中國(guó)企業(yè)透明度在新興市場(chǎng)最低

美聯(lián)社根據(jù)透明國(guó)際最新排行的報(bào)道：中國(guó)企業(yè)透明度在新興市場(chǎng)最低，其中奇瑞，格蘭仕，萬(wàn)向在被排名的100個(gè)企業(yè)中名列倒數(shù)第一，得分都為零(滿分十分），中國(guó)企業(yè)得分最高的是中興通訊。如果參與海外市場(chǎng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)，而非簡(jiǎn)單代工，企業(yè)透明度是最基本的門檻。

以下是美聯(lián)社報(bào)道的全文：

SURVEY: INDIAN FIRMS BEST, CHINA WORST ON TRANSPARENCY
BY KELVIN CHAN
ASSOCIATED PRESS

HONG KONG (AP) — India has the most transparent companies while Chinese firms are the most opaque, according to a global watchdog’s survey released Monday that assesses the efforts of companies in emerging markets to fight corruption.

Transparency International said the report’s findings were “pathetic” and highlighted the urgent need for big multinational companies to do more to fight corruption.

The report covered 100 companies in 15 emerging-market countries that also included Brazil, Mexico and Russia. The overall score slipped since the last Transparency In Corporate Reporting survey in 2013, falling a fraction to 3.4 out of 10, with three quarters of companies scoring less than half.

The Berlin-based watchdog warned that the failure of a vast majority of companies surveyed to operate transparently risks creating an environment for corruption to thrive both in their businesses and the countries where they operate.

The weak scores are a big concern for global corruption fighting efforts, said Susan Cote-Freeman, Transparency’s head of business integrity. “All these companies including the Chinese ones are expanding in other geographies and they really have to raise the bar on their anticorruption and disclosure practices if we’re going to have a level playing field and if we’re going to really tackle this problem of corruption.”

Companies were scored on three measures: anticorruption programs, the amount of information disclosed about subsidiaries, joint ventures and other holdings, and financial data released for operations in each country where it has business.

Thirty-seven Chinese companies were evaluated, making them the survey’s biggest group, but they had the weakest overall performance. The three companies that scored zero out of 10 were all Chinese: automaker Chery, appliance maker Galanz and auto parts maker Wanxiang Group. The list’s bottom 25 spots were also dominated by Chinese companies.

“The very weak Chinese results stem from weak or non-existent anticorruption policies and procedures, or a clear failure to disclose them in line with international practice,” Transparency International said in a news release accompanying its report.

Spokespersons for Chery and Wanxiang did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the report. Galanz representatives could not be reached for comment.

Indian firms, on the other hand, dominated the top spots. Telecom company Bharti Airtel took first place with a score of 7.3 out of 10, followed by six units of conglomerate Tata and technology company Wipro.

One reason Indian companies came out on top is strict government requirements for financial disclosures, including operations in different countries. Another is that older companies such as Tata have been focusing on anticorruption efforts for “quite a long time,” said Cote-Freeman.

Only one Chinese company, telecom gear maker ZTE, placed in the top 25.

環(huán)球時(shí)報(bào)的報(bào)道如下：

德國(guó)調(diào)查稱中國(guó)三家企業(yè)“最不透明” 當(dāng)事企業(yè)拒絕指責(zé)

【環(huán)球時(shí)報(bào)記者倪浩 王曉雄 環(huán)球時(shí)報(bào)駐德國(guó)特約記者 青木】“中國(guó)企業(yè)最不透明”——位于德國(guó)的非政府反腐敗機(jī)構(gòu)“透明國(guó)際”11日發(fā)布一份報(bào)告稱，該機(jī)構(gòu)對(duì)全球15個(gè)新興國(guó)家的100家大型企業(yè)進(jìn)行調(diào)查評(píng)估顯示：印度企業(yè)在透明度方面做得最好，中國(guó)企業(yè)最差，3家中國(guó)企業(yè)在評(píng)估中被“打零分”。其中被點(diǎn)名的中國(guó)著名小家電企業(yè)格蘭仕11日接受《環(huán)球時(shí)報(bào)》記者采訪時(shí)表示，該公司不接受這樣的評(píng)估。

據(jù)美聯(lián)社11日?qǐng)?bào)道，調(diào)查于去年11月至12月進(jìn)行，包括巴西、墨西哥、俄羅斯、中國(guó)、印度等15個(gè)新興國(guó)家。報(bào)告從受調(diào)查公司的反腐敗舉措、公司股權(quán)和子公司財(cái)產(chǎn)披露情況、在所運(yùn)作國(guó)家的納稅額等關(guān)鍵財(cái)政信息三方面進(jìn)行測(cè)評(píng)，給予0-10分的評(píng)分。報(bào)告撰寫者表示，相關(guān)信息取自企業(yè)網(wǎng)站等公開(kāi)信息來(lái)源。

報(bào)告稱，受調(diào)查的大部分新興市場(chǎng)公司透明度極低，“扮演了助長(zhǎng)腐敗增長(zhǎng)的角色”。其中上市公司比國(guó)有和私營(yíng)企業(yè)更加透明。與2013年進(jìn)行的上一次調(diào)查相比，這些公司的平均得分下降0.2分，降至3.4分。“透明國(guó)際”主席何塞·烏蓋茲在11日的媒體聲明中表示：“新興市場(chǎng)大型公司的透明程度令人失望，這不禁使人們質(zhì)疑，私人企業(yè)對(duì)防止腐敗、預(yù)防貧困、減少不平等究竟有多么關(guān)心?！辈贿^(guò)英國(guó)《衛(wèi)報(bào)》11日稱，“透明國(guó)際”2014年發(fā)表的對(duì)全球124家跨國(guó)公司的透明度調(diào)查中，平均得分為3.8分。

美國(guó)CNBC網(wǎng)站稱，“透明國(guó)際”此次調(diào)查的100家公司中，中國(guó)占了37家，平均得分為1.6分，是新興市場(chǎng)公司中透明度最低的。報(bào)告批評(píng)稱，中國(guó)企業(yè)存在的主要問(wèn)題是反腐敗政策幾乎不存在，或根本未予披露。排名最靠后的10家公司中有9家為中國(guó)公司，包括萬(wàn)向集團(tuán)、格蘭仕集團(tuán)和奇瑞汽車得分均為0分。中興公司則躋身新興市場(chǎng)25家最透明公司的行列。

印度報(bào)業(yè)托拉斯11日稱，得分最高的公司來(lái)自印度，印度最大的電信運(yùn)營(yíng)商BhartiAirtell被認(rèn)為是最透明的公司，得分為7.3分?！巴该鲊?guó)際”認(rèn)為，印度公司得分較高的原因在于其公司法案的存在，私人公司的工資收入披露、審計(jì)、募資等都要受到監(jiān)管。公司法案也表明，強(qiáng)有力的監(jiān)管事實(shí)上可以推動(dòng)更大的透明度。

格蘭仕集團(tuán)是總部位于廣東順德的是中國(guó)著名小家電企業(yè)，公司負(fù)責(zé)新聞宣傳的工作人員11日接受《環(huán)球時(shí)報(bào)》記者采訪時(shí)，表示不接受透明國(guó)際對(duì)格蘭仕作出的評(píng)估結(jié)果。他告訴記者說(shuō)，格蘭仕是一家在完全市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)環(huán)境中成長(zhǎng)起來(lái)的民營(yíng)企業(yè)，如果不開(kāi)放透明，沒(méi)有良好的公司治理結(jié)構(gòu)，根本不可能在殘酷的市場(chǎng)環(huán)境中生存下來(lái)，更沒(méi)有辦法逐漸壯大。該工作人員稱，格蘭仕成立于1978年，立志于做百年老店，但公司迄今未在證券市場(chǎng)掛牌上市，“格蘭仕不是資本型企業(yè)，也沒(méi)有義務(wù)向國(guó)際機(jī)構(gòu)公布財(cái)務(wù)數(shù)據(jù)?！痹撔侣勑麄髫?fù)責(zé)人員稱，一些國(guó)外評(píng)估機(jī)構(gòu)并不了解中國(guó)市場(chǎng)環(huán)境，也不了解中國(guó)企業(yè)，所做出的評(píng)估結(jié)果并不客觀，不足以讓人信服。