中小企業對於我國來說是一非常重要的經濟體，從早期經濟發展來看，中小企業是過去經濟支柱，其憑藉的靈活彈性的特質，在逆境中成長，帶來了國民所得快速的增加，雖然近年來中小企業已非我國經濟上之最大主力，但其仍在穩定社會功能上扮演著非常重要的角色，中小企業提供了97.67%以上的工作機會，不但可以解決失業問題，並可以促進台灣所得均化進而穩定社會，由此可知中小企業的存在對我國是非常重要的。
然而，由於政府機關所訂定的法規命令層出不窮，政府機關在訂定法規命令時通常未考量到大企業與中小企業的區別而一體適用相同的法規命令。這些法規命令造成了中小企業營運成本的提高及不必要的負擔，致使我國的中小企業正面臨著法規調適的困境，這些法規調適困境很有可能會扼殺了中小企業的成長空間，嚴重著甚至會致使中小企業倒閉，為了避免這種情況的發生，法規調適分析機制之存在有其必要性。
本文在探討了我國現行的法規調適分析機制並發現現行法規調適分析機制運作上可能產生的問題後，基於國家憲法增修條文第10條的3項揭示對中小企業保護的意旨，認為現行的法規調適分析機制之法制上有其不足的地方。為了解決前述的問題，本文進一步的探討美國法規調適法，美國法規調適法自1980年代立法後運行至今已逾30年，其有一套完善的法規調適分析機制來解決美國國內的中小企業所面臨的法規調適困境。因此本文希望能夠以美國法規調適法為借鏡，提供我國未來針對法規調適分析機制法制上建構上之參考。

The Mechanism of Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
for Small and Medium Enterprises in Taiwan

Wang, Tzu-Ching
Wang, Yu-Cheng
Department of Law, College of Social Sciences

SUMMARY

Small and medium enterprises, which can resolve unemployment problem and promote income averaging, are important economic entities in our country. However agencies had issued thousands of regulations without distinguishing between small businesses and larger businesses when they developed rules and resulted in increasing of regulatory costs and unnecessarily burdened of small and medium enterprises. Unlike more capital which larger business having, there was less capital in small and medium enterprises and increased regulatory costs may probably cause their growing space snuffing out and even collapse. For "level the playing field" with large businesses, regulatory flexibility analysis was necessary to exist. Thus, the aim of this thesis was to investigate the mechanism of regulatory flexibility analysis for small and medium enterprises in Taiwan. The method of this thesis was documentary analysis including dissertations, journals and public documents by searching the documents on web of Westlaw, LexisNexis, Heinonline and Lawdata. After reviewing the current mechanisms of regulatory flexibility analysis, we found that the existingly regulatory flexibility anslysis is unable to shield small and medium enterprises in Taiwan. In Amendment of the Constitution article 10 paragraph 3, the intents on protections of small and medium enterprises were declared. The regulations were necessary to be modified as soon as possible to avoid the collapse of small and medium enterprises in Taiwan while those were more comprehensive in American. Therefore, those systems in Amerian may be a reference to amendent the law in Taiwan.

Key words: small and medium enterprises, regulatory flexibility analysis, protection, regulatory cost

INTRODUCTION

Small and medium enterprises are important economic entities in our country. Reviewing the pathing developed history, they used to be the mainstay of the economy. With its qualities of flexibility and resilience, small and medium enterprises growed in adversity and brought rapid increasing in gross domestic product. However they are no longer the mainstay of the economy in recent years but still play an important role of maintaining social stability by privoding more than 97.67% opportunities of job which can resolve unemployment problem and promote income averaging. Therefore, the existing of small and medium enterprises is quietly essential in our country. However agencies had issued thousands of regulations without distinguishing between small businesses and larger businesses when they developed rules; believing that a "one-size-fits-all" regulatory solution was adequate. Hence, these regulations resulted in the increasing of regulatory costs and unnecessarily burdened of small and medium enterprises. Unlike more capital which larger business having, there was less capital in small and medium enterprises and increased regulatory costs may probably cause their growing space snuffing out and even collapse. For "level the playing field" with large businesses, regulatory flexibility was necessary to analyse and the adjustment of the institutions should be examined. Thus, the aim of this thesis was to investigate the mechanism of regulatory flexibility analysis for small and medium enterprises in Taiwan.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The method of this thesis was documentary analysis. We reviewed the literature, such as dissertations, journals and public documents, of mechanisms of regulatory flexibility analysis in recent 20 years. We searched the data on web of Westlaw, LexisNexis, Heinonline and Lawdata by using the key word including “regulatory flexibility analysis”, “regulatory flexibility”, “small bussiness”, “small and medium enterprises” and “regulatory cost”. Not only was the literature in Taiwan but also American enrolled to analyse in this study.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

After reviewing the current mechanisms of regulatory flexibility analysis in Taiwan, we found that there are several problems of their operation. In Amendment of the Constitution article 10 paragraph 3, the intents on protections of small and medium enterprises were declared. Based on that, the existingly regulatory flexibility anslysis is unable to shield small and medium enterprises. This is because the existing laws were too ambiguous to powerful for indicating government to review the regulatory cost and did not consider the differences between small, medium and larger business. Furthermore, we investigated on “Regulatory Flexibility Act” in American, and this Act enacted in September 19th, 1980. “Regulatory Flexibility Act” has been worked over 30 years and was able to significantly decrease the regulatory cost in small and medium enterprises. Therefore, there is a comprehensively regulatory flexibility to deal with the difficulty of small and medium enterprises in American.

CONCLUSION

The mechanisms of regulatory flexibility in Taiwan were not only unable to protect small and medium enterprises and further to cause the increasing of regulatory cost. The regulations were necessary to be modified as soon as possible to avoid the collapse of small and medium enterprises. However those systems in Amerian seem to be worked well and may be a reference to us. The limitation of this thesis was lack of the analysis for other countries except American and further studies can focus on the systems in other countries.

一、中文部分(以下依照作者姓氏筆畫排序)
(一)書籍
1.吳庚，《行政法之理論與實用》，2001年增訂七版，頁304。
2.吳庚，《行政法之理論與實用》，2005年增訂九版，頁297-298。
3.吳庚，憲法的解釋與適用，2004第三版，頁276-277。
4.李惠宗，《憲法要義》，元照出版，2006年三版，頁232。
5.湯德宗，《行政程序法論》，元照出版，2000年初版，頁94-95。
6.經濟部中小企業處，「美國中小企業適法分析制度譯介」，經濟部中小企業處編印，1994年。
7.葉俊榮，〈行政命令〉，收於翁岳生編《行政法》，2000年二版，第521頁。
8.謝瀛洲，《中華民國憲法論》，台北市：謝瀛洲印行，1971年。
(二)學位論文
1.何燦誠，「我國法規衝擊分析之研究─以商標法第二十九條規定為例」，世新大學法學院碩士論文，2003年7月。
2.高瑞聰，「我國法規調適分析可行性之研究」，世新大學法學院碩士論文，2006年7月。
3.楊坤樵，從憲法變遷論法律與憲法的緊張關係-以經濟憲法為例，國立政治大學法律系碩士論文，2004年7月。
(三)期刊論文
1.朱正中，「中小企適應勞基法之探討」，台灣經濟研究月刊，第18卷第4期，1995年4月。
2.朱松柏，「中小企業適法分析制度之商榷」，台灣經濟研究月刊，第18卷第4期，1995年4月。
3.吳惠林、周添城，試揭台灣中小企業之謎，企銀季刊第11卷第三期，1998年，頁 60-71。
4.李惠宗，論營業許可基準之司法審查─兼論我國憲法上營業自由之限制，經社法制論叢，第5期，頁260。
5.林志成，「中小企業法規調適分析─政府採購法篇」，萬國法律，第109期，2000年2月。
6.施俊吉，「台灣政府管制革新的原則與方向」，台灣經濟戰略研討會，2003年，頁2-3。
7.胡博硯，在經濟領域中的國家保護義務-從金融控股公司法第36條談起，憲政時代，第4期，2011年4月。
8.張文宏，「對中小企業法規調適之芻見」，台灣經濟研究月刊，第18卷第4期，1995年4月。
9.張其祿，「政府行政管制與中小企業之發展：以OECD 國家為例」，法制論叢，第40 期，2007年，頁45。
10.張其祿，「論政府管制之決策品質：以行政中立為核心」，T&D飛訊，第107期，2010年，頁2。
11.張鈞，「談中小企業適法分析制度立法問題」，台灣經濟研究月刊，第18卷第4期，1995年4月。
12.許宗力，「基本權主體」，月旦法學教室，第4期，2003年2月，頁82。
13.陳清秀，「中小企業租稅法規調適法律觀點」，財稅研究，第29卷第5期，1997年9月。
14.陳清秀，「中小企業適應租稅法規問題之探討」，台灣經濟研究月刊，第18卷第4期，1995年4月。
15.黃銘傑，「中小企業保護與競爭政策─憲法增修『中小企業保障條款』的問題提起」，國立台灣大學法學論叢，第27卷第3期，1998年4月，頁61。
16.黃蔭基，「中小企業租稅法規調適─財稅觀點」，財稅研究，第29卷第5期，1997年9月。
17.詹明瑛，「美國中小企業度法規障礙之調適制度介紹」，台灣經濟研究月刊，第18卷第4期，1995年4月。
18.廖元豪，〈行政程序法命令訂定程序之研究〉，《華岡法粹》，第27期，頁323。
19.蔡宏明，「中小企業對經貿法規調適問題剖析」，台灣經濟研究月刊，第18卷第4期，1995年4月。
20.蔡孟彥，「中小企業稅制設計的思考方向」，中小企業發展季刊，第19期，頁124。
21.蔡宗珍，營業自由之保障及其限制-最高行政法院2005年11月22日庭長法官聯繫會議決議評釋，國立臺灣大學法學論叢，第35卷第3期，2006年5月。
22.蔡維音，「財產權之保護內涵與釋義學結構」，成大法學，第11期，2006年6月，頁51-72。
23.賴英照，憲法與國民經濟問題--92.12.25總統府舉行中樞慶祝行憲暨國父紀念月會講詞，司法周刊，2004年，頁11。
24.戴肇洋，「精進中小企業經濟地位與競爭策略之研析」，今日合庫，第34卷第12期，2008年。
25.簡世雄，「中小企業適法分析制度之意涵」，台灣經濟研究月刊，第18卷第4期，1995年4月。
(四)政府出版品及研究計畫
1.《憲法基本國策中有關經濟政策之檢討》，研究主持人：吳榮義，受委託單位：台灣經濟研究院，行政院研究發展考核委員會編印，2005年10月。
2.「2006年中小企業白皮書」，經濟部中小企業處、中華經濟研究院編印，2006年。
3.「2012年中小企業白皮書」，經濟部中小企業處、中華經濟研究院編印，2012年。
4.「2013中小企業白皮書」，經濟部中小企業處、中華經濟研究院編印，2013年。
二、英文部分(以下依照英文字母順序排序)
1.A Guide for Government Agencies：How to Comply with the Regulatory Flexibility Act,SBA Office ofAdovocacy(2012),at10.
2.Ace Lobster Co. v. Evans, 165 F. Supp. 2d 148 (D. R.I. 2001).
3.Ace Lobster Co., Inc. v. Evans, 165 F. Supp. 2d 148.
4.Aero. Repair Station Association v. F.A.A. 494 F.3d 161 (D.C. Cir. 2007).
5.Alenco Communications Inc v. Federal Communications Commission, 201 F.3d 608 (5th Cir. 2000).
6.Alenco Communications v. FCC, 201 F.3d 608 (5th Cir. 2000).
7.Allied Local and Reg’l Mfrs. Caucus v. EPA, 215 F.3d 61 (D.C. Cir. 2000).
8.American Federation of Labor v. Chertoff, 552 F.Supp.2d 999, (N.D.Cal. 2007).
9.American Moving and Storage Association v. DOD, 91 F. Supp. 2d 132 (D.D.C. 2000).
10.American Trucking Associations, Inc. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Respondent.commonwealth of Massachusetts, 175 F.3d 1027.
11.Ashley County Med. Ctr. v. Thompson, 205 F. Supp. 2d 1026 (E.D. Ark. May 13, 2002).
12.Associated Fisheries of Maine, Inc., v. Daley, 127 F.3d 104, 115 (1st Cir. 1997)
13.Barry A. Pineles, The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act:New Options in Regulatory Relief, 5 COMMLAW CONSPECTUS 29 (1997),at38.;§241,110 Stat. at 864-65.
14.Blue Water Fishermen’s Association v. Mineta, 122 F. Supp. 2d 150, 178 (D. D.C. 2000).
15.Cactus Corner, LLC v. United States Dept. of Agriculture, 346 F.Supp.2d 1075(E.D. Cal.,2004)
16.Cement Kiln Recycling Coalition v. Environmental Protection Agency, 255 F. 3d 855.
17.Chocolate Mfrs. Ass’n v. Block, 755 f.2d 1098, 1103 (4th Cir. 1985).
18.Economic Report of the President(1982)：http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/economic_reports/1982.pdf
19.Environmental Defense Center. v. E.P.A, 344 F.3d 832 (9th Cir. 2003).
20.EPA’s Action Development Process：Final Guidance for EPA Rulewriters: Regulatory.Flexibility Act, OPEI Regulatory Development Series ,2006.
21.EPA’s National Primary Drinking Water Regulations; Arsenic Clarifications to Compliance and New Source Contaminants Monitoring, 66 Fed. Reg. 6976, at6987 (2001).
22.Friends of Fiery Gizzard v. Farmers Home Admin., 61 F.3d 501, 505 (6th Cir. 1995).
23.Hall v. Evans, 165 F. Supp. 2d 114 (D.R.I. 2001).
24.Harlan Land Co. v. United States Dept. of Agriculture, 186 F. Supp. 2d 1076 (E.D. Cal. 2001).
25.Harris, L. ,Small Firm Responses to Employment Regulation., Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development(2003),Vol.9, No.3,at296-306.
26.In re Sealed Case, 666 F. Supp. 231, 236 (D.D.C. 1987)
27.Jean v. Nelson, 711 F.2d 1455 (11th Circuit 1983).
28.Keith W. Holman, THE REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ACT AT 25:IS THE LAW ACHIEVING ITS GOAL?, Fordham Urb. L.J. 1119(2005).
29.La Gloria Oil and Gas Co. v. United States, 56 Fed. Cl. 211 (2003)
30.Little Bay Lobster Company Inc v. L Evans, 352 F. 3d 462.
31.McLouth Steel Prods. v. EPA, 838 F.2d 1317, 1324 (D.C. Cir. 1988)
32.Michigan v. EPA, 213 F.3d 663 (D.C. Cir. 2000).
33.Mid-Tex Elec. Coop v. FERC, 773 F.2d 327 (D.C. Cir. 1985).
34.Mid-Tex Elec. Coop v. FERC, 773 F.2d 327 (D.C. Cir. 1985).
35.Mid-Tex Electric Cooperative Inc v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 773 F.2d 327.
36.Motor Equipment Manufacturers Association v. D Nichols Motor & Equipment, 142 F.3d 449 (D.C. Cir. 1998).
37.National Ass’n of Psychiatric Health Sys. v. Shalala, 120 F. Supp. 2d 33 (D.D.C. 2000)
38.National Association for Home Care v. Shalala, 135 F. Supp. 2d 161 (D.D.C. 2001).
39.National Association of Home Builders v. Army Corps of Engineers , 417 F.3d 1272 (D.C. Cir. 2005).
40.National Association of Mortgage Brokers v. Board. Of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 773 F. Supp. 2d 151 (D.D.C. 2011).
41.National Association of Psychiatric Health Sys. v. Shalala, 120 F. Supp. 2d 33 (D. D.C.2000).
42.National Propane Gas Ass'n v. US DEPT. OF TRANS, 43 F. Supp. 2d 665.
43.National Telephone Cooperative Association v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, 563 F.3d 536 (C.A. D.C. 2009)
44.Navajo Refining Co. v. United States, 58 Fed. Cl. 200 (2003).
45.North Carolina Fisheries Ass'n, Inc. v. Daley, 16 F. Supp. 2d 647 (E.D. Va. 1997).
46.North Carolina Fisheries Association v. Daley, 16 F. Supp. 2d 647 (E.D. Va. 1997).
47.North Carolina Fisheries Association v. Daley, 27 F. Supp. 2d 650 (E.D. Va. 1998).
48.Northwest Mining Association v. Babbitt, 5 F.Supp. 2d 9, (D.D.C. 1998)
49.PAUL R. VERKUIL, A CRITICAL GUIDE TO THE REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ACT, Duke Law Journal No. 2(1982).
50.Polich, Jeffrey J.,Judicial Review and the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act: An Early Examination of When and Where Judges are Using Their Newly Granted Power over Federal Regulatory Agencies Note,William and Mary Law Review (1999-2000),at1437.
51.Revised Interim Guidance for Epa Rulewriters: Regulatory Flexibility Act As Amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(1992),at 18.
52.Roche v. Evans, 249 F. Supp. 2d 47 (D. Mass. 2003).
53.Small Businesses in Telecomm. v. FCC, 251 F.3d 1015, 1025 (D.C. Cir. 2001).
54.Southern Offshore Fishing Ass'n v. Daley, 995 F. Supp. 1411.
55.The RFA in a Nutshell:A Condensed Guide to the Regulatory Flexibility Act,SBA Office of Advocacy(2010).
56.The State of Alanama v. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Centers for medicare , Medicaid Services, ET AL.,Case No.2:08-CV-881-MEF-TFM, (M.D. Ala. 2010).
57.Theiss v. Principi, 18 Vet. App. 204 (2004).
58.THOMAS 0. SARGENTICH ,Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act,Administrative Law Review 49 Admin. L. Rev. (1997),at131.
59.W. MARK CRAIN, THE IMPACT OF REGULATORY COSTS ON SMALL FIRMS, under contract number SBHQ-03-M-0522(2005).
60.White Eagle Cooperative Association v. Charles F. Conner, Acting Secretary, United States Department of Agriculture, 553 F.3d 467 (7th Cir. 2009).
三、網路資源
1.U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission：http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/plan/regflexibilityact.cfm
2.中小企業認定標準：http://www.nasme.org.tw/front/bin/ptdetail.phtml?Part=ray3
3.中小企業營運法規調適計畫：http://www.moea.gov.tw/ad/Ad02/content/ContentDetail.aspx?menu_id=3848
4.台灣綜合研究院：http://www.tri.org.tw/ceo/
5.美國小企業署：http://www.sba.gov/advocacy/823
6.經濟部中小企業處網頁：http://www.moeasmea.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=10203&ctNode=689&mp=1