John Coffee Mapping the Future of Insider Trading Law: Of Boundaries, Gaps, and Strategies (01 May 2013) Available at ECGI: http://ecgi.global/working-paper/mapping-future-insider-trading-law-boundaries-gaps-and-strategies
The current law on insider trading is arbitrary and unrationalized in its limited scope in a number of respects. For example, if a thief breaks into your office, opens your files, learns material, nonpublic information, and trades on that information, he has not breached a fiduciary duty and is presumably exempt from insider trading liability.
But drawing a line that can convict only the fiduciary and not the thief seems morally incoherent. Nor is it doctrinally necessary.
The basic methodology handed down by the Supreme Court in SEC v. Dirks and United States v. O?Hagan dictates (i) that a violation of the insider trading prohibition requires conduct that is 'deceptive' (the term used in Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934), and (ii) that trading that amounts to an undisclosed breach of a fiduciary duty is 'deceptive.' This formula illustrates, but does not exhaust, the types of duties whose undisclosed breach might also be deemed deceptive and in violation of Rule 10b-5. Many forms of theft or misappropriation of confidential business information could be deemed sufficiently deceptive to violate Rule 10b-5. More generally (and more controversially), the common law on finders of lost property might be used to justify a duty barring recipients from trading on information that has been inadvertently released or released to them without lawful authorization. Still, current law has stopped short of generally prohibiting the computer hacker and other misappropriators who make no false representation.
This article surveys possible means by which to rationalize current law and submits that the SEC can and should expand the boundaries of insider trading by promulgating administrative rules paralleling and extending the rules it issued in 2000 (namely, Rules 10b5-1 and 10b5-2). Specific examples are suggested.
At the same time, this article acknowledges that the goal of reform should not be to achieve parity of information and that there are costs in attempting to extend the boundaries of insider trading to reach all instances of inadvertent release. Deception, it argues, should be the key, both for doctrinal and policy reasons.
This chapter surveys fiduciary principles in Western European civil law jurisdictions. Focusing on France and Germany, we suggest that functional equivalents to fiduciary duties have developed on the Continent, although they do not always carry...Read more
The regulation of related party transactions (RPTs) is today the single most important yardstick for the quality of corporate governance systems. It is also one of the thorniest issues because RPTs are a well-documented cause of abuse by...Read more
In response to the financial crisis, as a way to align incentives of originators and investors, new regulation in the US (Dodd-Frank) and the EU (CRR) requires issuers of asset backed securities to hold some skin-in-the-game, offering a set of...Read more
Codes of conduct are a well-accepted feature of European corporate governance. Listed corporations are obliged to annually state their compliance with a corporate governance code or to explain their non-compliance. Whilst it is agreed that...Read more