutions, and has the vivid characteristics including gratuitous gain and beneficial, selective, but restrictive exercise make it different from other stimulation institutions. The nature of stock option that is considered an object of this kind right has been an important subject on law research into stock option. There are mainly two different views on the nature of stock option that it is regarded as an" unilateral right "or "expected right". This theory shows that the nature of stock option shouldn't be simply summered up to a definite right, but should be made a final conclusion according to the specific situation as the following: from the date of reward to the date of given exercise, it is an accomplished right; from the date of given exercise to the date of sending the letter of exercise, it is an unilateral right; from the date of approval of exercise to the date of true exercise, it is a requested right.
The financial scandals hi Europe and America just set up an essential alarm bell for all of countries who are practicing or are to practice stock option, which is whether stock option can still make its functions well on the present time or whether it is necessary and valuable to practice stock option in China. Therefore, the first task is just supposed to affirm its practical value before how to design scientific law institutions about the Chinese stock option. The theory gives a certain answer to practical value of stock option by making a scientific and comparative analysis on the cardinal reasons why the financial scandals occurred in Europe and America and by listing many successful companies around the world that are practicing stock option. On the above basis, the writer is sure that stock option still can bring into such stimulation effects as a lower agent cost, a stronger appeal to t employments for managers, a more permanent attitude at corporation's management and a more perfect corporation's man
agement structure due to alleviate the problem about "control by insiders".
However, there appear many relevant law obstacles to designing the Chinese stock option law institutions. Except for Lenovo and Fangzheng Corporation and so on that have just appeared on the stock market in Hong Kong, the Chinese stock option (it actually isn't worthy of its name, but only an
expected stock) that has put into practice for several years in haste lacks it adequate theoretical demonstrations and legal foundations, with the result that it similar to the expected stock has been sinking into such problems as lack of law foundations, violation of the present laws and practical operations in a state of confusion. It is undutiful that the most essential reason is that the Chinese legislation committee hasn't made an active reaction into practices on the Chinese stock option, Therefore, from the law point of view, how to design the Chinese stock option institution will still be a theory subject with some important epoch meanings that is supposed to be further researched by Chinese scholars. Not only is there a special law about stock option, but the present such economical law institutions as corporation law, stock law, tax revenue law, accountancy law and labor law can't become a law basis and even become some terrible obstacles to the Chinese stock option. So the only way to giving an ex
act nature and a perfect operating guide is just to design the law institutions about the Chinese stock option.
The Chinese legislation committee is bound to keep the same pace with the practice of the Chinese stock option and then designs the law institutions about the Chinese stock option by a special legislation that should adopt a form of administrative law. At the same time, it is vital to consummate the present law institutions related to stock option including the stock supervision institutions and corporation's management structure institutions. On the basis of such a consideration, this theory plays an emphasis on how to design the specific law in
引文
1、梁慧星著：《民法总论》，法律出版社，1996年版。
2、冯果著：《现代公司资本制度比较研究》，武汉大学出版社，2000年版。
3、卞耀武主编：《当代外国公司法》，法律出版社，1995年版。
4、高如星、王敏详著：《美国证券法》，法律出版社，2001年版。
5、毛岩亮著：《民间审计责任研究》，东北财经大学出版社，2003年版。
6、姚刚主编：《公司治理与与股权激励》，广东经济出版社，2001年版。
7、高闯等著：《经理股票期权制度分析》，经济管理出版社，2003年版。
8、肖金泉、徐永前著：《经营者持股与股票期权计划的规范化设计》，企业管理出版社，2003年版。
9、刘园、李志群著：《股票期权制度分析》，对外经济贸易大学出版社，2003年版。
10、中国企业家协会编：《经营者收入分配制度——年薪制、期股期权设计》，企业管理出版社。
11、胡俞越主编：《经理层革命》，中国财政经济出版社，2000年版。
12、陈清泰、吴敬琏主编：《股票期权激励制度法规政策研究报告》，中国财政经济出版社，2001年版。
13、张志强著：《期权理论与公司理财》，华夏出版社，2000年版。
14、 David L Rather: "Securities Regulation",法律出版社，1999年版。
15、"Stock Option:Beyond the Basics", by ScottS Rodrick, The National Center for Employee Ownership U S A.
16、"Stock Options, Corporate Performance, and Organization Change", by Joseph Blasi, Douglas Kruse, James Sesil, and Maya Kroumova, The National Center for Employee Ownership U S A.
17、"Current Practices in Stock Option Plan Design", by Corey Rosen, The National Center for Employee Ownership U S A.
18、"Sharing Ownership:The Manager's Guide to ESOPs and Other Productivity Incentive Plans", by Darien A. McWhirter, John Wiley & Sons.
19、Robert W. Hamilton: "The Law Of Corporations"中国社会出版社，1999年版。
1、金晓兵、刘和平著：《认股权法律制度研究》，载于《民商法论丛》第17卷，香港金桥文化出版有限公司2000年版。
2、颜延、张文贤著：《我国推行股票期权制度的法律问题》，载于《中国法学》2001(3)。
3、甘培忠：《经理股票期权的法律分析》，载于《政法论坛(中国政法大学学报)》，2002(2)。
4、陈红：《我国实行股票期权制度的法律障碍与对策》，载于《法商研究》，2002(4)。
6、佟光临，雷艳智：《我国上市公司中推行股票期权制度的法律障碍》，载于《法学杂志》，2001(6)。
5、黄敏著：《薪酬制度中股票期权的法律问题》，载于《财经理论与实践》，2001(8)。
6、刘爽：《我国推行股票期权制度的法律构想》，载于《法律适用》，2001(11)。
5、邱秋芳著：《公司为员工持股取得自己股份之日本法制探讨》，载于《财经法专论》，台湾五南图书出版公司1997年版。
6、彭世平：《创业企业实行股票期权的法律障碍及问题分析》，载于《南方金融》，2001(6)。
8、范湘凌，何小平：《中国股票期权制度的法律设计》，载于《学术论坛》，2001(6)。
11、魏峰著：《经理激励机制的理论、实践与改革》，载于《上海经济研究》，1999(8)。
12、韩朝炜著：《我国实施股票期权制的相关法律问题探析》，载于《广西政法管理干部学院学报》，2001(12)。
13、张彪，邓颖：《金融工具创新先锋—认股权证》，载于《中国证券报》，2001(2，22)。
14、孟宪生：《期权制度设计相关法律问题》，载于www.Mengxiansheng.com
15、陈刚：《再造期权》，载于www.csrrc.com,2004(3)。
16、胡泳：《股票期权：为挽歌而起舞》，载于www.Blogchina.com,2002(9)。