일본의 정책금융 개혁과 법적 통제

Abstract

A governmental financing refers to means of providing subsidy by government to specific parts. It is a difficulty to define ‘governmental financing’ in simple form since its form and functions have changed throughout the development of economy and capital markets in each countries. Japan’s reformation of governmental financing is becoming a subject of discussion in perspective of privatization of post office and reformation of corporation having a special status. According to today’s economical status and in order to adjust to the market theory, there is a demand for reform in roles of government into a passive form, which requires the reformation in basic structures. A problem which has been arisen within the Finance Act, was study on governmental financing, which was not controlled by the national assembly, which is very massive and effective to the society. This paper will overlook on parts that is insufficient on prospect of democratic control. On the other hand there could be a different evaluation on defining this reform in perspective of financial democracy. A financing through issue of public investment and loan, as a national loan, can be helpful to raise assets since it bases on credit of a country. It seems to be that there will be a strengthen in democratic control, such as deciding its maximum amount through the national assembly. There still lies a risk of damaging the purpose of reformation, raising funds actively according to market theory, if the public investment and loan was not restricted. Also, if the national assembly sets the maximum amount highly, then the inner part of the financial policy can be loose and used politically opposing to its original purpose of democratic control. The fact that the governmental financing, which is also called as ‘second budget’ due to its massive scale and its importance in society and economy, is not controlled by national assembly seems undesirable in view of financial democracy. However we can accept that there was an improvement since it has become a legal obligation to submit the plan for governmental financing to the national assembly. But the democratic control regarding governmental financing seems still not sufficient enough. Anyhow, it appears to be that the adoption of market theory and its efficiency over general parts of governmental financing, has been achieved. But we need to remember that political financing is a field where failure is not accepted, thus we cannot entrust whole field on market theory. Due to is public character, it requires the control of national assembly.