kaal:claim:617681-004

Even if the ECJ has embraced the incorporation theory, Member States can still frustrate Type B regulatory competition through tax law, capital market law, listing requirements and other mechanisms, so the seat theory may retain de facto dominance.

Source quote, verbatim

tax law,16 capital market law17 and listing requirements18 or other mechanisms to frustrate Type B regulatory competition after ECJ's rulings in Centros and Inspire Art, the seat theory may continue its de facto dominance.

From

Christian Kirchner, Richard W. Painter, Wulf A. Kaal, Regulatory Competition in EU Corporate Law after Inspire Art Unbundling Delaware's Product for Euro (2004), A. Introduction, p. 9
https://ssrn.com/abstract=617681 · source PDF

Cite as

Christian Kirchner, Richard W. Painter, Wulf A. Kaal, Regulatory Competition in EU Corporate Law after Inspire Art Unbundling Delaware's Product for Euro (2004). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=617681

Holds when

Member States willing to use adjacent bodies of law to deter reincorporation

Classification

predictivesupport: arguedfailure: collateral-law-circumventionfamily: jurisdictional-conflicteconomicsregulatory-failure

Verify

The quote above is an exact substring of the source PDF, whose sha256 is e142130507ea2f5b025fd97b3f762d44ee3a7aaa82b155aab63434b85e8fd834. Extraction method: pdf-text-layer.
Attestation record: colloquium/attestations/c8e5f70602d76249...json
Verify the binding yourself: curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/617681-004.md | sha256sum