# Jurisdictional arbitrage

`kaal:entity:jurisdictional-arbitrage`

**Status.** derived

This node is assembled mechanically from the 3 claims that carry the concept tag `jurisdictional-arbitrage`. It is a roster of what the corpus says under this term. It is **not** an adjudicated definition: no single statement here has been ruled canonical, and no first-appearance call has been made. Read the claims and judge for yourself.

## Every claim under this term

3 claims across 1 works, 2019 to 2019.

**2019**

- [3405660-001](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/3405660-001) [failure/argued] *(failure mode)* -- Direct hedge fund regulation faces a two sided trap: strong direct rules push hedge funds offshore where they escape regulation altogether, while weak rules leave investors without adequate protection.
  > Yet, regulators are faced with the problem of jurisdictional arbitrage, i.e. if they regulate directly, hedge funds may relocate offshore and escape from regulation altogether. If regulators impose weak regulations, investors may not be afforded adequate protection.
  Kaal, Indirect Regulation of Hedge Funds (2019). SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3405660
- [3405660-015](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/3405660-015) [failure/argued] *(failure mode)* -- Coordinated international cooperation in hedge fund regulation will ultimately be hindered by administrative costs, immense transaction costs, setup costs and, above all, the divergent interests of offshore havens and the resulting jurisdictional arbitrage, so it may never become a realistic regulatory option.
  > The administrative costs, the immense transaction costs as well as the costs of setting up such a venture and, most importantly, the differing interests especially of off-shore heavens and, hence, jurisdictional arbitrage will ultimately hinder such actions.
  Kaal, Indirect Regulation of Hedge Funds (2019). SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3405660
- [3405660-031](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/3405660-031) [mechanism/argued] -- Indirect regulation removes the problem of missing jurisdictional authority and therefore of jurisdictional arbitrage, because the Basel Framework applies to banks worldwide rather than to funds in any one jurisdiction.
  > Indirect regulation of hedge funds removes the problem of lacking jurisdictional authority and, thus, jurisdictional arbitrage. The Basel Framework is a framework for banks worldwide.
  Kaal, Indirect Regulation of Hedge Funds (2019). SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3405660

## Verify

Every claim above resolves to a record carrying a verbatim source quote, the sha256 of the source PDF, and a preformatted citation. Nothing here asks to be taken on trust.

    curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/entities/jurisdictional-arbitrage.md | sha256sum

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of this entity node. Its sha256 is the content hash.