Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Banking and Finance Law

Chicago-Kent College of Law

Dodd-Frank

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Investing And Pretending, Anita Krug May 2015

Investing And Pretending, Anita Krug

All Faculty Scholarship

One of the more prominent components of Dodd–Frank’s regulatory changes was Title VII, providing for the regulation of the over-the-counter derivatives known as “swaps.” A swap is a financial instrument whose value is based on an asset—the “reference asset”—that is wholly unrelated to the swap itself. Although there was much ado about swap regulation immediately after Dodd–Frank’s enactment, the same cannot be said of the many rules that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) has subsequently adopted pursuant to its authority under Title VII. This Article critically evaluates the CFTC’s “swap rules” and identifies the regulatory vision that they reflect. …


Does State National Bank Of Big Spring V. Geithner Stand A Fighting Chance?, Devon J. Steinmeyer Jan 2014

Does State National Bank Of Big Spring V. Geithner Stand A Fighting Chance?, Devon J. Steinmeyer

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Two years after the start of the 2008 financial crisis and during one of the worst economic recessions since the Great Depression, Congress passed a law designed to insure a financial crisis of the same magnitude would not occur again, and if it did, it would not have the same wide-reaching effects the 2008 crisis had. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act sought to, among other things, end “too big to fail,” consolidate the consumer protection agencies, and provide for the orderly liquidation of defaulting systematically important companies. State National Bank of Big Spring v. Geithner, a …


Rethinking U.S. Investment Adviser Regulation, Anita Krug Jan 2013

Rethinking U.S. Investment Adviser Regulation, Anita Krug

All Faculty Scholarship

(Excerpt)Now, in the aftermath of Dodd-Frank's enactment and the SEC's associated bout of rulemaking, one might think that the Advisers Act's regulatory regime is a workable and effective one, equipped to address - and address efficiently - the investor-protection risks that the twenty-first-century investment adviser industry produces. In fact, however, Dodd-Frank did not touch - and, indeed, Dodd-Frank's crafters indicated no awareness of - many of the Advisers Act's longstanding troubles. Additionally, the changes Dodd-Frank brought about have their own considerable deficiencies. As this Article contends, the U.S. investment adviser regulatory regime, now seventy-four years old, is in need of …