论文部分内容阅读
中外合资企业的产生大致有三种方式:(1)中外双方共同投资,在新的厂址独立兴建一个新的企业,如上海高仕香精有限公司、深圳华丝有限公司等;(2)中方将某一个现有国营企业全部作为投入物投资入股,与外商合资形成合资企业,如天津奥的斯电梯有限公司、上海联合毛纺织有限公司等;(3)中方从原有老企业中划出一个车间或分厂作为中方投入物,以它为基础与外商合资建成一个合资企业,如北京吉普车有限公司、上海贝尔电话有限公司等。这三种合资企业中尤以第三种方式比较复杂,争议颇多,人们形象地称之谓“一厂两制”或“一院两宅”。本文将考察“一厂两制”方式的实践情况,并力图对其重新评价。
There are roughly three ways in which Sino-foreign joint ventures can be created: (1) Chinese and foreign parties invest together and build a new company independently at the new site, such as Shanghai Gaoshi Fragrance Co., Ltd. and Shenzhen Huasi Co., Ltd.; (2) China will An existing state-owned enterprise invests in shares as an input and forms joint ventures with foreign companies, such as Tianjin Otis Elevator Co., Ltd. and Shanghai Union Wool Textile Co., Ltd.; (3) China draws a workshop from the old company Or a branch factory as a Chinese input, based on it to establish a joint venture with a foreign joint venture, such as Beijing Jeep Co., Ltd., Shanghai Bell Telephone Co., Ltd. and so on. Among the three joint ventures, the third method is more complicated and controversial. People call it “one factory, two systems” or “one house, two houses”. This article will examine the practice of the “One Factory, Two Systems” approach and try to re-evaluate it.