Fairness, Efficiency, and Insider Trading: Deconstructing the Coin of the Realm in the Information Age

IF 2 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Northwestern University Law Review Pub Date : 2001-02-15 DOI:10.2139/SSRN.260256
K. Krawiec
{"title":"Fairness, Efficiency, and Insider Trading: Deconstructing the Coin of the Realm in the Information Age","authors":"K. Krawiec","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.260256","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Whether and how the federal securities laws should restrict insider trading is one of the most hotly debated topics in the securities law literature. Paradoxically, both the theoretical analysis and the legal rules concerning insider trading remain extraordinarily vague and ill-formed. What is the special character of insider trading that leads to this apparently irresolvable puzzle? In this Article, I argue that there is, in fact, nothing special about insider trading that creates this dilemma, but rather there is something special about the nature of information itself. Accordingly, this theoretical dilemma is not limited to insider trading regulation, but rather pervades all areas of intellectual property law. In this Article, I situate insider trading regulation within the larger body of intellectual property law by discussing three potential allocations of the property right in valuable inside information. First, inside information could be treated as a public resource, meaning that a person in possession of inside information could not legally exploit that advantage for personal profit. Such a regime would forbid some or all insider trading by forcing the disclosure to the marketplace of inside information prior to trading. I argue that regulators should reject this alternative because, despite it's proponents' tendency to justify the rule in terms of fairness, this proposal is unlikely to foster fairness in any meaningful way. Alternatively, the property right in valuable inside information could belong to issuers, as the producers of such information. I argue that regulators should reject this alternative because, despite its proponents? tendency to frame their arguments in terms of promoting informational efficiency, a legal regime treating inside information as the property of the issuer is unlikely to further that goal. In fact, such proposals assume an affirmative answer to a question that is fiercely debated in other areas of intellectual property law: does creating a property right in information producers incentivize additional production to the extent necessary to offset the social costs of excluding others from use of the information? Finally, the property right in valuable inside information could reside with \"outsider traders\" (traders who possess inside information, but are neither insiders nor constructive insiders of the issuer). I argue that regulators should pursue this alternative because, although there is no need to encourage issuers to create valuable inside information, the need to encourage the dissemination of such information to the marketplace has been recognized for many years. Accordingly, I propose in this Article a system of federal securities regulation that would permit trading by corporate outsiders who did not receive their information in a tip from an insider or constructive insider. Such a system, I argue, provides the hope of filling in the gaps left by the current disclose or abstain system, by encouraging the reflection of material information in stock market price without disclosure of the actual inside information. At the same time, this proposal avoids the perverse incentives and negative impacts on market efficiency attendant in a system that permits insider trading by corporate employees.","PeriodicalId":47587,"journal":{"name":"Northwestern University Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Northwestern University Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.260256","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

Whether and how the federal securities laws should restrict insider trading is one of the most hotly debated topics in the securities law literature. Paradoxically, both the theoretical analysis and the legal rules concerning insider trading remain extraordinarily vague and ill-formed. What is the special character of insider trading that leads to this apparently irresolvable puzzle? In this Article, I argue that there is, in fact, nothing special about insider trading that creates this dilemma, but rather there is something special about the nature of information itself. Accordingly, this theoretical dilemma is not limited to insider trading regulation, but rather pervades all areas of intellectual property law. In this Article, I situate insider trading regulation within the larger body of intellectual property law by discussing three potential allocations of the property right in valuable inside information. First, inside information could be treated as a public resource, meaning that a person in possession of inside information could not legally exploit that advantage for personal profit. Such a regime would forbid some or all insider trading by forcing the disclosure to the marketplace of inside information prior to trading. I argue that regulators should reject this alternative because, despite it's proponents' tendency to justify the rule in terms of fairness, this proposal is unlikely to foster fairness in any meaningful way. Alternatively, the property right in valuable inside information could belong to issuers, as the producers of such information. I argue that regulators should reject this alternative because, despite its proponents? tendency to frame their arguments in terms of promoting informational efficiency, a legal regime treating inside information as the property of the issuer is unlikely to further that goal. In fact, such proposals assume an affirmative answer to a question that is fiercely debated in other areas of intellectual property law: does creating a property right in information producers incentivize additional production to the extent necessary to offset the social costs of excluding others from use of the information? Finally, the property right in valuable inside information could reside with "outsider traders" (traders who possess inside information, but are neither insiders nor constructive insiders of the issuer). I argue that regulators should pursue this alternative because, although there is no need to encourage issuers to create valuable inside information, the need to encourage the dissemination of such information to the marketplace has been recognized for many years. Accordingly, I propose in this Article a system of federal securities regulation that would permit trading by corporate outsiders who did not receive their information in a tip from an insider or constructive insider. Such a system, I argue, provides the hope of filling in the gaps left by the current disclose or abstain system, by encouraging the reflection of material information in stock market price without disclosure of the actual inside information. At the same time, this proposal avoids the perverse incentives and negative impacts on market efficiency attendant in a system that permits insider trading by corporate employees.
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
公平、效率与内幕交易:解构信息时代的钱币王国
联邦证券法是否以及如何限制内幕交易是证券法文献中争论最激烈的话题之一。矛盾的是,关于内幕交易的理论分析和法律规则仍然非常模糊和不健全。内幕交易的特殊性质是什么,导致了这个显然无法解决的难题?在这篇文章中,我认为,事实上,内幕交易并没有什么特别之处,而是信息本身的性质有一些特别之处。因此,这种理论上的困境并不局限于内幕交易监管,而是普遍存在于知识产权法的所有领域。在本文中,我通过讨论有价值的内幕信息中三种潜在的产权分配,将内幕交易监管置于更大的知识产权法体系中。首先,内幕信息可以被视为一种公共资源,这意味着拥有内幕信息的人不能合法地利用这一优势谋取个人利益。这种制度将通过强制在交易前向市场披露内幕信息,禁止部分或全部内幕交易。我认为,监管机构应该拒绝这种选择,因为尽管它的支持者倾向于从公平的角度为规则辩护,但这一提议不太可能以任何有意义的方式促进公平。或者,有价值的内幕信息的产权可能属于发行者,即这些信息的生产者。我认为,监管机构应该拒绝这种替代方案,因为尽管它的支持者?他们倾向于从提高信息效率的角度来构建他们的论点,将内幕信息视为发行人财产的法律制度不太可能进一步实现这一目标。事实上,这些建议假设了一个在知识产权法的其他领域激烈争论的问题的肯定答案:在信息生产者中建立产权是否激励了额外的生产,以抵消排除他人使用信息的社会成本?最后,有价值的内幕信息的产权可能属于“外部交易者”(拥有内幕信息,但既不是发行人的内部人,也不是发行人的建设性内部人)。我认为,监管机构应该采取这种替代方案,因为尽管没有必要鼓励发行人创造有价值的内幕信息,但鼓励向市场传播这些信息的必要性多年来一直得到认可。因此,我在本文中建议建立一种联邦证券监管制度,允许那些没有从内部人士或建设性内部人士那里获得信息的公司外部人士进行交易。我认为,这种制度鼓励在不披露实际内幕信息的情况下,将重要信息反映在股市价格上,从而填补了现行披露或弃权制度留下的空白。与此同时,这一提议避免了允许企业员工进行内幕交易的制度所带来的不正当激励和对市场效率的负面影响。
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
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
10.50%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Northwestern University Law Review is a student-operated journal that publishes four issues of high-quality, general legal scholarship each year. Student editors make the editorial and organizational decisions and select articles submitted by professors, judges, and practitioners, as well as student pieces.
期刊最新文献
From the Spirit of the Federalist Papers to the End of Legitimacy: Reflections on Gundy V. United States A New Strategy for Regulating Arbitration Contract Governance in Small-World Networks: The Case of the Maghribi Traders Reconstituting We the People: Frederick Douglass and Jurgen Habermas in Conversation The Discriminatory Effects of the HUD Smoke-Free Policy
×
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