随着资本市场的快速发展，股权质押因其简化的运营、高度的灵活性和不转让控制权受到上市公司股东的追捧。股权质押针对纾缓企业股东的营运资金压力、促进企业发展具有积极作用，但控股股东的质押规模不断扩张的同时，背后隐藏着的风险也逐渐暴露出来。A股市场上多家上市公司在股东进行股权质押行为后引发的不良后果，让企业面临风险，致使企业的发展停滞不前。基于上述情况，本文将从不同的角度分析股权质押形成的动因、以及给企业带来的经济后果、提出防范对策，避免控股股东股权质押给投资者、中小股东造成经济损失，降低股权质押给其带来的风险。

在此基础上，本文选取上市公司JH公司作为研究对象，基于现有的研究结论基础上，拟利用信息不对称理论、委托代理理论等理论基础出发，采用事件研究法、托宾Q值、Z-score方法等，通过对案例公司的发展历程及控股股东的股权质押情况，梳理了研究案例的股权质押规模、资金用途等。根据以上研究方法得出以下列结论：第一，JH公司进行高频次、高比例股权质押的动因主要为弥补资金缺口，该需求可能是企业自身或者控股股东个人，与市场的环境变化存在一定关系；第二，控股股东股权质押引发JH公司股价波动，当其频繁进行股权质押行为时，市场在短期内呈现出负面的情绪，说明股权质押公告披露后引起了利益相关者的不信任，对其可使用的流动性资金产生了质疑；第三，JH公司进行股权质押的背景下，在一定程度上，控股股东过度股权质押的行为导致了公司盈利能力的削弱，对公司的发展能力、营运能力的影响未产生积极作用。在高比例、高频次质押情况下，对于财务风险存在一定程度的消极影响；第四，控股股东质押程度较高的年份，股权质押行为对JH公司的长期价值并未造成明显的负面影响。其次，针对文章研究得出的股权质押带来的不良经济后果的相关结论，本文向上市公司JH公司及市场监管部门提出了相关的建议与防范措施：增强企业内部控制体系对控股股东行为的监督与制衡，遏制控股股东的贪婪因子，立法严格限制股权质押比例并完善股权质押披露制度等方面的建议，降低股权质押的风险，杜绝造成不良经济后果。

With the rapid development of the capital market, equity pledge is sought after by shareholders of listed companies due to its simplified operation, high degree of flexibility and non-transfer of control. Equity pledge has a positive effect on relieving the working capital pressure of corporate shareholders and promoting the development of the enterprise, but while the pledge scale of the controlling shareholder continues to expand, the hidden risks behind it are gradually exposed. The adverse consequences caused by the equity pledge behavior of many listed companies in the A-share market have exposed enterprises to risks and caused the development of enterprises to stagnate. Based on the above situation, this article will analyze the motivation of the formation of equity pledge and the economic consequences to enterprises from different perspectives, and put forward preventive measures to avoid economic losses caused by equity pledge by controlling shareholders to investors and small and medium-sized shareholders, and reduce the risks brought by equity pledge.

On this basis, this paper selects JH Company, a listed company, as the research object, and on the basis of the existing research conclusions, it is proposed to use the theoretical basis of information asymmetry theory and principal-agent theory, and use the event research method, Tobin Q-value, Z-score method, etc., through the development history of the case company and the equity pledge of the controlling shareholder, and sort out the equity pledge scale and capital use of the research case. Based on the above research methods, the following conclusions are drawn: first, the main motivation for JH to carry out high-frequency and high-proportion equity pledges is to make up for the funding gap, which may be the enterprise itself or the controlling shareholder, which has a certain relationship with the changes in the market environment; Second, the equity pledge of the controlling shareholder caused the stock price of JH to fluctuate, and when it frequently carried out equity pledges, the market showed negative sentiment in the short term, indicating that the disclosure of the equity pledge announcement caused distrust among stakeholders and questioned the liquidity funds available to it. Third, in the context of JH's equity pledge, to a certain extent, the controlling shareholder's excessive equity pledge has led to the weakening of the company's profitability, and has not had a positive impact on the company's development ability and operating ability. In the case of high proportion and high frequency pledge, there is a certain degree of negative impact on financial risk; Fourth, in the years when the controlling shareholder's pledge degree was relatively high, the equity pledge did not have a significant negative impact on the long-term value of JH Company. Secondly, in view of the relevant conclusions of the adverse economic consequences brought about by the equity pledge obtained from the research of this paper, this paper puts forward relevant suggestions and preventive measures to the listed company JH Company and the market supervision department: strengthen the supervision and checks and balances of the internal control system of the controlling shareholder, curb the greed factor of the controlling shareholder, strictly limit the proportion of equity pledge and improve the disclosure system of equity pledge, so as to reduce the risk of equity pledge and prevent adverse economic consequences.

[1]Hao Z ，Tian J ，Hanbin C .Do controlling shareholders collude with their related large shareholders? Evidence of equity pledges and shareholding increases from China[J].International Review of Financial Analysis，2023，89

[2]Chan K， Chen H and Liu Y. Shares Pledged and Corporate Repurchase[R].Working Paper. 2015(13):63-65

[3]Kao，L．， Chiou，J． and Chen，A．， The agency problems，firm performance and monitoring mechanisms: The evidence from collateralized shares in Taiwan ． Corporate Governance: An International Ｒeview，2004.(3)．

[4]Yeh Y，Ko C，Su Y.Ultimate control and expropriation of minority shareholders:new evidence from Taiwan[J].Academia Economic Papers，2003(3):263-299.

[5]Wang Y，R K Chou. The Impact of Share Pledging Regulations on Stock Trading and Firm Valuation[J].Journal of Banking and Finance，2018，89(4):1-13.

[6]Qigui Liu and Gary Tian.Controlling shareholder，expropriations and firm’s leverage decision. Evidence from Chinese Nontradable share reform[J].Journal of Corporate Finance.2012(21):43-51.

[7]Jiang G， Lee CMC，and Yue H. Tunneling through Intercorporate Loans: The China experience[J]. Journal of Financial Economics，2010，98(1):1-20.

[8]Cronqvist H ，Nilsson M .Agency Costs of Controlling Minority Shareholders[J].Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis，2003，38(4):695-719.

[9]Konan Chan， Hung-Kun Chen，etal.Share pledges and margincall pressure[J]. Journal of Corporate Finance，2018，52:96-117.

[10]Ronald A，Michael P.Insider share-pledging and firm risk［R］.Working Paper，2005.

[11]Attig N ， Fong W M ， Gadhoum Y ， et al. Effects of large shareholding on information asymmetry and stock liquidity[J]. Journal of Banking & Finance， 2004， 30(10):2875-2892.

[12]Yeh Y， Ko C， Su Y. Ultimate control and expropriation of minority shareholders:new evidence from Taiwan[J]. Academia Economic Papers，2003，(3):263-299.

[13]Chen ，and Hu. The Controlling Shareholder's Personal Stock Loan and Firm Performance[J].Expert Systems with Application，2001，（21）.

[14]Zeineb Barka，Taher Hamza. The effect of large controlling shareholders on equity prices in France: monitoring or entrenchment?[J]. Journal of Management and Governance，2020，24(3).

[15]Deren X ， Ke L.Share pledging by controlling shareholders and real earnings management of listed

firms[J].China Journal of AccountingStudies，2018(2):109-119.

[16]Bozec Y, Laurin C. Large Shareholder Entrenchment and Performance: Empirical Evidence from Canada[J]. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 2008, 35(1-2):25-49.

[17]Guoping Li. The pervasiveness and severity of tunneling by controlling shareholders in China[J]. China Economic Review，2010，21(2).

[18]Claessens S，Fan JPH，Djankov S，et al. On Expropriation of Minority Shareholders:Evidence from EastAsia[J].Social Science Electronic Publishing，2000(2088).

[19]Liu H X， Zhang Z H. The Impact of Managerial Myopia on Environmental，Social and Governance (ESG) Engagement: Evidence from Chinese Firms [J]. Energy Economics，2023， 22(122).

[20]Chen G F，Han J，Yuan H W. Urban Digital Economy Development，Enterprise Innovation，and ESG Performance in China [J]. Frontiers in Environmental Science， 2022， 10(10).

[21]庄俊明,林永佳,于守金.控股股东股权质押与公司战略激进度[J].管理现代化,2022,42(01):40-47.DOI:10.19634/j.cnki.11-1403/c.2022.01.007.

[22]刘信兵.民营上市公司股权质押融资主要动因、风险隐患及政策建议[J].金融经济,2016,(24):155-156.DOI:10.14057/j.cnki.cn43-1156/f.2016.24.061.

[23]王斌，蔡安辉，冯洋.大股东股权质押、控制权转移风险与公司业绩[J].系统工程理论与实践，2013，33(07):1762-1773.

[24]王亚茹，赵耀，乔贵涛.控股股东股权质押对权益资本成本的影响[J].财会月刊，2018，(21):59-68.DOI:10.19641/j.cnki.42-1290/f.2018.21.009.

[25]杜丽贞，马越，陆通.中国民营上市公司股权质押动因及纾解策略研究[J].宏观经济研究，2019，(07):148-160.DOI:10.16304/j.cnki.11-3952/f.2019.07.013.

[26]袁智慧.ST欧浦家族控制下的大股东掏空行为及其影响研究[D].浙江工商大学,2021.DOI:10.27462/d.cnki.ghzhc.2021.000102.

[27]侯婧,朱莲美.控股股东股权质押与公司非效率投资行为[J].财会月刊,2018,(18):81-89.DOI:10.19641/j.cnki.42-1290/f.2018.18.011.

[28]黎来芳.商业伦理 诚信义务与不道德控制——鸿仪系“掏空”上市公司的案例研究[J].会计研究，2005(11):8-14.

[29]范宇辰.大股东股权质押动机分析——以银亿股份为例[J].现代营销(下旬刊),2019,(09):175-177.DOI:10.19932/j.cnki.22-1256/f.2019.09.106.

[30]李腊生,贺诚.实控人分类与股权质押道德风险测度[J].统计研究,2022,39(02):96-113.DOI:10.19343/j.cnki.11-1302/c.2022.02.007.

[31]王雄元,欧阳才越,史震阳.股权质押、控制权转移风险与税收规避[J].经济研究,2018,53(01):138-152.

[32]谢德仁,郑登津,崔宸瑜.控股股东股权质押是潜在的“地雷 ”吗?——基于股价崩盘风 险视角的研究[J]. 管理世界,2016,(05):128- 140+188.DOI:10. 19744/j.cnki.11- 1235/f.2016.05.011.

[33]杨茺.控股股东股权质押对审计风险的影响研究[J].中国乡镇企业会计,2024,(03):135-137.

[34]刘英男,柳泽宇.控股股东股权质押、信息透明度与股价崩盘风险[J].中国市场,2024,(04):37-40.DOI:10.13939/j.cnki.zgsc.2024.04.010.

[35]滕晓梅，祝婧然，周倩倩.房地产企业最终控制人股权质押对上市公司价值的侵占效应[J].财会月刊，2016，(32):21-24.DOI:10.19641/j.cnki.42-1290/f.2016.32.004.

[36]沈冰，陈锡娟.控股股东股权质押公告的市场反应研究[J].云南财经大学学报，2019，35(10):104-112.DOI:10.16537/j.cnki.jynufe.000498.

[37]袁明.上市公司股权质押风险与防控措施探析[J].财经界，2020，(10):96-98.

[38]朱文莉，陈鑫鑫，阚立娜.股权质押如何影响上市公司价值[J].财会月刊，2020，(02):48-55.DOI:10.19641/j.cnki.42-1290/f.2020.02.007.

[39]刘娅，李欣，赵淑鹏.机构持股、大股东股权质押与企业绩效[J].财会通讯，2021，(22):41-43.DOI:10.16144/j.cnki.issn1002-8072.2021.22.008.

[40]唐玮,夏晓雪,姜付秀.控股股东股权质押与公司融资约束[J].会计研究,2019,(06):51-57.

[41]吴静.控股股东股权质押等于“掏空”吗?——基于中国上市公司股权质押公告的实证分析[J].经济论坛，2016，(08):65-70.

[42]芦亚琴,许延明.股权质押对A公司财务绩效的影响研究[J].中国管理信息化,2022,25(17):62-64.

[43]王新红，曹帆.控股股东股权质押是否增加企业的财务风险?——来自民营企业的经验证据[J].南京审计大学学报，2021，18(03):42-50.

[44]许洋.两权分离下大股东控制对公司价值的影响研究[D].浙江工商大学，2015.

[45]王斌，蔡安辉，冯洋.大股东股权质押、控制权转移风险与公司业绩[J].系统工程理论与实践，2013，33(07):1762-1773.

[46]郝项超，梁琪.最终控制人股权质押损害公司价值么?[J].会计研究，2009，(07):57-63+96.

[47]周珏廷,李善民.国有股东如何化解民营企业股权质押危机？——对国有股东“用脚投票”治理机制的实证检验[J].证券市场导报,2023,(10):25-38.

[48]姜付秀，申艳艳，蔡欣妮等.多个大股东的公司治理效应:基于控股股东股权质押视角[J].世界经济，2020，43(02):74-98.DOI:10.19985/j.cnki.cassjwe.2020.02.005.

[49]胡海峰，魏涛，刘锦华.数字金融、控股股东股权质押与掏空治理[J].经济管理，2023，45(05):170-188.DOI:10.19616/j.cnki.bmj.2023.05.010.

[50]凌暄,王志涛.成长机会门槛下股权质押与企业价值研究[J].财会通讯,2020,(21):77-81.DOI:10.16144/j.cnki.issn1002-8072.2020.21.016.

[51]陈丹,王珊珊,刘畅.控股股东股权质押对企业价值的影响研究——基于研发投入视角[J].工业技术经济,2020,39(09):130-135.

[52]连玉君,刘畅.质押新规、股价崩盘风险与公司价值[J].中山大学学报(社会科学版),2021,61(05):182-196.DOI:10.13471/j.cnki.jsysusse.2021.05.020.

[53]李旎，郑国坚.市值管理动机下的控股股东股权质押融资与利益侵占[J].会计研究，2015，(05):42-49+94.

[54]吴静.控股股东股权质押等于“掏空”吗?——基于中国上市公司股权质押公告的实证分析[J].经济论坛，2016，(08):65-70.

[55]吴成颂，杨帆.控股股东股权质押与企业ESG责任履行：抑制还是促进?[J].中国石油大学学报(社会科学版)，2023，39(04):99-109.DOI:10.13216/j.cnki.upcjess.2023.04.0012.

[56]李常青，李宇坤，李茂良.控股股东股权质押与企业创新投入[J].金融研究，2018，(07):143-157.

[57]叶陈刚，张琦，黄冠华.大股东股权质押与企业投资效率——基于我国A股上市公司的经验证据[J].技术经济，2020，39(07):159-168.

[58]朱新蓉，熊礼慧.股权质押、内部控制与非效率投资[J].中南财经政法大学学报，2020，(03):97-106.DOI:10.19639/j.cnki.issn1003-5230.2020.0025.