{
 "@context": "https://schema.org",
 "@type": "DefinedTerm",
 "@id": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/entities/regulatory-justification",
 "identifier": "kaal:entity:regulatory-justification",
 "name": "Regulatory justification",
 "termCode": "regulatory-justification",
 "inDefinedTermSet": {
  "@id": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/entities/index.json"
 },
 "author": {
  "@type": "Person",
  "name": "Wulf A. Kaal",
  "identifier": "https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0757-275X"
 },
 "dateModified": "2026-07-29",
 "canonicalForm": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/entities/regulatory-justification.md",
 "sha256": "70ba401299f9e61368d7a10626614f86876452636cce2eb2b6d422545b6c3c50",
 "additionalProperty": [
  {
   "@type": "PropertyValue",
   "name": "status",
   "value": "derived"
  },
  {
   "@type": "PropertyValue",
   "name": "claim_count",
   "value": 2
  },
  {
   "@type": "PropertyValue",
   "name": "work_count",
   "value": 2
  },
  {
   "@type": "PropertyValue",
   "name": "year_span",
   "value": [
    "2009",
    "2015"
   ]
  },
  {
   "@type": "PropertyValue",
   "name": "non_current_claims",
   "value": 0
  }
 ],
 "subjectOf": [
  {
   "@type": "Claim",
   "@id": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/1428387-040",
   "identifier": "kaal:claim:1428387-040",
   "text": "Regulating on the basis of retailization would not currently be justifiable, because retailization cannot be quantified with any degree of certainty and regulation premised on speculation without proof or data validation would probably produce inadequate results.",
   "abstract": "Using a form of regulation that is premised on speculation without any proof or form of validation through data analysis would probably produce inadequate results and therefore would not be justifiable. (The SEC has not yet raised the",
   "citation": "Kaal, Hedge Fund Valuation Retailization, Regulation, and Investor Suitability (2009). SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1428387",
   "datePublished": "2009",
   "claim_type": "failure",
   "confidence": "argued",
   "is_failure_mode": true,
   "scope_conditions": [
    "as of 2009, absent data quantifying retail participation in hedge funds"
   ],
   "source_pdf_sha256": "6aa3a280dc6750723be2389f3af2aabf3a16c4ce20e49fcdaddd7f2ea95a67aa",
   "status": "current"
  },
  {
   "@type": "Claim",
   "@id": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2629451-033",
   "identifier": "kaal:claim:2629451-033",
   "text": "Because the market reacts positively both to N/DPA announcements and to the governance improvements taking effect, the DOJ's escalation of N/DPA executions beginning in 2002 could be justified on market value grounds.",
   "abstract": "The positive market reaction to announcements of N/DPAs and to N/DPA governance improvements at the beginning of the N/DPA term suggest that the DOJ's increase in N/DPA executions, starting in 2002, could be justified.",
   "citation": "Wulf A. Kaal, Timothy Lacine, Stock Price Response to Non- and Deferred Prosecution Agreements (2015). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2629451",
   "datePublished": "2015",
   "claim_type": "normative",
   "confidence": "argued",
   "is_failure_mode": false,
   "scope_conditions": [
    "holds to the extent market reaction is an acceptable measure of policy value"
   ],
   "source_pdf_sha256": "507404d641abb922ab6d8e3a0b032e35ead2befd7b88746d09d178a8fa816957",
   "status": "current"
  }
 ],
 "description": "2 claims in the published works of Wulf A. Kaal carry the concept tag 'regulatory-justification'. Derived node: a roster, not an adjudicated definition."
}