摘要
當企業在經營的過程中無法履行債務，債權人最終難免訴諸法律途徑以保障自身權益。在美國，解決債權糾紛最常見的兩種法定程序分別載於美國破產法 ( United States Bankruptcy Code ) 之第七章 ( Chapter 7 ) 與第十一章 ( Chapter 11 )。第七章所規範之程序與我國清算程序相近，即在法院指定之受託管理人監督下，清算違約企業之資產以履行其債務；第十一章者則與我國重整程序相近，藉由與債權人協商、談判，重新訂定企業與債權人間之債務額度以及還款計畫。而在第十一章的程序中，又可分為傳統式重整以及預先包裹式重整。兩者之主要差異在於還款計劃的協商、訂定之程序有所不同，而這些差異將進而影響企業在重整過程中所需負擔之直接成本與間接成本。

過去文獻在探討兩者差異時，主要為何種企業特性將促使企業進行不同之選擇 ( Yost, 2002 )；或是企業聲請破產保護時股價報酬之表現( Eberhart et al., 1998 )；亦或是探討不同重整模式間之成本差異 ( Betker, 1997 )。本文除欲探討影響企業選擇重整模式之企業特性外，進一步以 Tobin’s Q 及市價淨值比作為企業價值之代理變數，藉此探討選擇不同重整模式之企業，是否在脫離重整程序後，在企業價值上有顯著之差異。

Abstract
When an enterprise can not fulfill its obligation to repay the debt, the creditors would resort to legal means eventually. In the U.S., The most two common legal procedures are separately recorded in the Chapter 7 and the Chapter 11 of United States Bankruptcy Code. The procedure governed by the Chapter 7 is close to the procedure of liquidation in Taiwan. It liquidates the assets of debtor and uses the proceeds to repay the liabilities. And the Chapter 11 procedure which is also known as reorganization rearranges the face value, terms and the interest rates of the debts through the negotiation and consultation between the debtor and the creditors. Furthermore, the Chapter 11 can be divided into traditional reorganization and prepackaged organization. The main difference between the two types is the order of the filing date and the negotiation of the reorganized plan. Due to the difference, firms reorganize with different types would burden different levels of the direct cost and indirect cost resulted from the procedure.
The past literatures concerning prepackaged reorganization are researching the firm characteristics which influence the choice of the reorganizing type ( Yost, 2002 ) , examining the difference of stock return and the cost between the firms emerging from the two types of Chapter 11 ( Eberhart et al., 1998; Betker, 1997 ). This article discusses the firm’s characteristics which influence the choice of the reorganizing type. In addition, this article takes Tobin’s Q and Price-to-Book ratio as the proxy of a firm’s value to examine if the firm’s value of firms emerging from different types of reorganization would be significantly different.

Betker, B. L., 1995. “An Empirical Examination of Prepackaged Bankruptcy,”
Financial Management 24: 3-18.

Betker, B. L., 1997. “The administrative Costs of Debt Restructurings: Some
Recent Evidence,” Financial Management 26: 56-68.

Cagwin, D., and M. J. Bouwman, 2002. “The association between activity-based
costing and improvement in financial performance,” Management Accounting Research 13 (1): 1-39.

Chatterjee, S., U. S. Dhillon, and G. G. Ramírez, 1996. “Resolution of
Financial Distress: Debt Restructurings via Chapter 11, Prepackaged Bankruptcies, and Workouts,” Financial Management 25: 5-18.

Cheng, T. W., K. L. Wang, and C. C. Weng, 2000. “A study of technical
efficiencies of CPA firms in Taiwan,” Review of Pacific Basin Financial Markets
and Policies 3 (1): 27-44.

Dahiya, S., K. John, M. Puri, and G. Ramírez.,2003. “Debtor-in-Possession Financing
and Bankruptcy Resolution: Empirical Evidence,” Journal of FinancialEconomics 69: 259-280.

Daily, C. M., 1996. “Governance Patterns in Bankruptcy Reorganizations,” Strategic
Management Journal 17: 355-375.

D’Aveni, R. A., 1990. “Top managerial prestige and organizational bankruptcy,”
Organization Science 1: 121-142.

Eberhart, A., E. Altman, and R. Aggarwal, 1998. “The Equity Performance of Firms
Emerging from Bankruptcy,” Journal of Finance 54: 1855-1868

Flagg, J. C., G. A. Giroux and C. E. Wiggins, 1991. “Predicting corporate bankruptcy
using failing firms,” Review of Financial Economics 1: 67-78.

Gales, L. M. and I. F. Kesner, 1994. “An analysis of board of director size and
composition in bankrupt organizations,” Journal of Business Research
30(3): 271-282.

Gosselin, M. 1997. “The effect of strategy and organizational structure on the adoption
and implementation of activity-based costing,” Accounting, Organizations and Society 22 (2): 105-122.

Hambrick, D. C. and R. A. D’Aveni, 1988. “Large corporate failures as downward
spirals,” Administrative Science Quarterly 33: 1-23.

Hambrick, D. C. and R. A. D’Aveni, 1992. “Top team deterioration as part of the
downward spiral of large corporate bankruptcies,” Management Science 38:
1445-1466.

Ittner, C. D., W. N. Lanen, and D. F. Larcker, 2002. “The association between
activity-based costing and manufacturing performance,” Journal of Accounting Research 40 (3): 711-726.

Libby, T., and J. H. Waterhouse. 1996. “Predicting change in management accounting
Systems,” Journal of Management Accounting Research 8: 137-150.

Rizzi, J., 1991. “Opportunities in DIP financing,” The Bankers Magazine, July/August:
43–49.

Rohman, M., 1990. “ Financing Chapter 11 companies in the 1990,” Journal of
Applied Corporate Finance 5: 96–101.

Tashijian, E., R. Lease, and J. McConnell, 1996. “ Prepacks: an empirical analysis of
Prepackaged bankruptcies,” Journal of Financial Economics 40: 135–162.

Trueman, B., M. H. Franco Wong, and X. J. Zhang, 2000. “The eyeballs
have it: Searching for the value in Internet stocks,” Journal of Accounting
Research 38 (Supplement): 137-163.

Yost, K., 2002. “The Choice Among Traditional Chapter 11, Prepackaged Bankruptcy,
and Out-of-Court Restructuring,” Krannert Graduate School of Management,
Purdue University working paper

Zellner, A., and H. Theil, 1962. “Three stage least squares: Simultaneous estimate of
simultaneous equations,” Econometrica 29: 54–78.