Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- SEC (4)
- Securities and Exchange Commission (4)
- Dodd-Frank (3)
- Securities (3)
- Dodd–Frank (2)
-
- Asadi (1)
- Asset-Backed Securities (1)
- Berman v. Neo@Ogilvy (1)
- CFTC (1)
- Circuit split (1)
- Clawback (1)
- Collateralized debt obligations (1)
- Commodity Futures Trading Commission (1)
- Corporate misconduct (1)
- Credit-Default Swap (1)
- Executive compensation (1)
- FCPA (1)
- Financial Crisis (1)
- Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (1)
- Futures (1)
- G.E. Energy (1)
- Insurance Law (1)
- LSOC Model (1)
- Legal Segregation and Operationally Commingled Model (1)
- Leverage (1)
- Manning (1)
- Merrill Lynch (1)
- Moral Hazard (1)
- Portfolio Margining (1)
- Risk retention requirement (1)
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
When Is The ‘Force’ With A Securities Claim That Is ‘Brought To Enforce’ A Federal Securities Law?, Michelle Wellnitz
When Is The ‘Force’ With A Securities Claim That Is ‘Brought To Enforce’ A Federal Securities Law?, Michelle Wellnitz
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
No abstract provided.
The Perfect Storm Is Brewing Once Again: What Scaling Back Dodd-Frank Will Mean For The Credit Default Swap, Daniel Isaacson
The Perfect Storm Is Brewing Once Again: What Scaling Back Dodd-Frank Will Mean For The Credit Default Swap, Daniel Isaacson
The Journal of Business, Entrepreneurship & the Law
The current presidential administration has expressed a concerted desire to “scale back” and even “get rid of” the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd–Frank). Focusing specifically on Dodd–Frank’s regulation of the credit default swap (CDS), this Article explores two timely queries. First, whether Dodd–Frank’s regulatory response to these financial instruments is a justifiable one, and second, what effect a repeal may have. This Article will show that the “perfect storm” CDS—which contributed so significantly to the 2007–2010 financial crisis—flourished in a regulatory environment that contained two key weaknesses: (1) few restrictions on excessive speculation; and (2) the …
To Be A "Whistleblower," Or Not To Be A "Whistleblower? " That Is The Question-Whether 'Tis Nobler In The Mind Of The Courts To Suffer For Reporting Wrongdoing To The Sec Or Employers Internally: Examining The Recent Circuit Split Regarding The Definition Of A Whistleblower Under Dodd-Frank, Luke I. Landers
The Journal of Business, Entrepreneurship & the Law
Under the current state of the law, the circuit courts are split over whether an employee must report corporate wrongdoing directly to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), or report wrongdoing to a company’s management in order to receive whistleblower protection under Dodd–Frank. The resolution of this circuit split not only will have implications for American employees caught in situations similar to the fiction above, but also will provide a prime opportunity for the Supreme Court to clarify how courts are to understand the interpretive and deferential relationship between the language of legislative statutes and their corresponding bureaucratic regulations. In …
Regulating Moral Hazard: The True Risk Of Dodd-Frank's Risk Retention Requirement, Ethan T. Mobley
Regulating Moral Hazard: The True Risk Of Dodd-Frank's Risk Retention Requirement, Ethan T. Mobley
The Journal of Business, Entrepreneurship & the Law
Dodd–Frank was implemented in response to the Great Recession as a means to curb abuses on Wall Street. The Act mandated broad reform of the financial system, and in particular, required regulators to promulgate rules controlling the complex structure of Asset-Backed Security (ABS). Dodd–Frank required securitizers to retain a portion of the credit risk associated with ABS. The goal was to curb moral hazard—the market failure commonly blamed for the Financial Crisis. However, there is reason to believe Dodd–Frank may “not adequately address” the moral hazard problem. In Part I, this Article will set forth the nuts and bolts of …
The Legal Aspects Of Portfolio Margining: A Move Toward The Lsoc Model, Christian Chamorro-Courtland
The Legal Aspects Of Portfolio Margining: A Move Toward The Lsoc Model, Christian Chamorro-Courtland
The Journal of Business, Entrepreneurship & the Law
This Article focuses on the legal aspects of “portfolio margining” in the United States and their potential for reducing costs and facilitating the management of collateral for the participants involved. First, this Article outlines the level of protection that customer “margin” deposits receive in clearing systems using a Central Counterparty (CCP). Second, it explains the process of portfolio margining from a legal perspective and discusses the benefits of adopting these arrangements. Thirdly, it argues that adopting the “Legal Segregation and Operationally Commingled Model” (LSOC Model) in the futures industry can facilitate the implementation of portfolio margining. Finally, the conclusion explains …
Clarifying The Original Clawback: Interpreting Sarbanes-Oxley Section 304 Through The Lens Of Dodd-Frank Section 954, J. Royce Fichtner, Patrick Heaston, Lou Ann Simpson
Clarifying The Original Clawback: Interpreting Sarbanes-Oxley Section 304 Through The Lens Of Dodd-Frank Section 954, J. Royce Fichtner, Patrick Heaston, Lou Ann Simpson
The Journal of Business, Entrepreneurship & the Law
In the early 2000s, major accounting scandals involving reporting violations and audit failures sent the United States financial markets into turmoil. Congress and President George W. Bush reacted to the controversy by passing the Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act, better known as the Sarbanes–Oxley Act (SOX), in July of 2002. Section 304 created an explicit procedure, whereby the SEC could disgorge or clawback a CEO or CFO’s incentive-based compensation or stock gains when such profits were based on inflated financial statements later required to be restated to reflect the company’s true financial position. When the stock market …