Research Programs
More
What are you looking for?
Showing 8 of 521 Publications in Financial Regulation & Corporate Governance
TOTM First, Joel Trachtman of Tufts’ (great and soon-to-be better) Fletcher School has started up a new international trade blog, called International Economic Law and Policy. . . .
First, Joel Trachtman of Tufts’ (great and soon-to-be better) Fletcher School has started up a new international trade blog, called International Economic Law and Policy. If you know anything about international trade law and/or economics, you know Joel Trachtman and thus you know that this will be a must-read. He has been joined at the blog by Columbia Law’s Petros Mavroidis.
Read the full piece here.
TOTM We all know that our securities regulatory regime is predominantly a disclosure regime, meaning the regulators, for the most part, don’t impose substantive regulations on . . .
We all know that our securities regulatory regime is predominantly a disclosure regime, meaning the regulators, for the most part, don’t impose substantive regulations on securities issuers, but require only accurate, timely disclosure of certain information. And as against a more intrusive, substantive regime, I think this is preferable, even in its current, fairly intrusive form. But too often disclosure is presumed by commentators (and regulators) to be fairly costless — meaning that, even if it doesn’t do what it’s supposed to do, it imposes no great cost, and if it succeeds it does so quite cheaply. This is what Larry means when he refers to regulations as “chicken soup.” I think this presumption is often under-supported.
Scholarship In this short essay, we take on some of the common claims surrounding the law and economics of the backdating of options. Most of these claims are rooted in the basic argument that backdating options amounts to concealment of compensation.
In this short essay, we take on some of the common claims surrounding the law and economics of the backdating of options. Most of these claims are rooted in the basic argument that backdating options amounts to concealment of compensation. While we agree that backdating may have amounted to a technical rule violation in some cases, there is actually no concealment and, in fact, backdated options are fully disclosed when granted, and their value incorporated into stock price. We also challenge a few other myths surrounding the practice of backdating options.
Scholarship Abstract Behavioral law and economics scholars who advance paternalistic policy proposals typically employ static models of decision-making behavior, despite the dynamic effects of paternalistic policies. . . .
Behavioral law and economics scholars who advance paternalistic policy proposals typically employ static models of decision-making behavior, despite the dynamic effects of paternalistic policies. In this article, we consider how paternalistic policies fare under a dynamic account of decision-making that incorporates learning and motivation effects. This approach brings out two important limitations on the efficiency effects of paternalistic regulations. First, if preferences and biases are endogenous to institutional forces, paternalistic government regulations may perpetuate and even magnify a given bias and cause other adverse psychological effects. Second, for some biases, it will be more efficient to invest resources in debiasing than to change legal rights and remedies or, in some cases, to do nothing in light of the natural variation in irrational propensities. We propose dynamic models for determining ex ante and ex post when accommodation of bias will be second-best efficient. These models direct decision-makers to consider (1) the efficiency cost of the bias; (2) the extent to which accommodation worsens the bias or, alternatively, the extent to which non-accommodation improves the bias or has other benefits; and (3) the potential for education or other mechanisms to debias an individual. We argue that the concept of “cognitive hazard” – the potential for the costs of a bias to increase as individuals are insulated from the adverse effects of the bias – should be added to the concept of moral hazard as important qualifications to paternalistic proposals.
Scholarship In this article we examine the use of business documents to prove antitrust violations. Such usage has long occurred in the courts and regulatory agencies. More recently, there has been a scholarly effort to justify the use of such documents and the rhetoric they contain in antitrust analysis.
This Article considers the implications for antitrust law and policy of the relationship between business rhetoric and economic analysis. We maintain that antitrust analysis should remain firmly rooted in economics and that courts must be wary of the role of business rhetoric in antitrust analysis and adjudication. This is not to say that “market realities” reflected in business documents and testimony should not be considered in antitrust cases. Rather, courts and policy makers should recognize the distinction between the market realities themselves and expressions or characterizations of those realities for legally irrelevant business purposes. An important implication is that regulators’ and courts’ reliance on business documents is misplaced, and much of this material should be excluded from consideration by courts.
Scholarship Abstract Tax evasion is still widespread around the world, among the most advanced countries too. Its level in Italy is comparatively very high, as it . . .
Tax evasion is still widespread around the world, among the most advanced countries too. Its level in Italy is comparatively very high, as it is commonly recognized. This essay offers a broad non-technical outline of the main topics concerning tax evasion, from the economist’s point of view. The first section introduces the paper, summarizes its main contents, and depicts the basic conclusions and suggestions. The second section is devoted to a critical survey of existing empirical estimates on evasion magnitude, both in Italy and in other Western countries. Some figures on tax evasion consequences in Italy are then briefly discussed. The third section focuses on individuals’ decision to evade, inside the framework built on the classical grounds of Allingham-Sandmo’s (A/S) model. It scrutinizes A/S model’s hypotheses and implications and finally introduces some other factors which may prove relevant for the decision to evade taxes. According to this framework, the fourth section analytically derives the main properties of new audit procedures, recently adopted or proposed in Italy
NOTE: The paper is in Italian.
Popular Media Even the smallest economic factor can scarcely escape the effects of global commerce today. For example, a local tomato farmer may be competing with foreign . . .
Even the smallest economic factor can scarcely escape the effects of global commerce today. For example, a local tomato farmer may be competing with foreign imports directly, exporting her produce abroad, or simply selling her tomatoes in a domestic market where the prevailing price is determined in part by the availability of competing foreign products. And it is not simply commercial activity that has an international flavor. Laws enacted in one country to protect the environment, labor standards, and competitive markets invariably affect citizens or governments of other countries.
Scholarship This article uses property rights theory and the theory of the firm to analyze the behavior of the participants in nonprofit organizations. It locates the failure of nonprofit oversight in the confluence of strict standing rules and nearly insurmountable agency costs.
This article uses property rights theory and the theory of the firm to analyze the behavior of the participants in nonprofit organizations. It locates the failure of nonprofit oversight in the confluence of strict standing rules and nearly insurmountable agency costs. The article repudiates the conventional solutions to the problem (ranging from relaxing standing limitations to restricting the use of the nonprofit form), and proposes a contractual solution through which nonprofits or their founders would secure the services of a set of independent agents to monitor and, where appropriate, enforce the nonprofit’s charter and the relevant fiduciary rules through judicial action. Because the monitoring agents would function within a market framework, market controls should operate to constrain the behavior of these agents. Thus donors, philanthropists, and beneficiaries would receive the benefit of effectively monitored corporate (or trust) agents who do not present a significant agency cost problem. The result should be increased accountability on the part of nonprofit agents to their donors or patrons without the serious threat of frivolous suits or politically-selective attorney general enforcement.
