我國證券交易法第二十二條之二規定，可藉由美國初級市場規範法理，利用「承銷商」與「再次發行」等概念之操作，可充分說明該規定完全符合美國Rule 144之規範精神與目的，並非只是內部人股權移轉管理之規定而已，更與內線交易之防止無關。惟參酌比較美國相關法制後，不難發現我國證券交易法再次發行之規範，仍有若干缺失及矛盾，亟待修法彌補。首先，現行證券交易法第二十二條之二第一項第一款之「申請核准」實屬舊法概念，應予修正。其次，第二十二條之二第一項第二款所適用之證券，既然為已完成公開發行之證券，我國卻錯誤移植美國限制性證券（私募證券）之閉鎖期間（六個月），誠屬不當，應予刪除。同理，我國亦無必要依Rule 144之規範，限制內部人轉讓之數量。最後則建議第四十三條之八第一項第二款之規定，應參酌第二十二條之二第一項第三款之規定，依美國第4(11/2)條豁免之法理修改，並刪除該款有關再次發行安全港－轉讓限制內容規定，與第四十三條之八第一項第一款之規定共同架構私募證券次級市場之規範。

In the United States, the 1933 Act requires any person selling securities to either register the securities with the SEC or qualify for an exemption from the registration requirement. Section 4(1) exempts from the registration requirement of Section 5 all sales of securities except sales by “issuers, underwriters or dealers.” A number of transactions, whose informational dangers are comparable to those of a public offering, are subject to registration. For example, distributions to public investors by persons acting as agents for the issuer; persons who previously purchased securities from the issuer in private transaction; and persons in a control position with the issuer and control persons. Hence, control persons who wish to sell without registration will comply with SEC Rule 144. Actually, Section 22-1 of the Securities and Exchange Act in Taiwan, has copied Rule 144. The large majority of resale rules, however, do not comply with the principle of SEC rule-based safe harbors for resale. Consequently, this article has proposed regulatory reforms to improve the viability of Section 22-1. In any case, the resale rules of control persons should follow Rule 144.