本文實證研究主要包含兩個部份：(1)比較臺灣與大陸企業在負債比率以及在一些資本結構決定因素方面是否有顯著的差異。(2)臺灣與大陸企業資本結構決定因素對於其負債比率影響是否會因兩岸企業各自面臨不同制度與代理問題而有所差異？針對第一個部份之實證研究，本文將以t-test、Mann-Whitney U-test以及三因子變異數分析進行比較。至於第二部份之實證研究，本文首先運用多元迴歸模式以比較兩岸企業資本結構決定因素對於其負債比率影響之主要差異所在。其次，藉由從分析兩岸企業面臨不同的制度與代理問題的層面，對於差異原因提出解釋。 本文計選取大陸403家上市公司與臺灣396家上市公司的樣本進行分析，實證結果如下：(1)大陸企業比臺灣企業有略微較高的負債水準。就負債代理成本、獲利能力與成長性來看，大陸企業則顯著高於臺灣企業。至於臺灣企業在營業風險與非負債稅盾利益顯著高於大陸企業。(2)負債代理成本、獲利能力、非負債稅盾利益、企業成長性與企業規模對於兩岸企業負債比率的影響是有差異的，而導致此差異的原因似乎可從兩岸企業各自面臨的不同的制度與代理問題的層面予以解釋。

The empirical study in this paper is composed of two segments. First, we examine whether there are significant differences between Mainland China and Taiwanese firms in the debt ratio and the capital structure determinants. Next, we investigate how the institutional differences and agency problems affect capital structure in Mainland China and Taiwan. for the first segment, t-test, Mann-whitney U-test, and three-way analysis of variance are applied. Multiple regression analysis is applied for the second segment. Using the sample of 403 Mainland China firms and 396 Taiwanese firms, the empirical findings are: (1)The results indicate that debt ratio is slightly higher in Mainland China in Taiwan, and that agency cost, profitability, and growth are significantly larger in Mainland China than in Taiwan. conversely, business risk and nondebt tax shield are significantly larger in Taiwan than in Mainland China. (2)Agency cost, profitability, nondebt tax shield, growth, and firm size show different effects on debt ratios of Mainland China and Taiwan. these eff4ects may be explained by different institutional and agency problem.