<?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/2018/02/16/perpetual-dual-class-stock-the-case-against-corporate-royalty/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>Fri, 05 Jun 2026 16:08:54 +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>Perpetual Dual-Class Stock: The Case Against Corporate Royalty</title>
		<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2018/02/16/perpetual-dual-class-stock-the-case-against-corporate-royalty/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=perpetual-dual-class-stock-the-case-against-corporate-royalty</link>
		<comments>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2018/02/16/perpetual-dual-class-stock-the-case-against-corporate-royalty/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Feb 2018 14:26:01 +0000</pubDate>
<!-- 		<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator> -->
				<category><![CDATA[Corporate Elections & Voting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Empirical Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Practitioner Publications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Speeches & Testimony]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dual-class stock]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Firm performance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Firm valuation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPOs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Listing standards]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ownership]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Proxy voting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SEC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shareholder rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shareholder voting]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/?p=105050?d=20180220100722EST</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My first few weeks at the SEC have been a whirlwind—and just to be clear, I am not talking about the markets. In a few short weeks, I have gotten a crash course on SEC policymaking—and enough reading to empathize with my former law students, who used to tell me, to my puzzlement, that my Corporate Law [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<hgroup><em>Posted by Robert J. Jackson, Jr., U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, on Friday, February 16, 2018 </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://www.sec.gov/biography/commissioner-robert-j-jackson">Robert J. Jackson, Jr.</a> is a Commissioner at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The following post is based on Commissioner Jackson’s recent remarks at the UC Berkeley School of Law, available <a href="https://www.sec.gov/news/speech/perpetual-dual-class-stock-case-against-corporate-royalty">here</a>. The views expressed in the post are those of Commissioner Jackson and do not necessarily reflect those of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the other Commissioners, or the Staff. Related research from the Program on Corporate Governance includes <a class="external" href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2954630" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">The Untenable Case for Perpetual Dual-Class Stock</a> by Lucian Bebchuk and Kobi Kastiel (discussed on the Forum <a href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2017/04/24/the-untenable-case-for-perpetual-dual-class-stock/">here</a>).</p>
</div></hgroup><p>My first few weeks at the SEC have been a whirlwind—and just to be clear, I am <em>not</em> talking about the markets. In a few short weeks, I have gotten a crash course on SEC policymaking—and enough reading to empathize with my former law students, who used to tell me, to my puzzlement, that my Corporate Law syllabus was not exactly beach material.</p>
<p>But in between the policy memos that come across my desk, I’ve also had the pleasure of working with my new colleagues on the SEC’s Staff. They’ve taught me a lot in a short time, and I’m grateful for their insights and assistance. The hard work and dedication of these folks gives me confidence that we are up to the challenge of making sure our financial markets are the safest, strongest, and most efficient in the world.</p>
<p> <a href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2018/02/16/perpetual-dual-class-stock-the-case-against-corporate-royalty/#more-105050" class="more-link"><span aria-label="Continue reading Perpetual Dual-Class Stock: The Case Against Corporate Royalty">(more&hellip;)</span></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2018/02/16/perpetual-dual-class-stock-the-case-against-corporate-royalty/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
