Inside Asian Gaming

IAG NOV 2021年11月 亞博匯 22 LIMITING DIVIDENDS NOT THE ONLY SOLUTION UNDER MACAU GAMING LAW REVISIONS: MDME MDME：擬議博彩法修正案中的 限制股息並非唯一解決方案 A PROPOSAL by the Macau government to introduce limitations on the distribution of dividends by casino concessionaires to their shareholders has no parallel example within Macau’s legal framework, with the stated policy goals likely achievable via other mechanisms available under the legal system, according to a new paper from MdME Lawyers. The controversial dividend proposal was one of the more notable to emerge from possible amendments to Macau’s gaming law announced by the government on 14 September. In the first of a series of papers exploring the proposed gaming law amendments in more detail, MdME’s Rui Pinto Proença and Rui Filipe Oliveira note that the proposed dividend limitation is “difficult to harmonize with Macau’s legal framework”, with no such requirement having ever been introduced even as they relate to the concession contracts of essential public services like water and electricity supply. Although the stated objectives of the proposal – ensuring profits are better applied to promoting the sustainable and diversified development of Macau – are seen as legitimate, MdME says it “creates a significant disincentive to private investment and does not guarantee that the profits retained will be used to make further investments.” Instead, MdME suggests finding alternatives within Macau’s legal framework to reach the proposed goals without affecting the fundamental rights of shareholders under a free enterprise system, as provided in the Macau Basic Law. These alternatives, it says, could include writing specific investment obligations or spending targets for non-gaming activities into the license contracts of concessionaires – therefore allowing the concessionaires to better allocate their resources. They could also include the imposition of prudential rules around each company’s debt-to-equity or asset-to- equity ratios. 澳門政府 提出的制約博企向股東分配股息的建 議，在澳門的法律框架內並無先例。而MdME Lawyers在一篇論文中指出，其實可以通過法 律體系下的其他機制更好的實現既定的政策目 標。 澳門政府於9月14日公布博彩法修訂草 案，而該備受爭議的股息提案是其中較為顯著 的一條。 在詳細探討擬議博彩法修訂文本系列論文 的第一篇中，MdME的Rui Pinto Proença 和 Rui Filipe Oliveira指出，文本提出的股息限制 「與澳門的法律框架難以協調」，概因此前未 出現過此類要求，即使是涉及到水、電等公共 服務的專營權合同也未有過此類要求。 雖然提案的既定目標——確保利潤可更好 地用於促進澳門的可持續和多元化發展——被 認為是合法的，MdME表示，其「對私人投資 造成了極大的抑制，並不能保證保留的利潤可 用於進行進一步投資。」 相反地，MdME建議可在澳門的法律框 架內尋找替代方案，在不影響《澳門基本法》 規定的自由企業制度下股東的基本權利的情況 下，實現擬議目標。 其稱，替代方案可以是在與博企的合同中 寫入非博彩活動的具體投資義務或支出目標， 從而令到博企可以更好地分配資源。也可以小 幅提升稅率，或者對每家公司的債務股本或資 本股本實施審慎的規定。