Thursday, July 31, 2014
Tuesday, July 29, 2014
Matthew C. Turk has posted The Convergence of Insurance with Banking and Securities Industries, and the Limits of Regulatory Arbitrage in Finance on SSRN with the following abtract:
This Article explores recent overlooked innovations in insurance — namely, the widespread convergence of the insurance industry with other financial services traditionally performed by banking and securities firms — and argues that they present dramatic illustrations of the two fundamental “boundary problems” that afflict all financial regulation. The first problem is a question of jurisdictional boundaries: to what degree should diverse regulations be harmonized across jurisdictions? The second concerns definitional boundaries: within a given jurisdiction, how should distinctions be drawn among financial products and firms that perform similar economic functions? The Article then employs the framework of regulatory boundaries to evaluate a number of policy issues raised by insurance-related reforms in Dodd-Frank and various international initiatives that followed the 2008 financial crisis, both of which represent first steps towards a potentially bold new regulatory approach.
At bottom, both boundary problems are a product of the possibility for regulatory arbitrage across jurisdictions or industry definitions, and the potential inevitably of a loosely regulated “shadow finance” sector. The opportunity for regulatory arbitrage is a key variable in assessing financial reforms that draw regulatory boundaries, yet reliable empirical estimates of its magnitude are largely unavailable. For this reason, recent proposals to require federal agencies to apply quantitative cost-benefit analysis to financial regulations may fall short of expectations. Sensitive to this uncertainty, this Article presents an analytical framework that provides some tentative policy prescriptions and, at a minimum, sheds greater light on the tradeoffs involved in the regulation of insurance and finance in a post-2008 Crisis world.
A reader submitted the following fellowship announcement:
The Lowell Milken Institute for Business Law and Policy at UCLA School of Law is now accepting applications for the Lowell Milken Institute Law Teaching Fellowship. This fellowship is a full-time, year-round, one or two academic-year position (approximately July 2015 through June 2016 or June 2017). The position involves law teaching, legal and policy research and writing, preparing to go on the law teaching market, and assisting with organizing projects such as conferences and workshops, and teaching. No degree will be offered as part of the Fellowship program. Only one fellowship will be offered.
Fellowship candidates must hold a JD degree from an ABA accredited law school and be committed to a career of law teaching and scholarship in the field of business law and policy. Applicants should have demonstrated an outstanding aptitude for independent legal research, preferably through research and/or writing as a law student or through exceptional legal experience after law school. Law Teaching Fellowship candidates must have strong academic records that will make them highly competitive for law teaching jobs.
More information on the fellowship can be found at http://lowellmilkeninstitute.law.ucla.edu/lowell-milken-institute-business-law-and-policy-teaching-fellowship/. Applications must be submitted by November 14, 2014.
The University of California is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer. All qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability, age or protected veteran status. For the complete University of California nondiscrimination and affirmative action policy see: UC Nondiscrimination & Affirmative Action Policy.
The University of California seeks candidates committed to the highest standards of scholarship and professional activities and to a campus climate that supports equality and diversity.
The following law review articles relating to securities regulation are now available in paper format:
Nicholas D. Horner, Note, If You Rate It, He Will Come: Why Uncle Sam's Recent Intervention with the Credit Rating Agencies Was Inevitable and Suggestions for Future Reform, 41 Fla. St. U. L. Rev. 489 (2014).
Stephanie Ray, Comment, Getting Caught Between the Borders: the Proposed Exemption of the Canadian Mutual Fund from the Passive Foreign Investment Company Rules, 37 Fordham Int'l L.J. 823 (2014).
Tom Wentzell, Comment, The JOBS Act: Effects on Capital Market Competition in Both Public and Private Markets, 10 U. St. Thomas L.J. 892 (2013).
Yesha Yadav, The Case for a Market in Debt Governance, 67 Vand. L. Rev. 771 (2014).
Katherine T. Zuber, Note, Breaking Down a Great Wall: Chinese Reverse Mergers and Regulatory Efforts to Increase Accounting Transparency, 102 Geo. L.J. 1307 (2014).