Research On The Application Of Materiality Standards For Disclosure Of Information Under The Perspective Of Administrative Punishment

The “significance” standard for information disclosure serves as a criterion for determining whether information is significant and plays a very important role in administrative penalties.In recent years,with the gradual advancement of China’s registration system reform,the importance of information disclosure has become increasingly prominent.Therefore,it is of great significance to use the “significance”standard for information disclosure well in administrative penalty practice to curb illegal acts of information disclosure and protect investors’ legitimate rights and interests.However,there are still many deficiencies in the application of the“significance” standard for information disclosure by securities regulatory agencies in administrative penalty practice.These deficiencies are not conducive to the stability of the capital market and investor protection.In order to promote better use of the “significance” standard for information disclosure in administrative penalty practice,this article analyzes the “significance” standard for information disclosure from three perspectives under administrative penalty:Firstly,in order to clarify the relationship between the “significance” standard for information disclosure and administrative penalties,it is necessary to clarify the connotation of the “significance” standard.Therefore,Chapter 1 analyzes three definitions and their basis for defining the “significance” standard for information disclosure: The definition basis for “price sensitivity criteria” is stock price fluctuations;The definition basis for “rational investor criteria” is investor decisionmaking;The definition basis for “issuer quality disadvantage criteria” is initial accuracy.At the same time,Chapter 1 also sorts out these main judgment factors and their causal relationship with significance.Secondly,on top of sorting out these definitions and bases for defining significance standards clearly,Chapter 2 analyzes how these three significance standards have been applied through cases from CSRC’s administrative penalties.Then based on these applications Chapter 3 points out problems with both significance itself as well as its application in administrative penalty practice.These problems mainly include ambiguity within significance standards themselves;failure within administrative supervision;imbalance within distribution of administrative responsibility.Finally based on these problems with both significance itself as well as its application in administrative penalty practice that were sorted out earlier this paper proposes some targeted suggestions including improving legislation on significance standards;innovating ways to administratively supervise;clarifying responsibilities under significance standards.The innovation point of this paper mainly lies within its innovative viewpoints.By analyzing significance standards this paper sorts out factors that determine stock price fluctuations within price sensitivity criteria such as time and magnitude while pointing out that rational investor criteria should focus on investor decision-making while also clarifying that initial accuracy should be used as core basis when defining issuer quality disadvantage criteria.This paper has shortcomings such as: Firstly due to my own knowledge level and research ability I only analyzed significance standards from an administrative penalty perspective which makes my research perspective one-sided while lacking depth but not breadth;Second,the “significance” standard for information disclosure is a small research topic with relatively few related literature,so this article is slightly insufficient in the theoretical analysis of the “significance”standard for information disclosure.