<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance</title>
	<atom:link href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2017/03/11/the-delaware-trap-an-empirical-study-of-incorporation-decisions/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu</link>
	<description>The leading online blog in the fields of corporate governance and financial regulation.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 Apr 2026 11:30:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.5.8</generator>

 
	<item>
		<title>The Delaware Trap: An Empirical Study of Incorporation Decisions</title>
		<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2017/03/11/the-delaware-trap-an-empirical-study-of-incorporation-decisions/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-delaware-trap-an-empirical-study-of-incorporation-decisions</link>
		<comments>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2017/03/11/the-delaware-trap-an-empirical-study-of-incorporation-decisions/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Mar 2017 14:36:40 +0000</pubDate>
<!-- 		<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator> -->
				<category><![CDATA[Academic Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Accounting & Disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Comparative Corporate Governance & Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Empirical Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Accounting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Corporate forms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Decision-making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Delaware articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Delaware law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disclosure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Incorporations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Inside counsel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jurisdiction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation D]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Risk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/?p=79941?d=20170311093640EST</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One of the most enduring debates in corporate law is whether the United States system of corporate law federalism leads to a “race to the bottom” or a “race to the top.”  Race to the bottom theorists argue that because insiders of companies must initiate incorporation decisions, jurisdictions compete to provide legal rules that favor [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<hgroup><em>Posted by Robert Anderson IV, Pepperdine University, on Saturday, March 11, 2017 </em><div class='e_n' style='background:#F8F8F8;padding:10px;margin-top:5px;margin-bottom:10px;text-indent:2.5em;'><strong style='margin-left:-2.5em;'>Editor's Note: </strong> <p style="margin:0; display:inline;"><a href="https://law.pepperdine.edu/faculty-research/robert-anderson/">Robert Anderson IV</a> is Associate Professor of Law at Pepperdine University School of Law. This post is based on his recent paper, and is part of the <a href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/the-delaware-law-series/">Delaware law series</a>; links to other posts in the series are available <a href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/the-delaware-law-series/">here</a>.</p>
</div></hgroup><p>One of the most enduring debates in corporate law is whether the United States system of corporate law federalism leads to a “race to the bottom” or a “race to the top.” <a class="footnote" id="1b" href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2017/03/11/the-delaware-trap-an-empirical-study-of-incorporation-decisions/#1">[1]</a> Race to the bottom theorists argue that because insiders of companies must initiate incorporation decisions, jurisdictions compete to provide legal rules that favor insiders, allowing them to extract private benefits at the expense of the corporation or its shareholders. Race to the top theorists argue that market constraints prevent insiders from favoring such jurisdictions, and that jurisdictions actually compete to provide efficient legal rules that enhance shareholder value. Although the dichotomous framing as a “race” to the “top” or “bottom” is a bit of an oversimplification of a more nuanced debate, that version of the debate has dominated discussions of corporate law for decades.</p>
<p> <a href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2017/03/11/the-delaware-trap-an-empirical-study-of-incorporation-decisions/#more-79941" class="more-link"><span aria-label="Continue reading The Delaware Trap: An Empirical Study of Incorporation Decisions">(more&hellip;)</span></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2017/03/11/the-delaware-trap-an-empirical-study-of-incorporation-decisions/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
