Hedge Fund Forum Shopping

Douglas J. Cumming, S. Johan
{"title":"Hedge Fund Forum Shopping","authors":"Douglas J. Cumming, S. Johan","doi":"10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199862566.003.0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Hedge funds have been the subject of media attention in the United States (US) and around the world given the pronounced growth of the hedge fund sector in recent years and the comparative dearth of regulations faced by hedge fund managers. The first part of this paper provides an overview of the potential agency problems associated with managing a hedge fund, and associated rationales for hedge fund regulation. While hedge funds are hardly regulated in the US, there are nevertheless jurisdictions outside the US with different and sometimes more onerous sets of regulatory requirements. Examples of international differences in hedge fund regulation include minimum capitalization requirements, restrictions on the location of key service providers and different permissible distribution channels via private placements, banks, other regulated or non-regulated financial intermediaries, wrappers, investment managers and fund distribution companies. The second part of this paper provides an analysis of hedge fund strategies in the context of international differences in hedge fund regulation. Certain fund strategies have been characterized in the law and finance literature, as well we in popular media and public policy debates, as being inherently more risky and associated with more pronounced agency problems. For instance, managed futures, long/short and event driven strategies might be associated with greater risk and agency problems than market neutral equity strategies and various arbitrage strategies. At issue, therefore, is whether funds engage in forum shopping to select jurisdictions that potentially offer greater scope for agency problems associated with hedge fund management. The data examined offer little or no support for the view that hedge fund managers pursuing riskier strategies or strategies with potentially more pronounced agency problems systematically select jurisdictions with less stringent regulations. For the most part, fund strategies are not systematically and statistically related to different regulations observed in different jurisdictions. In fact, to the extent that there is evidence of forum shopping, it is such that funds pursuing riskier strategies or strategies with greater potential agency problems select jurisdictions with more stringent regulations. We may infer from the evidence that forum shopping by fund managers in relation to fund strategic focus is not consistent with a 'race to the bottom'. Rather, hedge fund managers appear to select jurisdictions that are in funds' investors' interests in order to facilitate capital raising by the hedge fund.","PeriodicalId":336554,"journal":{"name":"Corporate Law: Securities Law","volume":"50 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Corporate Law: Securities Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199862566.003.0005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

Abstract

Hedge funds have been the subject of media attention in the United States (US) and around the world given the pronounced growth of the hedge fund sector in recent years and the comparative dearth of regulations faced by hedge fund managers. The first part of this paper provides an overview of the potential agency problems associated with managing a hedge fund, and associated rationales for hedge fund regulation. While hedge funds are hardly regulated in the US, there are nevertheless jurisdictions outside the US with different and sometimes more onerous sets of regulatory requirements. Examples of international differences in hedge fund regulation include minimum capitalization requirements, restrictions on the location of key service providers and different permissible distribution channels via private placements, banks, other regulated or non-regulated financial intermediaries, wrappers, investment managers and fund distribution companies. The second part of this paper provides an analysis of hedge fund strategies in the context of international differences in hedge fund regulation. Certain fund strategies have been characterized in the law and finance literature, as well we in popular media and public policy debates, as being inherently more risky and associated with more pronounced agency problems. For instance, managed futures, long/short and event driven strategies might be associated with greater risk and agency problems than market neutral equity strategies and various arbitrage strategies. At issue, therefore, is whether funds engage in forum shopping to select jurisdictions that potentially offer greater scope for agency problems associated with hedge fund management. The data examined offer little or no support for the view that hedge fund managers pursuing riskier strategies or strategies with potentially more pronounced agency problems systematically select jurisdictions with less stringent regulations. For the most part, fund strategies are not systematically and statistically related to different regulations observed in different jurisdictions. In fact, to the extent that there is evidence of forum shopping, it is such that funds pursuing riskier strategies or strategies with greater potential agency problems select jurisdictions with more stringent regulations. We may infer from the evidence that forum shopping by fund managers in relation to fund strategic focus is not consistent with a 'race to the bottom'. Rather, hedge fund managers appear to select jurisdictions that are in funds' investors' interests in order to facilitate capital raising by the hedge fund.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对冲基金论坛购物
由于近年来对冲基金行业的显著增长和对冲基金经理面临的监管相对缺乏,对冲基金一直是美国和世界各地媒体关注的主题。本文的第一部分概述了与管理对冲基金相关的潜在代理问题,以及对冲基金监管的相关理由。尽管对冲基金在美国几乎不受监管,但美国以外的司法管辖区也有不同的、有时甚至更为繁重的监管要求。对冲基金监管方面的国际差异包括最低资本要求、对主要服务提供商所在地的限制,以及通过私募、银行、其他受监管或不受监管的金融中介机构、包装商、投资经理和基金分销公司等不同的允许分销渠道。本文的第二部分分析了国际对冲基金监管差异背景下的对冲基金策略。在法律和金融文献中,以及在大众媒体和公共政策辩论中,某些基金策略的特点是天生风险更大,与更明显的代理问题有关。例如,管理期货、多/空和事件驱动策略可能比市场中性股票策略和各种套利策略具有更大的风险和代理问题。因此,争论的焦点是,基金是否会选择那些可能为对冲基金管理相关的代理问题提供更大空间的司法管辖区,参与“论坛购物”。研究的数据很少或根本没有支持这样一种观点,即追求风险更高策略或可能存在更明显代理问题的策略的对冲基金经理会系统性地选择监管不那么严格的司法管辖区。在大多数情况下,基金策略与不同司法管辖区的不同法规没有系统和统计上的关系。事实上,在某种程度上,有证据表明,寻求风险更高的策略或具有更大潜在代理问题的策略的基金,会选择监管更严格的司法管辖区。我们可以从证据中推断,基金经理在基金战略重点方面的论坛购物与“逐底竞争”并不一致。相反,对冲基金经理似乎选择符合基金投资者利益的司法管辖区,以促进对冲基金的融资。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
How Should a Firm Go Public? A Dynamic Model of the Choice between Fixed-Price Offerings and Auctions in Ipos and Privatizations Do we need a European 'National Market System'? Competition, Arbitrage, and Suboptimal Executions Emergency Short Selling Restrictions in the Course of the Financial Crisis Litigation Governance: Taking Accountability Seriously The SEC and the Madoff Scandal: Three Narratives in Search of a Story
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1