entity · derived
Regulatory arbitrage
Derived node: assembled mechanically from the claims carrying regulatory-arbitrage. A roster, not an adjudicated definition.
Every claim under this term
- 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, s
- 617681-027 : Member States can avoid at least part of the result in Centros and Inspire Art by recharacterizing what used to be corporate law as creditor protection law, provided the recharacterized rule does not
- 1428387-036 : A retail investor asset threshold would be gamed: managers would be incentivized to keep retail assets under the applicable threshold, thereby keeping the fund in the existing regulatory scheme withou
- 1664809-007 : The Lehman Repo 105 transactions, consummated in London but booked as sales in Lehman's US securities filings, underscore the effect that conduct in one country can have on markets elsewhere.
- 1664809-016 : For European jurisdictions the extraterritorial application of US law creates confusion and legal uncertainty and makes it harder to regulate private parties who engage in regulatory arbitrage by taki
- 1806252-005 : The AIFM Directive could create incentives for regulatory arbitrage and could provoke retaliatory action by countries outside the European Union.
- 1806252-007 : Hedge fund managers subjected to stricter rules in one jurisdiction while competing with funds in less restrictive jurisdictions could be placed at a comparative disadvantage.
- 1806252-024 : Legislators had disincentives to impose harsher requirements on the hedge fund industry before the crisis, because harsher regulation could have driven franchise taxes and other business to offshore c
- 1806252-025 : Basel III capital charges based on a bank's lending exposure to hedge funds could help address the threat of regulatory arbitrage.
- 1908473-021 : Without a degree of international convergence in contingent capital rules, regulatory arbitrage could undermine the establishment of contingent capital as an integral part of financial markets.
- 1998455-015 : Divergent national definitions of Tier 1 capital produce a distortion: financial institutions in countries with stricter definitions that exclude contingent capital appear to hold less capital and thi
- 2029983-009 : Harmonization invites its own defeat by creating an incentive for rogue jurisdictions to attract, into their legal systems, the private actors who do not agree with the harmonized rule.
- 2061166-001 : Where bank resolution regimes are not coordinated across jurisdictions, the same systemically important financial institution can be handled in opposite ways: it might petition for reorganization unde
- 2061166-005 : Because most national crisis responses took the form of public bail-outs adopted without broad international consensus, they increased the threat of international regulatory arbitrage and damaged the
- 2061166-038 : Without a degree of similarity and convergence in bank resolution and contingent capital rules, regulatory arbitrage will work against establishing contingent capital as an integral part of financial
- 2150377-008 : Because Title IV's registration exemptions are broad enough to threaten the rule they qualify, the Dodd-Frank Act deliberately gives the SEC rulemaking authority to keep the exemptions from swallowing
- 2337268-015 : The pre Dodd-Frank exemption for advisers with fewer than fifteen clients failed as a regulatory boundary because most hedge fund advisers deliberately designed their operations and legal structures t
- 2714974-026 : Direct regulation of hedge fund leverage collapses on the details because balance sheet leverage is not an adequate measure of risk and would push funds into off-balance sheet avoidance strategies.
- 2715083-016 : Freedom from significant regulatory oversight is what historically enabled hedge funds to run more exotic, more leveraged strategies aimed at absolute returns.
- 2739479-011 : Because the Dodd-Frank Act discouraged banks from growing too large and made bank lending harder, private funds and other alternative lenders filled the resulting void by financing small and medium si
- 2739479-038 : Changing AUM preferences driven by compliance costs could eventually produce industry consolidation aimed at cost savings, or drive a shift toward family offices that manage no third-party assets and
- 2740477-009 : When disruptive firms do not comply with existing rules or write their own exemptions because no appropriate rules exist, consumer protection and public safety goals are undermined and incumbent firms
- 2808132-010 : When disruptive firms do not comply with existing rules or effectively create their own exemptions because the existing framework does not reach them, public policy goals can be undermined and incumbe
- 2811729-004 : Unconstrained mutual funds combine the regulatory structure of a mutual fund with the investment strategy of a private fund implementing a credit strategy and principally trading fixed income instrume
- 2811729-005 : The investor eligibility line has become arbitrary in the credit space: private funds implementing substantially the same investment strategy as a fixed income unconstrained mutual fund, and carrying
- 2992962-012 : Regulating blockchain through the non anonymous application of the technology creates large inefficiencies that will be bypassed by the more efficient anonymous applications, and it is for those more
- 2998097-007 : Proposals to improve close-out netting agreements and to harmonize standard documentation across jurisdictions are likely to run into jurisdictional arbitrage and national protectionism.
- 3117224-004 : ICOs enable borderless online sales with fewer points of friction, letting promoters bypass typical legal, jurisdictional, and business hurdles by marketing directly to a worldwide investor pool.
- 3606663-005 : The assumption by ICO issuers that token sales let them circumvent securities registration and disclosure requirements proved to be a fallacy for many U.S. issuers, who faced increased SEC enforcement
- 3936876-024 : Applying the trust label to digital asset firms without an accompanying fiduciary duty is problematic, because the typical legal obligation of a trust company is to place customers' interests above it
- 5554218-027 : Persistent differences between jurisdictions that favor a permissive, innovation driven approach and those that prioritize strict control and consumer protection can produce regulatory arbitrage or un