Article

Stock Exchanges and the New Markets for Securities Laws

Chris Brummer

Assistant Professor of Law, Vanderbilt University Law School

This Article has benefited from the comments and suggestions of Professors Bobby Ahdieh, Douglas Baird, Margaret Blair, Bill Bratton, William Christie, Steven Davidoff, Gillian Hadfield, Paul Heald, Larry Helfer, Donald Langevoort, David Millon, Erin O’Hara, Bob Rasmussen, Hans Stoll, Bob Thompson, Joel Trachtman, and Todd Zywicki. The Article also benefited from faculty workshops at the University of Georgia, the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Southern California, and Northwestern University. I would also like to thank Murray Teitelbaum, James Duffy, and the staff of the New York Stock Exchange for their time and valuable insight.

For nearly a decade, leading scholars have bemoaned the absence of what can be termed a market for securities laws. Unlike the federalist structure of US corporate law, which may incentivize some states to compete for corporate charters, no competition for firms animates the enactment of national securities laws. Instead, the federal government has enjoyed a virtual monopoly over the provision of securities laws. Ever since the passing of the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”), firms have generally had to comply with US securities laws when selling their stocks and bonds to American investors. And because US stock exchanges were the most liquid in the world, there was little danger of foreign multinationals going elsewhere to raise capital. As a result, federal regulators have had few incentives to formulate efficient regulatory policies. A revolutionary transformation of global equity markets is, however, currently underway.

TABLE OF CONTENTS