法律要求ERM吗?金融和政府机构可以,私营企业不可以

A. Whitman
{"title":"法律要求ERM吗?金融和政府机构可以,私营企业不可以","authors":"A. Whitman","doi":"10.1111/rmir.12045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We examine whether enterprise risk management (ERM) is legally required for financial institutions (e.g., banks, securities brokerage firms, insurance, hedge funds and mutual funds), government entities, publicly traded companies, and private enterprises. We find that ERM is legally required for U.S. financial institutions and for some government-sponsored enterprises. Legally required means required by U.S. statutes, federal case law, or U.S. regulatory agencies (e.g., Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC]). ERM is an important factor for rating organizations (e.g., Standard & Poor's [S&P]), but not legally required. We found no U.S. statutes or federal court cases requiring an ERM framework for private enterprises, although ERM is accepted as a value-contributing best practice, and elements of ERM are practiced by some private enterprises. For publically traded companies, elements of ERM are required by federal statute, by the SEC, and by S&P. We suggest that if a private enterprise is sued in U.S. federal court alleging breach of a legal duty to practice ERM, the suit will likely be dismissed. We trace the development of ERM from a traditional risk management (TRM) base. Fortunately, ERM is recognized as a value-contributing best practice in corporate governance even when legal standards do not require it.","PeriodicalId":366327,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Other Econometrics: Applied Econometric Modeling in Financial Economics (Topic)","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is ERM Legally Required? Yes for Financial and Governmental Institutions, No for Private Enterprises\",\"authors\":\"A. Whitman\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/rmir.12045\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We examine whether enterprise risk management (ERM) is legally required for financial institutions (e.g., banks, securities brokerage firms, insurance, hedge funds and mutual funds), government entities, publicly traded companies, and private enterprises. We find that ERM is legally required for U.S. financial institutions and for some government-sponsored enterprises. Legally required means required by U.S. statutes, federal case law, or U.S. regulatory agencies (e.g., Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC]). ERM is an important factor for rating organizations (e.g., Standard & Poor's [S&P]), but not legally required. We found no U.S. statutes or federal court cases requiring an ERM framework for private enterprises, although ERM is accepted as a value-contributing best practice, and elements of ERM are practiced by some private enterprises. For publically traded companies, elements of ERM are required by federal statute, by the SEC, and by S&P. We suggest that if a private enterprise is sued in U.S. federal court alleging breach of a legal duty to practice ERM, the suit will likely be dismissed. We trace the development of ERM from a traditional risk management (TRM) base. Fortunately, ERM is recognized as a value-contributing best practice in corporate governance even when legal standards do not require it.\",\"PeriodicalId\":366327,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ERN: Other Econometrics: Applied Econometric Modeling in Financial Economics (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ERN: Other Econometrics: Applied Econometric Modeling in Financial Economics (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/rmir.12045\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Other Econometrics: Applied Econometric Modeling in Financial Economics (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rmir.12045","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

摘要

我们研究企业风险管理(ERM)是否在法律上要求金融机构(如银行、证券经纪公司、保险、对冲基金和共同基金)、政府实体、上市公司和私营企业。我们发现,对于美国的金融机构和一些政府资助的企业,ERM是法律所要求的。法律要求是指美国法规、联邦判例法或美国监管机构(如证券交易委员会[SEC])所要求的。ERM是评级机构(如标准普尔[S&P])的一个重要因素,但不是法律要求。我们没有发现任何美国法规或联邦法院案例要求私营企业采用ERM框架,尽管ERM被认为是一种贡献价值的最佳实践,而且一些私营企业也在实践ERM的要素。对于上市公司,联邦法规、SEC和标准普尔都要求具备ERM的要素。我们认为,如果一家私营企业在美国联邦法院因违反实施ERM的法律义务而被起诉,诉讼可能会被驳回。我们从传统的风险管理(TRM)的基础上追溯ERM的发展。幸运的是,即使法律标准没有要求,ERM也被认为是公司治理中贡献价值的最佳实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Is ERM Legally Required? Yes for Financial and Governmental Institutions, No for Private Enterprises
We examine whether enterprise risk management (ERM) is legally required for financial institutions (e.g., banks, securities brokerage firms, insurance, hedge funds and mutual funds), government entities, publicly traded companies, and private enterprises. We find that ERM is legally required for U.S. financial institutions and for some government-sponsored enterprises. Legally required means required by U.S. statutes, federal case law, or U.S. regulatory agencies (e.g., Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC]). ERM is an important factor for rating organizations (e.g., Standard & Poor's [S&P]), but not legally required. We found no U.S. statutes or federal court cases requiring an ERM framework for private enterprises, although ERM is accepted as a value-contributing best practice, and elements of ERM are practiced by some private enterprises. For publically traded companies, elements of ERM are required by federal statute, by the SEC, and by S&P. We suggest that if a private enterprise is sued in U.S. federal court alleging breach of a legal duty to practice ERM, the suit will likely be dismissed. We trace the development of ERM from a traditional risk management (TRM) base. Fortunately, ERM is recognized as a value-contributing best practice in corporate governance even when legal standards do not require it.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Kidnap and Ransom Insurance: A Strategically Useful, Often Undiscussed, Marketplace Tool for International Operations Regret in Health Insurance Post‐Purchase Behavior A Conceptual Model for Pricing Health and Life Insurance Using Wearable Technology Risk Management Roles of the Public and Private Sector ACA Exchange Competitiveness in Michigan
×
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