Yearly Archives: 2017

The Departing Remarks of Federal Reserve Governor Daniel K. Tarullo

Daniel K. Tarullo is former Governor of the Federal Reserve System. This post is based on Mr. Tarullo’s recent remarks at the Woodrow Wilson School, available here.

Tomorrow [April 5, 2017] is my last day at the Federal Reserve. So in this, my final official speech, it seems appropriate to offer a broad perspective on how financial regulation changed after the crisis. In a moment, I shall offer a few thoughts along these lines. Then I am going to address in some detail the capital requirements we have put in place, including our stress testing program. Eight years at the Federal Reserve has only reinforced my belief that strong capital requirements are central to a safe and stable financial system. It is important for the public to understand why this is so, especially at a moment when there is so much talk of changes to financial regulation.

READ MORE »

Of Snitches and Riches: Optimal IRS and SEC Whistleblower Rewards

Yehonatan Givati is Associate Professor at Hebrew University Law School. This post is based on his recent article, forthcoming in the Harvard Journal on Legislation.

The past decade has seen a dramatic shift in the enforcement of U.S. tax and securities laws away from reliance on public administrative agents and towards the use of paid whistleblowers. Traditionally, violations of tax law were detected by IRS auditors and agents, who reviewed tax returns and conducted investigations. Similarly, violations of securities law were detected by SEC agents, who conducted investigations to detect cases of insider trading, manipulation of market prices, or misrepresentation of important information about securities. Although IRS and SEC agents often relied on tips from various sources, there was no widespread and institutionalized payment of rewards for information on violations of the law.

READ MORE »

Delaware Law Amendments and the Maintenance of Corporate Records via Blockchain

Allison L. Land and Edward P. Welch are partners at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP. This post is based on a Skadden publication by Ms. Land, Mr. Welch, and Matthew Gerber. This post is part of the Delaware law series; links to other posts in the series are available here.

On March 27, 2017, the Corporation Law Section of the Delaware State Bar Association (DSBA) approved proposed amendments to the Delaware General Corporation Law (DGCL) that had been proposed by the DSBA Corporation Law Council. This year’s amendments are intended to address blockchain maintenance of corporate records, the date of effectiveness of Section 203(b) opt-outs, mergers with non-U.S. entities and the effectiveness of written consents, among other changes.

Blockchain Maintenance of Corporate Records

The proposed amendments, if adopted, are intended to provide specific statutory authority for Delaware corporations to use networks of electronic databases, known as blockchains or distributed ledgers, to create and maintain corporate records, including stock ledgers. The proposed amendments are the result of a Corporation Law Council study of the use of blockchain technology by Delaware corporations, following an initiative to embrace the technology announced in 2015 by then-Gov. Jack Markell. Under this technology, a corporation’s records, including its stock ledger, would be maintained electronically by thousands of trusted users on a shared system to record stock issuances and transfers, to maintain a list of record holders and other matters. Section 224 would be amended to permit corporations to rely on the contents of an electronic network as the corporate records, provided the records so kept can be converted into clearly legible paper form within a reasonable time. The amendments would require any stock ledger (including one maintained on an electronic network) to serve three functions: (i) enable the corporation to prepare the list of stockholders entitled to vote; (ii) record the information required by the DGCL to be maintained in a stock ledger; and, (iii) record transfers of stock.

READ MORE »

Global Climate Change and Sustainability Financial Reporting: An Unstoppable Force with or without Trump

Linda M. Lowson is Chief Executive Officer of the Global ESG Regulatory Academy and Editor-in-Chief of an ABA special publication on Climate Change and Sustainability Financial Reporting. This post is based on a recent publication by Ms. Lowson. Additional posts addressing legal and financial implications of the Trump administration are available here.

Climate Change and Sustainability Financial Reporting (CCSFR) is a complex, swiftly evolving, and now crucial area for issuers and capital providers globally. It has arrived front-and-center in global capital markets with the entrance of G20/Financial Stability Board (FSB) oversight. The Trump Administration’s resolute efforts to retract, revoke, or otherwise invalidate the climate protection progress made by the Obama Administration, as well as Trump Executive Orders aimed at scaling back financial regulation, will not diminish or derail the global tidal wave of investor demand for “full and fair” CCSFR, nor will Trump Administration actions alter or impede the seismic shift of global governmental support for this disclosure.

READ MORE »

Do the FASB’s Accounting and Reporting Standards Add Shareholder Value?

Urooj Khan is Class of 1967 Associate Professor of Business at Columbia Business School. This post is based on a recent paper by Professor Khan; Bin Li, Assistant Professor at University of Texas at Dallas Naveen Jindal School of Management; Shivaram Rajgopal, Roy Bernard Kester and T.W. Byrnes Professor of Accounting and Auditing at Columbia Business School; and Mohan Venkatachalam, R.J. Reynolds Professor of Business Administration at Duke University Fuqua School of Business.

For four decades, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) has been the designated private sector organization for setting up standards governing financial reporting for corporate America. During this time, over 160 standards have been issued along with several supporting American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) bulletins, which are interpretations and statements of positions intended to offer implementation and supportive guidance for the standards. The FASB asserts that its standards are important to the efficient functioning of the economy because credible and understandable financial information is useful for capital allocation in the economy.

READ MORE »

Cybersecurity Trends for Boards of Directors

Patrick Fitzgerald is a partner and William Ridgway is counsel at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP. This post is based on a Skadden publication by Mr. Fitzgerald and Mr. Ridgway.

Cybersecurity has in recent years become an integral component of a board’s role in risk oversight, but directors often find themselves in unfamiliar territory when it comes to formulating policies and oversight processes that address cybersecurity risk. It can be especially challenging for directors to identify upcoming risks and avoid focusing too much on yesterday’s headlines. Prioritizing the following three areas based on impend­ing cyber threats and emerging regulatory developments will help corporate directors stay ahead of the curve.

READ MORE »

Determining the Likely Standard of Review in Delaware M&A Transactions

Robert B. Little is a partner and Joseph A. Orien is an associate at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP. This post is based on a Gibson Dunn publication by Mr. Little and Mr. Orien, and is part of the Delaware law series; links to other posts in the series are available here.

M&A practitioners are well aware of the several standards of review applied by Delaware courts in evaluating whether directors have complied with their fiduciary duties in the context of M&A transactions. Because the standard applied will often have a significant effect on the outcome of such evaluation, establishing processes to secure a more favorable standard of review is a significant part of Delaware M&A practice. The chart below identifies fact patterns common to Delaware M&A and provides a preliminary assessment of the likely standard of review applicable to transactions fitting such fact patterns. However, because the Delaware courts evaluate each transaction in light of the transaction’s particular set of facts and circumstances, and due to the evolving nature of the law in this area, this chart should not be treated as a definitive statement of the standard of review applicable to any particular transaction. [1]

READ MORE »

Weekly Roundup: April 21–April 27, 2017


More from:

This roundup contains a collection of the posts published on the Forum during the week of April 21–April 27, 2017.











Wells Fargo Lessons: Will Leaders Ever Learn?




Financial CHOICE Act Imposes Sweeping Shareholder Proposal Reforms

Ning Chiu is counsel at Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP. This post is based on a Davis Polk publication by Ms. Chiu.

The modified version of the legislation, CHOICE Act 2.0, released by House Financial Services Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-TX), is mostly known for proposing major financial regulatory reforms. Tucked into the lengthy bill, however, are several significant changes that would completely overhaul the shareholder proposal process. Some are similar to proposals by the Business Roundtable, which we previously discussed here.

READ MORE »

The Deregulation of Private Capital and the Decline of the Public Company

Elisabeth de Fontenay is an Associate Professor at Duke University School of Law. This post is based on a recent article authored by Professor de Fontenay.

Despite attracting little notice until recently, the proportion of companies choosing to go public in the U.S. has been plummeting for more than two decades. Why is this happening? Most observers blame public companies’ increasing regulatory costs—particularly disclosure costs. Yet rising costs cannot be the full story, given that the downward trend began well before Sarbanes-Oxley, the supposed game-changer for public-company regulation. In a recent article, The Deregulation of Private Capital and the Decline of the Public Company, I argue that the culprit need not be rising costs of corporate disclosure, but declining benefits.

READ MORE »

Page 56 of 83
1 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 83