论公路建设BOT投资方式中政府的保证责任 - 我爱范文自我鉴定自传范文网论文论文网

近年来，我国公路建设已经逐步形成了“国家投资、地方筹资、社会融资、利用外资”和“贷款修路、收费还贷、滚动发展”的投融资体制，使我国高速公路建设在近几年内取得了快速的发展。1989年上海至嘉定高速公路的建成通车使我国高速公路实现了零的突破，1999年10月31日济南至泰安高速公路的建成通车使我国高速公路总里程突破1万公里，居世界第四位。在短短的10年间，1.03万公里高速公路伸向神州大地。伴随着京沪、京沈高速公路全线通车，我国高速公路通车总里程已突破1.6万公里，居世界第三位，走过了发达国家几十年走过的路程，为世界瞩目。到2010年，我国将基本建成总长3.6万公里的“五纵七横”国道主干线。未来十年间高速公路规划建设规模还有2万公里左右、建设任务艰巨，还需要大量的资金，为解决资金不足的矛盾，BOT融资方式为解决这一矛盾提供了有效途径。

1 BOT投资的特点

BOT方式有狭义和广义之分。从狭义上讲，BOT是指(build—operate—transfer)即“建设一经营一移交”的英文第一个字母缩写，也就包含这三方面的含义。广义的理解除了这一含义之外，又有多种具体的变换形式，它主要包括BOOT(build—own—operate—transfer)，即：建设一拥有一经营；BRT(build一rent—transfer)，即：建设一出租一移交等不同的具体操作方式。

具体而言，公路建设BOT方式是指政府〔通过契约〕授予项目投资者(包括外国企业和本国企业)以一定期限的特许专营权，许可其融资建设和经营公路建设项目，并准许其通过收费或沿线服务设施的经营以清偿贷款，回收投资并赚取利润。特许权期限届满时，将该公路基础设施项目无偿移交给政府。例如英法海底隧道、香港地区的东区港九海底隧道等一批耗资巨大的项目都是以BOT方式集资建设并投入运营的。

BOT投资作为一种新的融资方式，同其它融资方式相比，有其自身的法律特点：

（1）从权利转移看：政府只是通过与项目公司签订特许权协议(合同)，将公路建设的经营权交给项目公司，项目公司则在经营一定的时期后将其转交给当地政府。

（2）从责任范围来看：政府依据签订的协议(合同)，通过经济活动的方式将设计、融资、建设、经营、维护公路设施的责任转移给项目公司。

（3）从项目的资金来看：采用BOT融资的项目所需要的资金全部由外国投资者或国内投资者通过融资、贷款解决。政府不提供担保资金，但可适当贷款或参股，共同投资。

（4）从参与主体来看：政府与项目公司作为主要主体通过合同达成合作意向，项目公司分别通过贷款合同、经营合同、建筑合同、设计合同与银行、经营承包商、建筑商、工程设计机构达成有关贷款、经营、建设、设计方面的合作意向。

2 政府在BOT投资方式中的保证责任

尽管BOT在国外的应用相当广泛，相对我国而言却还是较新的融资方式。特别是目前我国法律体系尚不健全，国内成功的BOT案例也不多的情况下，BOT融资方式在我国的运用还存在着不少的问题。尤其是由于公路建设投资大、期限长，投资者的风险相对较大。并且公路项目是我国的基础设施，在这种情况下，相对又增加了融资方的融资顾虑，因此，投资者往往要求政府在特许授权的法律文件中作出种种保证。所以，政府保证与否及保证的充分程度，是投资者进行项目可行性评价的不可缺少的主要因素之一。可以说，政府的支持与保证是BOT项目取得成功的重要前提。

在公路建设BOT投资项目中，我国政府通常会提供的保证一般包括以下内容：

（1）土地及其它后勤保证：投资者承担BOT项目后，需要政府在供水、供电、备土、劳力、生活服务等方面提供便利条件。政府应主动协调电力、邮电、供水、劳动、粮食、交通等职能部门与公路经营企业之间的联系，积极疏导项目承建方与当地政府和群众的关系，维持良好的治安和施工秩序。政府尤其是乡镇、村组干部要积极为公路经营企业提供工程建设、养护、生产等所需的社会劳动力，缓解劳力需求的矛盾，也可增加当地就业机会。

（2）外汇汇兑保证：我国政府对BOT项目资本进出我国所面临的人民币兑换成外币及汇出、支付手段等风险进行的保证是外商最为关注的政府保证问题。我国属于外汇管制国家，人民币不能自由兑换，虽然现行《外汇管理条例》规定在经常性项目外汇实行自由兑换的浮动汇率制，但在资本项目外汇上仍然严格管理，外汇自由进出仍受到限制。由于公路建设BOT并非出口创汇项目，实施BOT项目主要采用境外外汇融资方式，收益则为人民币，很少能自行做到外汇平衡。因此，经营利润能否兑换成外汇并自由地汇出，不仅关系到投资者的投资，而且还关系到公路建成后以收费作为还本的问题。因此，投资者往往会要求政府对其经营收入能够自由兑换作出保证，目前采用国际BOT方式的发展中国家，很多都对外汇汇兑作出了保证。

（3）限制竞争保证：公路经营企业的收益直接取决于公路项目过往车辆的交通量。为保证项目建成通车后，经营企业有稳定的收入，政府承诺特许权期限内不在项目附近兴建任何竞争性公路，并控制公路支线叉道口的连接，使公路经营企业保持较高的回收率，以避免过度竞争引起投资者经营收益的下降。实践中提供限制竞争保证已成为国际BOT方式的一种习惯做法。例如，英吉利海底隧道工程中，英法两国政府对承建隧道的欧洲隧道公司作出保证，在33年内不建造第2条横跨海峡的连接设施。应强调的是，竞争只有是过度才是不必要的，因为这会导致资源的严重浪费。因此，政府的保证针对的应是“不过度竞争”而作出的。

（4）经营期保证：即要求政府保证项目公司的一定时期的特许经营权，不因投资者利润的丰厚而要求提前收回项目或以其它方式损害其利益。从投资者角度，经营期越长越有利，但从国家角度看则正好相反。一般来说，项目经营期应在20-30年左右，具体期限的确定，还要视项目投资者归还银行债务的安排及获利情况而定。

（5）投资回报率保证：投资回报率是指在项目经营期内所有现金流出和流入的现值的比率，即项目利润与投资的比率。由于公路建设风险大、利润低，东道国政府为吸引私人投资，弱化投资风险，一般要考虑给予投资者一定的投资回报率保证。不过，这种保证一般是间接地，并限于对市场和价格的保证，而不包括对工程超期、超支等商业风险的保证。但从实质上讲，政府对投资回报率的保证仍属于对商业风险进行保证的范畴，而并非政治风险方面的政策性承诺或保证。如1994年上海市政府专为上海延安东路隧道复建工程发布了《上海市延安东路隧道专营管理办法》，该办法第十条规定，“上海市人民政府同意隧道发展公司关于双方对利润分配的约定，港方投资者在专营期内从隧道发展公司取得百分之十五的投资回报率。”

3 政府保证责任的法律冲突与风险

（1）政府保证的法律冲突

我国现行的法律对政府保证作出了种种限制或禁止，首先，政府对BOT的保证一般是通过政府与投资者签定特许权协议来确立。但我国政府原则上不直接同外国投资者缔结合同。《担保法》第8条规定：“国家机关不得作为保证人，但经国务院批准为使用外国政府或国际组织进行转贷的除外”。外经贸部1995年发布的《关于以BOT方式吸收外商投资有关问题的通知》(简称《吸收通知》)第3条规定，“政府机构一般不应对项目做任何形式的担保或承诺（如外汇担保、贷款担保等）。如项目确需担保，必须事先征得国家有关主管部门的同意，方可对外作出承诺。”此外，中国人民银行于1996年9月发布的《境内机构对外提供外汇担保管理办法》的第4条中也对政府机构对外提供担保进行了限制。与《吸收通知》不同的是，国家计委、电力部、交通部1995年下发的《关于试办外商投资特许权项目审批管理有关问题的通知》(简称《审批通知》)第3 条却作出允许政府保证的规定，即“对于项目公司偿还贷款的本金、利息和经利汇出所需要的外汇，国家保证兑换和汇出境外。”

上述法律文件中，《担保法》的立法权威性最高，因此，有学者认为政府已被排除了对BOT投资项目外国投资者作出担保的全部可能性。但有些学者却认为《担保法》指的是民法上的担保，而在BOT项目中，政府通过特许权协议形式为项目公司作出诸如经营期限和项目等后勤保证，实质上属于对我国法律规定和国际协定条款的重申，是一种“非法律意义上的政府保证”。更有学者认为，政府对BOT项目的保证是一种“政府公法和行为”，具有国际法上的效力。

笔者认为，BOT项目的政府的保证是“政府对其签约行为的履约保证、对政治风险的承担保证和对其特定的豁免权放弃的保证，对该保证的违反会引起外交保护或国际求偿”。即这种政府保证是政府为了项目的顺利完工、经营、移交，对于一部分本国法律己规定的内容载入“特许权协议”中，以使该协议顺利进行。对于本国法律中未做规定的内容，通过协议加以确定，以维护投资人、项目公司的利益。即我国政府保证其实是一种对政策和履约的承诺，在合理范围内放弃主权和豁免权，一旦违约，政府要承担相应的法律责任。政府保证的目的是增强外国投资者的信心。

BOT投资方式的实施需要多个政府部门的共同规范，但我国目前尚无一个协调各部门的机构或是职权明确的机构，因此各部门发布的一些规章就很难做到统一协调，在不同的部门规定中，有时甚至会出现相矛盾之处。如《审批通知》允许直接提供外汇兑换和汇出的保证。然而，就法定职责来说，国家计委并非外汇主管部门，对外汇汇兑应否提供保证的问题，应由人民银行或国家外汇管理局来作出规定，而不适宜由国家计委作出。但在人民银行或国家外汇管理局的有关规定中，并没有涉及BOT项目的政府保证。

因此，依目前法律法规，要求政府对BOT项目作出保证有一定的法律障碍。首先，法律对政府保证的性质和效力未作出特别规定，本身具有很大的不确定性，甚至相互矛盾，一旦发生争议，将很难解决。如我国通常由国有公司同外国投资者签订经济合同．规定权利义务，但发生问题时国有公司只承担经济责任，而不承担国家责任。再次，政府同外国没资者签订投资协议发生争议时不知如何解决。理论上，我国应通过与有关国家签订的政府间双边投保护协定解决争议。虽然我国于92年正式签署《华盛顿公约》，但我国通常并不同意将争议交付其在世界银行总部设立的“解决投资争议国际中心”仲裁。胜诉一方无论在哪一个缔约国或其管辖下找到另一方财产，都可以请求改缔约国地法院予以扣押该项财产。因此，我国政府一旦败诉，投资者可以在任何一个缔约国申请对我国国家财产进行执行，该缔约国甚至不得以公共秩序保留为由加以抵制。虽然国家财产享有司法豁免权，但《华盛顿公约》将财产的扣押问题留给了裁决执行国的法院依据自己国家的法律予以解决。但根据《公约》关于当事人有权不将争议交付“中心”仲裁的规定，我国政府一般仅同意通过国内诉讼或国际仲裁解决，但外国投资者通常对国内裁决的公正件表示怀疑。比如当政府违反? 信凳保夤蹲收呔烤故且晕ピ嘉商崞鹈袷滤咚匣故堑Ｆ鹦姓咚希咳绻翘崞鹦姓咚希敲词欠穹闲姓咚戏ü娑ǖ氖馨阜段В?/P>

（2）政府保证的法律风险

公路经营企业主要依靠收取公路过路费来谋求投资的回报。公路项目建成后车辆交通量的大小决定着收取过路费的多少。政府可根据测算的交通量的增长速度，在不同阶段和年份制定出由政府控制掌握的最低收入水平线，向公路经营企业提供不同的最低收入的担保。当公路经营企业收取过路费达不到最低收入水干线时，政府可视情给予公路经营企业一定的补贴，保证公路经营企业的收益率，调动投资开发商的积极因素。但政府提供投资回报率的保证将会使政府负起偿债责任，提供这种保证，将违反《担保法》中“国家机关不得作为保证人”的规定。也违反了《审批通知》第3条中规定的：“项目公司也要承担投资融资、建造、采购、运营维护等方面的风险，政府不提供固定投资回报率的保证”内容。因此，国际惯例是政府不给予固定的保证，除非项目在经济或财务上不可行，作为吸引投资者的一种措施。如果政府保证固定投资回报率，那么BOT项目就变成了事实上的贷款项目，而这种贷款项目利率无异是较高的。这不但会使外商失去降低成本、提高效率的积极性，也会使政府承担了不应承担的风险。

但是考虑到BOT项目中投资风险的特殊性，特别是我国现阶段的投资环境不尽完美，如果法律法规对此风险的保证作出禁止性的规定，一概否定“政府对投资回报率”提供保证，恐怕是不合理和不切实际的。虽然对于投资回报率的保证通常是建立在交通量预测的基础上，但目前对于交通量的预测存在很大的不确定性，一方面由于预测理论模型自身的缺陷——根据混沌理论，非线性系统的长期预测是不可能的，另一方面也由于咨询机构自身的问题。如西南某高速公路交通量预测的项目负责人毫不掩饰地对笔者坦言外商被蒙了。更有甚者，某咨询机构为得到西南某长江的经营权转让可行性研究项目，居然许诺：甲方需要什么结果，他们就可以得出什么结果，而且该结果在同行中没有人敢提出质疑！对此，笔者认为，一旦政府在投资回报率上遭遇赔偿风险，政府可根据《民法通则》和《合同法》向有过错的交通量预测的中介咨询公司追索，从而化减政府投资回报率保证责任的风险。这同时也提醒中介咨询机构，随着市场经济运行规则的逐步完善，尤其是WTO规则和相关国际通行做法，中介咨询机构是必须为其咨询结论承担责任的，这一点，在安达信、毕马威等会计师事务所事件中得以体现。因此，国内的中介咨询机构在交通量预测的问题上必须采取慎重的态度，否则，不但有可能面临来自政府、BOT项目公司和股民的索赔，后果严重的，将直接违反《刑法》，构成“中介组织人员提供虚假证明文件罪”或“中介组织人员提供证明文件重大失实罪”。

4 结论

西部大开发对公路基础设施迅速增长的需求，使得我国公路基础设施投资的回报率和投资机会，较之欧美市场有巨大的吸引力。但公路基础设施建设所需大规模的投资，要求我们必须在用国际金融机构贷款和外国政府软贷款及证券融资的基础上，加快B0T方式融资的步伐。但由于公路BOT投资项目是一个跨国投资，投资大、期限长，投资者的风险相对较大。因此，BOT项目的成功在很大程度取决于项目所在地政府是否给予强有力的支持，但也由此给政府带来风险。而在我国法律法规中，涉及政府保证的内容很少，大都只局限于项目公司外汇兑换与汇出的保证，以及项目公司因政策变化而受损失时允许其延长经营期的保证，而对于其他一些私人投资者所关心和期望的诸如限制竞争保证、土地保证、投资回报率保证等，都没有作出具体规定。这势必将给予地方政府人投资者进行BOT项目谈判带来很大困难。对投资者而言，还意味着项目的政治风险大大增加，因为即使地方政府为有关项目提供他相关保证与承诺，也有可能会被其他法律法规或上级政府部门撤销。

迄今为止，由于我国尚无关于BOT投资方式的综合立法，而使投资者和政府均面临较大的风险，这也是BOT方式在我国还没有成功推广重要的原因。为减轻我国政府对政治风险承担的压力，必须尽快完善BOT投资法律体系，并鼓励外国投资者参加海外投资保险，通过本国的海外投资保险机构或多边投资担保机构承担政治风险，使我国政府对政治风险的承担减少到最低限度。

参考文献

[1] 《国际私法与国际经济法》. 法律出版社 . 1998年

[2] 幕亚平、赵康《BOT的法律问题与我国BOT立法》.《法学研究》.1998年2月

　

　

　

Analysis of Government’s Responsibility of Guarantee in the

BOT Investment of Highway Construction

　

Yan Qiang Huang Peng

(Department of Road and Traffic Engineering, Tongji University, 200092, Shanghai , China )

　

Abstract: Faced the tough mission of highway construction in the coming ten years , BOT investment style is a efficiency way to the make it ,yet ,it has many problem in implement .Investors always require government’s guarantee in by warranty law files ,such as :soil and logistics guarantee ,foreign currency exchange guarantee ,confined competition guarantee ,management time guarantee , investment returns guarantee ,etc .Though government’s support and guarantee is substantial to the success of BOT investment style , there are some law flaws ,and there are not an organizati on to harmonize all kinds organization which would otherwise lead to conflict ,also, guarantee of investment returns may make government faced law issue .therefore ,we should perfect the BOT investment law system as quickly as possible in order to de deduce the risk of government’s guarantee responsibility .

　

Key words: highway construction , BOT , government’s guarantee responsblity
　

Nowadays ,highway construction has formed the investment style of central government ,local government ,social finance organization and foreign finance organization investment ,which made highway construction have ground performance in recent years .Since it’s first highway ,from Shanghai to Jiading ,in 1989, china has had 10 000 kilometers highway ,NO.4 in the world , by the day of October 31,1999 ,when the highway——Jinan to Taian finished . It is only took 10 years to constructed 10 300 kilometers highway .Now ,with the successfully finished Beijing to Shanghai ,Beijing to&nb sp;Shenyang highway ,china has more than 16 000 kilometers highway , NO.3 in the world .China made the ground work which developed country almost took 40 years . By the year of 2010 ,China will have built more than 36 000 kilometers highway ,which means we have to build more than 20 000 kilometers highway in 10 years .faced the tough mission as well as short of capital , BOT investment style is a efficiency solution to the problem .

　

1. characteristic of BOT investment style

BOT investment style can be explained in two ways ,one is BOT :build—operate—transfer，the other is BOOT :build—own—operate—transfer or BRT :build一rent—transfer .In detail ,BOT of highway is government accredit investor ,including domestic and foreign , can invest and operate highway in limited years and freely transfer the item to government before the expire time .the English channel tunnel and Gangjiu channel tunnel of Hongkong were built and operated by BOT investment style .

　

Compared to other investment styles ,BOT item has is own law property as follows:

　

(1) Ownership : according to the contract of government and investor ,investor has the operate authority of highway in limited time ,and have to freely transfer the highway to government before the expire time .

　

(2) Responsibility : according to the contract between investor and government ,investor has the obligation of design ,invest ,construction ,operation and maintenance .

　

(3) Capital : the capital of highway construction is in charge of investor ,government can ,but not must ,invest in the highway .

　

(4) Participator : by loan contract ,operation contract ,construction contract ,design contract ,investor contract with bank ,constructor ,designer respectively .

　

2. Government’s responsibility in BOT

Though BOT populated overseas ,it is not familiar with us ,especially under the condition that we have not a perfect law system ,consequently ,there is little successful BOT issue in China .Considering highway BOT need enormous capital ,which increase the risk of investor .Thus ,investor always require government’s guarantee by authority law files . Consequently , government’s guarantee is the important factor in the assessment of BOT issue ,in other words ,it decided the success of BOT item .

Government’s guarantee In highway BOT item including as follows :

(1) Guarantee of soil and logistics : highway BOT issue investor need government’s convenience in water supply ,electricity supply ,soil ,labor force ,living substance ,etc .Government should initiatively harmonize water ,electricity ,post ,labor ,living ,traffic department with investor ,not only harmonize investor with local government and local people ,but also maintenance construction order .Government ,especially village government and village cadre should initiatively supply labor force for highway construction and maintenance ,which also can supply work position for rural area .

　(2) Guarantee of foreign currency exchange : Government’s guarantee of foreign currency exchange is most concerned by investor . China limited foreign money exchange , renmingbi can not be freely exchanged with foreign currency , Though Foreign Currency Exchange Management Department states regular issue can be exchanged with foreign currency dynamic, capital issue still strictly confined . Highway BOT issue usually adopted foreign currency , yet it’s returns is Chinese currency .therefore , whether investor’s returns can freely exchange with foreign currency is very important to  investor .Based on these analyses ,investor usually require government’s guarantee of foreign money exchange ,similarly ,many developing country guaranteed foreign currency exchange .

(3) Guarantee of confine competition : Investor’s returns directly depends on traffic .To ensure it’s stabilization returns , investor always require government to pledge not build competing issue during management time to make investor can have stabilization returns ,which would otherwise harm to investor . In fact , guarantee of confine competition is populated overseas , for example , Britain government and France government pledge to investor , Europe tunnel Co. , not build second tunnel or bridge in 33 years . But we should point out guarantee of confine comp etition is only tackle with over competition , because it would lead to resource waste .

(4) Guarantee of operation time : It requires government assure investor has enough time to operate the BOT issue even investor has well returns . From the point of investor , the long time of operation ,the better ,while it is on the contrary to government .usually ,operation time should between 20 and 30 years , which depends on the practice of the BOT item.

　(5) Guarantee of investment returns : Investment returns is the ratio of actual value of investment and returns .Considered the big risk of investment and the low returns ,government usually would offer guarantee of investment returns to attract investor . But this kind of guarantee usually is indirectly and confined in market and price ,not guarantee of construction time and over budget and so on . But in fact , government’s guarantee of investment returns still belong to business guarantee ,not politics risk . For example , Shanghai government states in Sh anghai Yanan East Road Tunnel Management Order in 1994 : the investor of Hongkong can have the investment returns ratio of 15% .

　

3. Law conflict law risk of government’s guarantee

3.1 law conflict of government’s guarantee

government’s guarantee is limited according to Chinese law . First , government pledge to investor by contract between them ,but in principle ,Chinese government can not directly contract with foreign investor . the Guarantee Law states “government organization can not be warrantor ,except loaned by foreign government or international organization which accredited by the central government .” According to Notice of Some Problem on the Issue of BOT Investment (Notice of Problem for short) , which published by the foreign trade department in 1995 states “government organization  commonly can not guarantee in any way ,such as foreign currency exchange guarantee and loan guarantee .unless approved correlation government organization ,can pledge to foreign investor if it is necessary .”the People’s Bank of China also states similarly regulates in sep 1996 . while contrary to the Notice of Problem , Plan Committee ,Electricity Department and Communication Department in 1995 published the file——Notice on License of Examine and Approve of Foreign Investor (Notice on License for short) , states government organization can guarantee fund ,corpus ,interest can  be feely exchange with foreign currency .

　

Guarantee Law has the most authority compared to other law files , thus , some scholars concluded that in BOT item government can not guarantee to foreign investor in any way . But others consider the Guarantee Law concerns civilly , while the guarantee of government in BOT item such as operation time and logistics are actually reaffirm of our law and international accord , then it is not law guarantee of government . some even consider government’s guarantee is public law and action which belong to law of nations .

　

In my view , government’s guarantee in BOT item is government’s assure to carry out the contract , bear the politics risk , renounce it’s given immunity , thus , he disobey of assuring could cause diplomatism protect of international protect . In other words , government’s guarantee is to make sure of the complete ,operation and transfer the BOT item smoothly , then , write down the law stated parts on the concession agreement , as to the issue not stated by law , then by the agreement to make sure investor’s interest . Therefore ,  our government’s guarantee is actually assure it’s politics and give up it’s given immunity in reasonable scope .The disobey would results government’s relevant law responsibility ,which can increase foreign investor’s confidence consequently .

　

The carry out of BOT item needs many departments’ assort with each other well , but China still has not a organization to harmonize all kinds of departments , which make their own files can not assort with each other , some even conflict each other . For example , Notice On Licenses states government can directly guarantee foreign currency exchange . But to their legal responsibility , Plan Committee is not in charge of foreign currency exchange ,which is in charge of People’s Bank of China and Foreign Currency Management Department , thus ,&nb sp;Plan Committee can not publish files about foreign currency exchange . But there is no files about government’s guarantee in BOT item in the files of People’s Bank of China and Foreign Currency Management Department .

　

Based on these discussion as above ,in BOT item ,government’s guarantee would conflict with current law . First , current law does not state government’s guarantee , which make government’s guarantee uncertainly and hard to solve once disputed arised during the course of BOT item . China usually contract with foreign investor by state owned corporations . But the states corporations only assume economic responsibility , not assume politics responsibility . second , it is unclearly to solve the conflict between government and foreign investor . In principle , it s hould through bilateral agreement of governments to solve these conflicts .though china has been the state member of Washington Agreement since 1992 ,but china usually would not agree to submit the conflict to International Central of Solve Investment Conflict which located in the headquarter of Word Bank to arbitrate .Once defeated ,investor could require any member state to execute the arbitration outcome ,and the member state even can not reject his require by hold public order .Though states’ property has the given immunity ,the Washington Agreement set the issue to& nbsp;be solved by the executing country according to it’s own law . Therefore , China usually would not agree to solve the conflicts by domestic arbitration or lawsuit . But foreign usually suspect the impartially of domestic arbitration or lawsuit . When government disobey it guarantee , foreign investor does not know it is a civil action or administration action . Even it is a administration action , he does not know whether it in the range of court .

　

3.1 law risk of government’s guarantee

Investor’s returns major depends on traffic , and the traffic decided his returns .Government can calculate the increase rate of traffic to control his earnings ,thus government can guarantee investor’s returns . If investor can not earning his expected means , government can supply subsidy to inspire investor’s enthusiasm . But government’s guarantee could make government faced the risk of debt , and the guarantee may violate the Guarantee Law —— government organization can not be warrantor , and the Notice of License —— investor must assume risk of construction  , stock , operation , etc , government would not pledge fixed returns . Therefore , by international routing ,government would not pledge fixed returns ,except it is necessarily in economic of finance to attract investor . BOT item would turn into loan in essential if government pledge fixed returns , which cost would be very high . Then , not only investor will lose enthusiasm in deduce cost and increase efficient , but also make government faced more risk which should not be faced .

　

Considered the distinguished risk of BOT item , especially our investment environment is not perfect , it is not a good idea to forbid any guarantee of risk , especially guarantee of returns . Though government’s guarantee of returns depends on traffic forecast , traffic forecast itself has many problem ,one is the theory of traffic forecast is not perfect——by the Chaos Theory , it is impossible to forecast traffic , the other is consult company . In a item of traffic forecast of a south-west city airport highway , the man at the wheel co nfess he cheated the investor . All the more , o get the traffic forecast item of a Changjiang river bridge , the chief man of a consult company promise to the owner they can meet owner’s all kinds request , band no craft brother can doubt their out come ! I was deeply astonished by these actions which ignore law . once government faced debt of his guarantee of returns ,he can ask the consult company to pay the debt according to law——civil code law and contract law , thus , the government can avoid the risk of debt  ;. his also means , with the development of market , especial the WTO order , consult company must answer for their work , which embody in the affairs of accountant firm . Therefore , the domestic consult company must careful their work , or else he may faced the debt of government , investor and bonder , even offend the Criminal Law .

　

4. conclusion

With the development of west ,invest in highway has higher returns and attraction than in Europe and America market . The great needs of capital make us must quicken the step of capitalize BOT investment from foreign finance organization and foreign government . But BOT item is a investment overseas , and it needs longer years and great capital ,which increase investor’s risk . Therefore , the success of BOT item greatly depends on the support of local government ,thus increase government’s risk . There is little law about government’s guarantee in BOT& nbsp;. All these investor concerned things such as limit competition , soil , returns , etc , are not clearly state in law files .thus , it make it more difficult for negotiate between government and investor . To investor , this means increase their politic risk because even local government has pledge to them , it still has the risk of repeal by law of superior government .

By now , we still has not integrate law on BOT ,which make both government and investor faced more risk , that is also the major reason why BOT did not populate in china successfully . To deduce government’s risk , we should not only perfect our law system of BOT , but also support investor insure overseas to minimize government’s politics risk .

reference

[1] international private law and international economic law . law publish company . 1998

[2] Mu Yaping、Zhao Kang . law issue of BOT and BOT legislation . law research . feb 1998