# kaal:claim:1765901-016

**Claim.** Treating the U.S. location of a broker as making the securities purchase domestic would circumvent most of the Morrison holding, since a foreign buyer of foreign securities could invoke U.S. law simply by routing the order through a U.S. broker.

**Type.** failure  **Support.** argued

**Holds when.**

- orders placed through U.S. brokers for execution on foreign exchanges

**Source quote.**

> The U.S. broker places the order based on an order from a foreign client, and U.S. securities law arguably would apply to the securities purchase, even if executed on a non-US. exchange. This line of argument would circum- vent most of the holding in Morrison.

**From.** Kaal and Painter, *The Aftermath of Morrison v. National Australia Bank and Elliott Associates v. Porsche* (2011), II. Open Questions After Morrison; 4. Does a Transaction Take Place in the U.S. if a U.S. Broker Is Involved?, page 15

**Cite as.** Kaal and Painter, The Aftermath of Morrison v. National Australia Bank and Elliott Associates v. Porsche (2011). SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1765901

**Verify.** sha256 of source PDF `7b08b8a15f7d72b4eeed41be2d17c20428cb4727269077a6575c5d22e31ecdc5` at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/wulfkaal/Academic-Papers/main/papers/pdf/Kaal%20and%20Painter%20-%202011%20-%20The%20Aftermath%20of%20Morrison%20v.%20National%20Australia%20Bank%20and%20Elliott%20Associates%20v.%20Porsche.pdf

**Failure mode.** broker-location-loophole  (family: other)

**Topics.** regulatory-failure

**Keywords.** broker-location, transaction-location, morrison, circumvention

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of the claim. Its sha256 is the content hash used for attestation.