corporate_law   41

Lords of Misrule | Matt Stoller - The Baffler - Sept 2017
In 1937, future Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson gave a toast at the New York State Bar Association on the civic responsibilities of the legal profession.…
Evernote  legal_culture  corporate_law  legal_system  US_politics  US_legal_system  US_government  white-collar_crime  criminal_justice  DOJ  fraud  financial_crisis  financial_regulation  SEC  antitrust  Obama_administration  accountability  from instapaper
september 2017 by dunnettreader
David Ciepley - Beyond Public and Private: Toward a Political Theory of the Corporation (2013) | American Political Science Review on JSTOR
This article challenges the liberal, contractual theory of the corporation and argues for replacing it with a political theory of the corporation. Corporations are government-like in their powers, and government grants them both their external "personhood" and their internal governing authority. They are thus not simply private. Yet they are privately organized and financed and therefore not simply public. Corporations transgress all the basic dichotomies that structure liberal treatments of law, economics, and politics: public/private, government/market, privilege/equality, and status/contract. They are "franchise governments" that cannot be satisfactorily assimilated to liberalism. The liberal effort to assimilate them, treating them as contractually constituted associations of private property owners, endows them with rights they ought not have, exacerbates their irresponsibility, and compromises their principal public benefit of generating long-term growth. Instead, corporations need to be placed in a distinct category—neither public nor private, but "corporate"—to be regulated by distinct rules and norms. - downloaded via iphone to dbox
organizations  institutional_economics  corporations  corporate_citizenship  markets-dependence_on_government  article  corporate_control  institutions  management  public-private_gaps  bibliography  social_contract  liberalism  jstor  property_rights  downloaded  corporate_law  political_theory  managerialism  corporate_governance  corporate_personhood  firms-organization  property 
july 2017 by dunnettreader
Leo E. Strine - A Job Is Not a Hobby: The Judicial Revival of Corporate Paternalism and Its Problematic Implications :: SSRN - Journal of Corporation Law, 2015, Forthcoming (rev'd March 2015)
Supreme Court of Delaware; Harvard Law School; University of Pennsylvania Law School -- This article connects the Supreme Court’s decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby to the history of “corporate paternalism.” It details the history of employer efforts to restrict the freedom of employees, and legislative attempts to ensure worker freedom. It also highlights the role of employment in healthcare coverage, and situates the Affordable Care Act’s “minimum essential guarantees” in a historical and global context. The article also discusses how Hobby Lobby combines with the Supreme Court’s earlier decisions in Citizens United and National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius to constrain the government’s ability to extend the social safety net, and shows how those decisions put pressure on corporate law itself. -- Note: The article was the subject of lectures to the Securities Regulation Institute of Northwestern University School of Law and the American Constitution Society Student Chapter at Harvard Law School. -- PDF File: 76 -- Keywords: Hobby Lobby; corporate law; corporate paternalism -- right on Leo! -- downloaded pdf to Note
article  SSRN  US_constitution  US_legal_system  corporate_law  corporate_citizenship  corporate_governance  shareholders  freedom_of_conscience  SCOTUS  labor  labor_standards  employers  employee_benefits  welfare_economics  welfare_state  health_care  campaign_finance  downloaded 
july 2015 by dunnettreader
Leo E. Strine - The Dangers of Denial: The Need for a Clear-Eyed Understanding of the Power and Accountability Structure Established by the Delaware Law :: SSRN Wake Forest Law Review, 2015, Forthcoming (March 20, 2015)
Supreme Court of Delaware; Harvard Law School; Penn Law School -- There is now a tendency among those who believe that corporations should be more socially responsible to pretend that corporate directors do not have an obligation under Delaware corporate law to make stockholder welfare the sole end of corporate governance within the limits of their legal discretion. These advocates of CSR contend that Delaware directors may subordinate stockholder welfare to other interests, such as those of the company’s workers or society generally. (..) But, the problem with that argument is that it is inconsistent with both judge-made common law of corporations in Delaware and the design of the Delaware General Corporation Law. More important, pretending that the nation’s leading corporate law is fundamentally different than it is runs contrary to the goal of ensuring that for-profit corporations behave lawfully, responsibly, and ethically. Lecturing others to do the right thing without acknowledging the rules that apply to their behavior and the power dynamics to which they are subject is not a responsible path to social progress. Rather, it provides an excuse to avoid tougher policy challenges, such as advocating for stronger externality regulation and encouraging institutional investors to exercise their power as stockholders responsibly. Those challenges must be confronted if we are to ensure that for-profit corporations are vehicles for responsible, sustainable, long-term wealth creation. -- PDF File: 43 -- downloaded pdf to Note
US_legal_system  US_politics  corporate_law  corporate_citizenship  corporate_governance  shareholder_value  profit_maximization  principal-agent  fiduciaries  law-and-economics  CSR  capital_as_power  duties-legal  duties-civic  duty_of_care  duty_of_loyalty  Delaware_law  downloaded 
july 2015 by dunnettreader
Leo E. Strine , Nicholas Walter Originalist or Original: The Difficulties of Reconciling "Citizens United" with Corporate Law History :: SSRN - Notre Dame Law Review, 2015, Forthcoming (rev'd March 2015)
Leo E. Strine Jr., Supreme Court of Delaware; Harvard Law School; Penn Law School -- Nicholas Walter, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz -- Citizens United has been the subject of a great deal of commentary, but one important aspect of the decision that has not been explored in detail is the historical basis for Justice Scalia’s claims in his concurring opinion that the majority holding is consistent with originalism. In this article, we engage in a deep inquiry into the historical understanding of the rights of the business corporation as of 1791 and 1868 — two periods relevant to an originalist analysis of the First Amendment. Based on the historical record, Citizens United is far more original than originalist, and if the decision is to be justified, it has to be on jurisprudential grounds originalists traditionally disclaim as illegitimate. -- PDF File: 94 -- Keywords: Jurisprudence, constitutional interpretation, original intent, original understanding, originalism, election law, campaign finance reform, corporate personhood, general corporation statutes, political speech, First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti, Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad -- downloaded pdf to Note
article  SSRN  corporate_law  corporate_citizenship  US_constitution  constitutional_law  originalism  free_speech  civil_liberties  legal_history  legal_theory  legal_reasoning  elections  campaign_finance  politics-and-money  downloaded 
july 2015 by dunnettreader
Reinier Kraakman, Bernard S. Black - A Self Enforcing Model of Corporate Law :: SSRN - Harvard Law Review, vol. 109, pp. 1911-1982, 1996
This paper develops a "self-enforcing" approach to drafting corporate law for emerging capitalist economies, based on a case study: a model statute that we helped to develop for the Russian Federation, which formed the basis for the recently adopted Russian law on joint-stock companies. The paper describes the contextual features of emerging economies that make importing statutes from developed countries inappropriate, including the prevalence of controlled companies and the weakness of institutional, market, cultural, and legal constraints. Against this backdrop, we argue that the best legal strategy for protecting outside investors in emerging economies while simultaneously preserving the discretion of companies to invest is a self-enforcing model of corporate law. The self-enforcing model structures decisionmaking processes to allow large outside shareholders to protect themselves from insider opportunism with minimal resort to legal authority, including the courts. Among the examples of self-regulatory statutory provisions are a mandatory cumulative voting rule for the selection of directors, which assures that minority blockholders in controlled companies have board representation, and dual shareholder- and board-level approval procedures for self-interested transactions. The paper also examines how one can induce voluntary compliance and structure remedies in emerging economies, as well as the implications of the self-enforcing model for the ongoing debate over the efficiency of corporate law in developed economies. -- PDF File: 73 -- downloaded pdf to Note
article  SSRN  corporate_law  corporate_governance  investor_protection  investors  capital_markets  emerging_markets  transition_economies  Russia  privatization  downloaded 
july 2015 by dunnettreader
Bernard S. Black, Reinier Kraakman, Anna Tarassova - Russian Privatization and Corporate Governance: What Went Wrong? :: SSRN - Stanford Law Review, Vol. 52, pp. 1731-1808, 2000
Bernard S. Black, Northwestern School of Law & Kellogg School of Management; European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI); Reinier Kraakman, Harvard Law School, ECGI; Anna Tarassova, U of Maryland, Center on Institutional Reform and the Informal Sector (IRIS) -- In Russia and elsewhere, proponents of rapid, mass privatization of state-owned enterprises (ourselves among them) hoped that the profit incentives unleashed by privatization would soon revive faltering, centrally planned economies. The revival didn't happen. We offer here some partial explanations. First, rapid mass privatization is likely to lead to massive self-dealing by managers and controlling shareholders unless (implausibly in the initial transition from central planning to markets) a country has a good infrastructure for controlling self-dealing. Russia accelerated the self-dealing process by selling control of its largest enterprises cheaply to crooks, who transferred their skimming talents to the enterprises they acquired, and used their wealth to further corrupt the government and block reforms that might constrain their actions. Second, profit incentives to restructure privatized businesses and create new ones can be swamped by the burden on business imposed by a combination of (among other things) a punitive tax system, official corruption, organized crime, and an unfriendly bureaucracy. Third, while self-dealing will still occur (though perhaps to a lesser extent) if state enterprises aren't privatized, since self-dealing accompanies privatization, it politically discredits privatization as a reform strategy and can undercut longer-term reforms. A principal lesson: developing the institutions to control self-dealing is central to successful privatization of large firms. -- PDF File: 79 -- downloaded pdf to Note
article  SSRN  Russia  privatization  Russian_economy  corporate_governance  corporate_law  corporate_finance  corporate_control  corruption  asset_stripping  downloaded 
july 2015 by dunnettreader
Bernard S. Black - The Core Fiduciary Duties of Outside Directors :: SSRN -:Asia Business Law Review, pp. 3-16, July 2001
This article offers my personal, idiosyncratic overview of the principal fiduciary duties of outside directors, from a common law perspective, and what the remedies should be for breach of each of these duties. I discuss the four core fiduciary duties of directors: the duty of loyalty; the duty of care; the duty of disclosure; and the duty of special care when your company is a takeover target. -- Number of Pages in PDF File: 36 -- saved to briefcase
article  SSRN  corporate_law  corporate_governance  fiduciaries  duties-legal  duty_of_loyalty  duty_of_care  disclosure  conflict_of_interest  corporate_control_markets 
july 2015 by dunnettreader
La Porta et al -- Investor Protection and Corporate Governance by :: SSRN 2000
Rafael La Porta, Florencio Lopez de Silanes, Andrei Shleifer, Robert W. Vishny -- Recent research on corporate governance has documented large differences between countries in ownership concentration in publicly traded firms, in the breadth and depth of financial markets, and in the access of firms to external finance. We suggest that there is a common element to the explanations of these differences, namely how well investors, both shareholders and creditors, are protected by law from expropriation by the managers and controlling shareholders of firms. We describe the differences in laws and the effectiveness of their enforcement across countries, summarize the consequences of these differences, and suggest potential strategies of reform of corporate governance. We argue that the legal approach is a more fruitful way to understand corporate governance and its reform than the conventional distinction between bank-centered and market-centered financial systems. -- PDF File: 40 -- saved to briefcase
paper  SSRN  corporate_law  corporate_governance  fiduciaries  investor_protection  corporate_ownership  shareholders  capital_markets  banking-universal 
july 2015 by dunnettreader
Frederick Tung -Leverage in the Board Room: The Unsung Influence of Private Lenders in Corporate Governance:: SSRN - UCLA Law Review, Vol. 57, 2009 (rev'd 2012)
Boston University School of Law --:The influence of banks and other private lenders pervades public companies. From the first day of a lending arrangement, loan covenants and built-in contingency provisions affect managerial decision making. Conventional corporate governance analysis has been slow to notice or account for this lender influence. Corporate governance discourse has traditionally focused only on corporate law arrangements. The few existing accounts of creditors' influence over firm managers emphasize the drastic actions creditors take in extreme cases - when a firm is in serious trouble - but in fact, private lender influence is a routine feature of corporate governance even absent financial distress. (..) I explain the regularity of lender influence on managerial decision making - "lender governance" - comparing this routine influence to conventional governance arrangements and boards of directors in particular. I show that the extent of private lender influence rivals that of conventional governance mechanisms, and I discuss the doctrinal and policy implications of this unsung influence. Accounting for lender governance requires a new examination of corporate fiduciary duties, debtor-creditor laws, and the regulatory reform proposals that have emerged to address the current financial crisis. I also discuss the implications of private lender influence for future corporate governance research. -- PDF File: 69 -- lender governance, corporate governance, covenants, credit agreement, private lender, private debt, creditor, financial regulation, financial crisis -- saved to briefcase
article  SSRN  corporate_finance  corporate_governance  creditors  banking  relationship_lending  financial_regulation  corporate_law  capital_markets  commercial_law  debtors  debtor-creditor  debt-restructuring  financial_crisis  finance_capital  corporate_control 
july 2015 by dunnettreader
Lyman Johnson, David Millon - Recalling Why Corporate Officers are Fiduciaries :: SSRN - William & Mary Law Review, Vol. 46, 2005
Lyman Johnson, Washington and Lee U Law School; U of St. Thomas, St. Paul/Minneapolis, MN - School of Law -- David Millon,Washington and Lee U Law School -- For all the recent federal attention to ...corporate officer and director functions, ... state fiduciary duty law makes no distinction between the fiduciary duties of these two groups. (..) The thesis of this article is that corporate officers are fiduciaries because they are agents. (..) drawing on the fiduciary duties of agents for guidance in fashioning modern understandings of corporate officer duties - and differentiating those duties from those of directors - can provide much-needed structure to what otherwise threatens to be an ad hoc enterprise. There are at least 3 benefits of our thesis. (1) state law remains the primary source for establishing the basic framework of corporate governance relations, both through corporate statutes and through judge-made fiduciary duty law. (..) (2) our thesis clarifies immensely why courts can and should more closely scrutinize officer conduct than they now review director performance (..). (3) At a theoretical level, ...our thesis has several implications. (..) we are entering an era when, due to heavier corporate regulation, the entity conception of the firm will be strengthened, as positive law, including agency law, still builds on that understanding of corporate relations. This period follows a span of perhaps 20 years when a highly disaggregated conception of corporate relations - the nexus of contracts theory - has predominated. We also believe that in the policy arguments for and against strong fiduciary duties over the years, virtually no attention has been given to distinguishing whether what is fitting for outside directors in the fiduciary duty area - relatively slack duties - is also fitting for corporate officers. -- saved to briefcase
article  SSRN  corporate_law  financial_regulation  capital_markets  fiduciaries  principal-agent  agents  duties-legal  officers-&-directors  corporate_governance  shareholders  investors  state_law  federalism  federal_preemption  SEC  SROs  corporate_personhood  directors  duty_of_care  duty_of_loyalty  conflict_of_interest  legal_remedies  law-and-economics  law-and-finance 
july 2015 by dunnettreader
Lyman Johnson, David Millon - Corporate Law after Hobby Lobby :: SSRN (rev'd Jan 2015) THE BUSINESS LAWYER, Vol 70 - November 2014
Lyman Johnson, Washington and Lee University - School of Law; University of St. Thomas, St. Paul/Minneapolis, MN - School of Law -- David Millon
Washington and Lee University - School of Law -- We evaluate the U.S. Supreme Court's controversial decision in the Hobby Lobby case from the perspective of state corporate law. We argue that the Court is correct in holding that corporate law does not mandate that business corporations limit themselves to pursuit of profit. Rather, state law allows incorporation 'for any lawful purpose.' We elaborate on this important point and also explain what it means for a corporation to 'exercise religion.' In addition, we address the larger implications of the Court's analysis for an accurate understanding both of state law's essentially agnostic stance on the question of corporate purpose and also of the broad scope of managerial discretion. -- PDF File: 33 -- Keywords: Corporate purpose, Corporate personhood, Shareholder wealth maximization, Shareholder primacy, Corporate social responsibility -- downloaded pdf to Note
article  SSRN  corporate_law  corporate_citizenship  corporate_governance  shareholders  freedom_of_conscience  SCOTUS  civil_liberties  corporate_control  corporate_personhood  limited_liability  corporations-closely-held  corporations  CSR  shareholder_value  shareholder_voting  profit_maximization  law-and-economics  labor_law  employee_benefits  power-asymmetric  capital_as_power  constitutional_law  downloaded 
july 2015 by dunnettreader
Edward B. Rock - Institutional Investors in Corporate Governance (Jan 2015) :: SSRN - Oxford Handbook on Corporate Law and Governance, 2015, Forthcoming
Penn Law School -- chapter examines the role of institutional investors in corporate governance and the role of regulation in encouraging institutional investors to become active stewards. (..) what lessons we can draw from the US experience for the EU’s 2014 proposed amendments to the Shareholder Rights Directive.(...) survey how institutional investors themselves are governed and how they organize share voting. (...) 2 central questions: (a) why, over the last 25 years, have institutional investors not fulfilled the optimists’ hopes?; and (b) can the core incentive problems that subvert Institutional Investor activism be cured by regulation? The US experience [substantial deregulation led to only modest increases in shareholder activism], suggests (..) institutional investors’ relative passivity is a fundamental lack of incentives. I examine the disappointing results of the SEC’s long experiment with incentivizing mutual funds to vote their shares (...) the EU efforts are likely to be similarly disappointing. I then examine the important role that hedge funds now play in catalyzing institutional shareholders, and consider some of the risks in relying on such highly incentivized actors. -- PDF File: 26 -- saved to briefcase
chapter  books  SSRN  law-and-economics  behavioral_economics  financial_economics  financial_regulation  corporate_governance  corporate_law  corporate_finance  capital_markets  corporate_control_markets  institutional_investors  shareholders  shareholder_voting  mutual_funds  incentives  activist_investors  investors  hedge_funds  proxies  comparative_law  administrative_law  EU-law  regulation-harmonization  regulation-enforcement  fiduciaries  profit_maximization  EU-regulation 
july 2015 by dunnettreader
David Millon - Radical Shareholder Primacy :: SSRN - Aug 2014
Washington and Lee University - School of Law -- University of St. Thomas Law Journal, Vol. 10:4 (2013) -- Washington & Lee Legal Studies Paper No. 2014-17 -- written for a symposium on the history of CSR, seeks to make sense of the surprising disagreement on the foundational legal question of corporate purpose: does the law require shareholder primacy or not? (..) disagreement is due to the unappreciated ambiguity in the shareholder primacy idea. (.. ) 2 models, the 'radical' and the 'traditional.' Radical shareholder primacy originated at Chicago in the later 1970s, (Daniel Fischel and Frank Easterbrook). [It asserts] that corporate management is the agent of the shareholders, charged with maximizing their wealth. There is no legal authority for this claim; Fischel drew it from the financial economists Michael Jensen and William Meckling, who used the agency idea in a non-legal sense. [The traditional model is] the idea that shareholders hold a privileged position within the corporation's governance structure, ... and (..) fiduciary duties as being owed to 'the corporation and its shareholders.' (..) shareholders enjoy primacy over (..) other stakeholders, although there is no maximization mandate and shareholders [have limited effective legal means] to insist that management privilege their interests. Nevertheless, this version of shareholder primacy is enshrined in the law, and, if the radical version's agency claim is laid to rest, there is no harm in acknowledging that fact. -- PDF File: 34 -- saved to briefcase
paper  SSRN  corporate_law  corporate_citizenship  corporate_governance  shareholder_value  profit_maximization  principal-agent  fiduciaries  law-and-economics  CSR  capital_as_power  status_quo_bias 
july 2015 by dunnettreader
David Millon - The Single Constituency Argument in the Economic Analysis of Business Law :: SSRN - Jan 2007
David Millon, Washington and Lee University - School of Law -- Research in Law and Economics, 2007 -- Washington & Lee Legal Studies Paper No. 2007-01 -- The essay points out an interesting parallel in law-and-economics business law scholarship. Working largely independently of each other, economically oriented scholars working in different areas have argued that the law should focus on the interests of a single constituency - shareholders in corporate law, creditors in bankruptcy law, and consumers in antitrust law. Economic analysts thus have rejected arguments advanced by progressive scholars working in each of these areas that the law should instead concern itself with the full range of constituencies affected by business activity. The law-and-economics single constituency claim rests in part on skepticism about judicial competence but the underlying objection is to the use of law for redistributive purposes. The primary value is efficiency, defined in terms of market-generated outcomes. In this essay, I question this political commitment, suggesting that it implies a strong tendency toward maintenance of the existing distribution of wealth. Even more importantly, the single constituency claim may actually have redistributive implications. In each of these areas of business law, however, it is a regressive program that favors owners of capital against those who are generally less well of, such as workers and small business owners. -- Number of Pages in PDF File: 31 -- saved to briefcase
paper  SSRN  philosophy_of_law  jurisprudence  legal_theory  political_philosophy  political_economy  law-and-economics  conflict_of_interest  principal-agent  profit_maximization  incentives  incentives-distortions  efficiency  shareholder_value  creditors  consumers  consumer_protection  competition  status_quo_bias  capital  inequality-wealth  inequality-opportunity  power-asymmetric  capital_as_power  distribution-income  distribution-wealth  corporate_governance  corporate_law  corporate_citizenship  bankruptcy  antitrust  conservative_legal_challenges 
july 2015 by dunnettreader
Jonathan R. Macey, Joshua Mitts - Finding Order in the Morass: The Three Real Justifications for Piercing the Corporate Veil :: SSRN - Cornell Law Review, Forthcoming (Sept 2014)
Jonathan R. Macey, Yale Law School and Joshua Mitts, Columbia Law School & Business School -- Few doctrines are more shrouded in mystery and yet more litigated than piercing the corporate veil. We develop a new theoretical taxonomy which postulates that veil-piercing decisions fall into three categories: (1) achieving the purpose of a statutory or regulatory scheme, (2) preventing shareholders from obtaining credit by misrepresentation, and (3) promoting the bankruptcy values of achieving the orderly, efficient resolution of a bankrupt’s estate. We analyze the facts of several veil-piercing cases to show how the outcomes are explained by the three theories we put forth and show that undercapitalization is rarely, if ever, an independent grounds for piercing the corporate veil. In addition, we employ modern quantitative machine learning methods never before utilized in legal scholarship to analyze the full text of 9,380 judicial opinions. We demonstrate that our theories systematically predict veil-piercing outcomes, the widely-invoked rationale of “undercapitalization” of the business poorly explains these cases, and our theories most closely reflect the textual structure of the opinions. -- PDF File: 80 -- saved to briefcase
article  SSRN  corporate_law  limited_liability  bankruptcy  fraud  regulation-enforcement  regulatory_avoidance 
july 2015 by dunnettreader
Frank Pasquale - Four Futures of Legal Automation | Balkinization: June 2015
http://balkin.blogspot.com/2015/06/four-futures-of-legal-automation.html -- overview of new article dealing with different scenarios for "disruption" promised by "innovators" and venture capitalists, which is likely to take the new fashion of arbitraging "inefficiencies" without any thoughts as to consequences for unraveling the "logic" of the current systems of legal services, re both content and access -- Instapaper has a number of links -- also downloaded pdf to Note
Instapaper  article  legal_system  legal_culture  automation  Innovation  technology  access_to_services  corporate_law  criminal_justice  family_law  property_rights  rights-legal  contracts  links  downloaded  from instapaper
june 2015 by dunnettreader
Margaret Blair - What must corporate directors do? Maximizing shareholder value versus creating value through team production | Brookings Institution - June 2015
Blair reviews the legal and economic theories behind the share-value maximization norm, and then lays out a theory of corporate law building on the economics of team production. Arguing that the corporate form itself helps solve the team production problem, Blair details five features which distinguish corporations from other organizational forms: 1. Legal personality -- 2. Limited liability -- 3. Transferable shares -- 4. Management under a Board of Directors -- 5. Indefinite existence -- Blair concludes that these five characteristics are all problematic from a principal-agent point of view where shareholders are principals. However, the team production theory makes sense out of these arrangements. This theory provides a rationale for the role of corporate directors consistent with the role that boards of directors historically understood themselves to play: balancing competing interests so the whole organization stays productive. -- downloaded pdf to Note
paper  corporate_governance  corporate_citizenship  business_practices  shareholder_value  hedge_funds  corporate_law  firms-theory  firms-structure  equity-corporate  equity_markets  investors  long-term_orientation  labor_share  cooperation  coordination  teams  downloaded 
june 2015 by dunnettreader
Steve Perlstein - Social Capital, Corporate Purpose, and the Revival of American Capitalism | Brookings Institution - January 2014
Since the Great Recession of 2008, corporate profits have more than rebounded, and yet the rest of the American economy has struggled to recover. Widening income inequality and an erosion of social capital and economic trust has deprived capitalism of its moral high ground. The public has lost confidence in big businesses--asking what purpose they serve in society writ large. Pearlstein argues we can begin to restoring the economic and moral legitimacy of American capitalism by reconsidering the purpose of corporations in American life. Despite the current dominance of the theory of “maximizing shareholder value,” this idea has little basis in history or law. Shifting to a more balanced form of capitalism will take time, but some possible steps for reform include: #-# Support investment funds dedicated to long-term horizons, including socially responsible investment funds #-# Recalibrate corporate governance law to allow for more flexible decision making #-# Rebalance capital gains taxes to encourage long-term stock holding by investors #-# Explore regulatory options for financial services, like a financial transaction tax to dampen the influence of short-term trading #-# Encourage a wider range of corporate metrics beyond quarterly earnings guidance #-# Reform shareholder voting rights to foster a sense of stewardship -- didn't download it -- Brookings also has video of Perlstein in Charlie Rose
paper  video  corporate_governance  corporate_citizenship  business_practices  corporate_finance  corporate_law  corporate_tax  financial_crisis  investors  institutional_investors  shareholder_value  capital_markets  shareholder_voting  capital_gains  financial_transaction_tax  short-termism  capitalism  capitalism-systemic_crisis 
may 2015 by dunnettreader

related tags

12thc  13thc  14thc  15thc  16thc  20thc  21stc  access_to_services  accountability  accounting  activist_investors  administrative_agencies  administrative_law  agents  antitrust  aragon  arms-length_transactions  article  asset_stripping  automation  banking-universal  banking  bankruptcy  behavioral_economics  benefit_corporations  beps  bibliography  books  british_history  business-and-politics  business-norms  business  business_history  business_operations  business_practices  busisness-ethics  campaign_finance  canon_law  capital  capital_as_power  capital_gains  capital_markets  capitalism-systemic_crisis  capitalism  chapter  china  church_of_england  civil_liberties  colonialism  commercial_law  common_good  company  comparative_economics  comparative_law  competition  conflict_of_interest  congress  conservative_legal_challenges  constitutional_law  consumer_protection  consumers  contract_law_&_beyond  contracts  cooperation  coordination  corporate_citizenship  corporate_control  corporate_control_markets  corporate_finance  corporate_governance  corporate_ownership  corporate_personhood  corporate_tax  corporation  corporations-closely-held  corporations  corruption  creditors  crime  criminal_justice  cross-border  csr  cultural_influence  data  debt-restructuring  debtor-creditor  debtors  delaware_law  deliberation-public  democracy  digital_economy  directors  disclosure  discourse-political_theory  distribution-income  distribution-wealth  doj  dorie_clark  downloaded  duties-civic  duties-legal  duty_of_care  duty_of_loyalty  economic_culture  economic_history  economic_sociology  ef-add  efficiency  elections  elizabeth  emerging_markets  employee_benefits  employers  environment  equity-corporate  equity_markets  etexts  eu-law  eu-regulation  eurasia  europe-early_modern  evernote  family_law  fast_track  fdi  federal_preemption  federalism  fiduciaries  fiduciary  finance_capital  financial_crisis  financial_economics  financial_institutions  financial_regulation  financial_system  financial_transaction_tax  firms-organization  firms-structure  firms-theory  fiscal_policy  fraud  free_speech  free_trade  freedom_of_conscience  g20  global_governance  health_care  hedge_funds  incentives-distortions  incentives  india  inequality-opportunity  inequality-wealth  innovation  instapaper  institutional_economics  institutional_investors  institutions  intellectual_history  interest_groups  international_law  international_political_economy  internet  investment-bilateral_treaties  investment-socially_responsible  investment  investor-state_disputes  investor_protection  investors  ip  isds  islamic_law  it_operations  jstor  jurisprudence  kindle-available  labor  labor_law  labor_share  labor_standards  law-and-economics  law-and-finance  law  legal_culture  legal_history  legal_reasoning  legal_remedies  legal_system  legal_theory  legaltech  legitimacy  liability  liberalism  limited_liability  links  lobbying  long-term_orientation  m&a  management  managerialism  markets-dependence_on_government  medieval_history  mena  mncs  mutual_funds  obama_administration  oecd  oecd_economies  officers-&-directors  oligarchy  organizations  originalism  outsourcing  outsourcing_&_subcontracting  papacy-english_relations  papacy  paper  philosophy_of_law  podcasts  political_economy  political_participation  political_philosophy  political_sociology  political_theory  politics-and-money  power-asymmetric  power  principal-agent  privatization  profit  profit_maximization  property-confiscations  property  property_rights  proxies  public-private_gaps  public_interest  public_policy  referral  reform-legal  reformation  regulation-enforcement  regulation-harmonization  regulation  regulatory_avoidance  relationship_lending  rent-seeking  report  representative_institutions  reviews  rights-legal  risk_management  russia  russian_economy  sarbanes-oxley  savings  scotus  sec  securities_regulation  shareholder_value  shareholder_voting  shareholders  short-termism  social_contract  sros  ssrn  stakeholders  state_law  status  status_quo_bias  stocks  tax_collection  tax_havens  taxes  teams  technology  torts  trade-cultural_transmission  trade-policy  trade  trans-pacific-partnership  transaction_costs  transatlantic_trade_and_investmentpartnership  transfer_pricing  transition_economies  treaties  trusts  uncategorized  us_constitution  us_economy  us_foreign_policy  us_government  us_legal_system  us_politics  us_trade_agreements  video  wales  welfare_economics  welfare_state  white-collar_crime 

Copy this bookmark:



description:


tags: