Search results

To analyze the impact of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Liu v. SEC, where the Court confronted the issue of whether the SEC can obtain disgorgement in federal district court proceedings.

This paper provides an overview of the authors’ prior work analyzing courts’ treatment of SEC disgorgement and a summary of the background and opinion in Liu v. SEC. This article then focuses on the practical implications of Liu on SEC disgorgement by considering questions left open by the decision.

The Court in Liu held that the SEC is authorized to seek disgorgement as “equitable relief” as long as it “does not exceed a wrongdoer’s net profits and is awarded for victims.” But the Court left many unanswered questions, such as whether disgorged funds must always be returned to investors for disgorgement to be a permissible equitable remedy, whether the SEC can obtain joint-and-several disgorgement liability from unrelated co-defendants, what “legitimate expenses” should be deducted in disgorgement calculations, and to what extent the SEC can seek disgorgement in cases when victims are difficult to identify.

Original, practical guidance from experienced lawyers in financial services regulatory and enforcement practices, many of whom have previously worked in the SEC’s Division of Enforcement.

To analyze the impact of recent legislation that amended the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to expressly empower the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to seek disgorgement in federal district court proceedings and to codify applicable statutes of limitations.

This article provides an overview of the authors’ prior work analyzing courts’ treatment of SEC disgorgement and summarizes how the scope of the remedy has evolved since Kokesh v. SEC (2017). Then, the article analyzes the changes to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 contained in Section 6501 the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which statutorily empowered the SEC to seek and obtain disgorgement in federal court actions. Finally, the authors discuss the impact of the legislation on the Supreme Court’s decisions in Kokesh and Liu v. SEC (2020).

The availability and appropriateness of SEC disgorgement have been the subject of vigorous debate. Just as courts began to iron out the contours of SEC disgorgement in the wake of Kokesh and Liu, Congress intervened by granting to the SEC explicit statutory authority to seek a remedy traditionally obtained at equity. In passing this legislation, Congress answered some questions that remained after Liu but also raised many new ones. These new questions will likely take years to resolve through subsequent litigation and potentially additional legislation.

Original, practical analysis and guidance from experienced lawyers in financial services regulatory and enforcement practices, many of whom have previously worked in the SEC’s Division of Enforcement.

The purpose of this study is to review a synthesis of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) implementation in developing countries in an attempt to provide directions for future research. The in-depth analysis was performed with the use of the data analysis tool available in the Scopus databases. The study initially reviewed 145 papers and in particular 35 papers were analysed. Fifteen articles (43%) were published in seven journals including International Journal of Accounting, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Advances in Accounting, International Journal of Accounting and Information Management, Asian Review of Accounting, Journal of Applied Accounting Research, and Asian Journal of Business and Accounting. Specifically, 89% citations were from 14 articles, but 9 (25%) articles were without any citations. Most of the studies focus on qualitative followed by quantitative, and very few studies were based on mixed methods. Researchers should focus on few areas for future research on IFRS implementation in developing countries including theory implications, policy prescriptions, and case of particular standard.

Within the last two decades, entrepreneurship education has become institutionalized in Germany. It is offered as a stand-alone program or as part of a business degree, combining academic knowledge, practical skills, and personal development to enhance the entrepreneurial success of university graduates. While entrepreneurship education has experienced similar growth worldwide, its emergence in Germany is closely tied to the country’s political and economic developments. The significance of entrepreneurship education for a thriving entrepreneurial ecosystem and contemporary economic policy has been instrumental in advancing its academic recognition. This chapter provides a historical analysis of the academization of entrepreneurship in Germany. It explores the recursive and often idiosyncratic processes involving state and financial institutions, companies, and universities that have created, respecified, and mutually reinforced a subdiscipline and field of study. Academic entrepreneurship knowledge successively not only became relevant for starting a business but also for employment within the entrepreneurial infrastructure and beyond. This chapter follows a chronological order, highlighting three key stages in the academization of entrepreneurship education. First, the academic, financial, and political roots (I) of entrepreneurship up until the 1970s. Second, it explores the transformation (II) of entrepreneurship into a viable policy alternative and the challenges faced in establishing complementary research and education in higher education institutions during the 1980s. Finally, it sketches the institutionalization (III) of entrepreneurship as a central driver of government economic policy, allowing for the late bloom of entrepreneurship education and research at universities around the turn of the millennium.

The paper provides a theoretical framework for interdisciplinary accounting scholars interested in performances of accountability in front of live audiences.

This is a processual case study of “Falkirk in crisis” that covers the period from September 2021 to September 2022. The focus of this paper is two-fan-Q&A sessions held in October 2021 and June 2022. Both are naturally occurring discussions between two groups such as are found in previous research on routine events and accountability. This is a theoretically consequential case study.

A key insight of the paper is to identify the practical and symbolic dimensions of accountability. The paper demonstrates the need to align these two dimensions when responding to questions: a practical question demands a practical answer and a symbolic question requires a symbolic answer. Second, the paper argues that most fields contain conflicting logics and highlights that a complete performance of accountability needs to cover the different conflicting logics within the field. In this case, this means paying full attention to both the communitarian and results logics. A third finding is that a performance of accountability cannot succeed if the audience rejects attempts to impose an unpalatable definition of the situation. If these three conditions are not met, the performance is bound to fail.

An important theoretical coontribution of the study is the application of Jeffery Alexander’s work on political performance to public performances of accountability.

The phenomenon explored in the paper (what the authors term “grassroots accountability”) has broad applicability to any situation in organizational or civic life where the power apex of an organization is required to engage with a group of informed and committed stakeholders – the “community”. For those who find themselves in the position of the fans in this study, the observations set out in the empirical narrative can serve as a useful practical guide. Attempts to answer a practical complaint with a symbolic answer (or vice versa) should be challenged as evasive.

This paper studies an engagement of elite actors with ordinary (or grassroots) actors. The study shows important rules of engagement, including the importance of respecting the power of practical questions and the need to engage with these questions appropriately.

This paper offers a new vista for interdisciplinary accounting by synthesizing the accountability literature with the political performance literature. Specifically, the paper employs Jeffery Alexander’s work on practical and symbolic performance to study the microprocesses underpinning successful and unsuccessful performances of accountability.

Discussion of the 2016 electorate has centered on two poles: results of public opinion and voter surveys that attempt to tease out whether racial, cultural, or economic grievances were the prime drivers behind the Trump vote and analyses that tie major shifts in the political economy to consequential shifts in the voting behavior of certain demographic and geographic groups. Both approaches render invisible a major development since the 1970s that has been transforming the political, social, and economic landscape of wide swaths of people who do not reside in major urban areas or their prosperous suburban rings: the emergence and consolidation of the carceral state. This chapter sketches out some key contours of the carceral state that have been transforming the polity and economy for poor and working-class people, with a particular focus on rural areas and the declining Rust Belt. It is meant as a correction to the stilted portrait of these groups that congealed in the aftermath of the 2016 election, thanks to their pivotal contribution to Trump's victory. This chapter is not an alternative causal explanation that identifies the carceral state as the key factor in the 2016 election. Rather, it is a call to aggressively widen the analytical lens of studies of the carceral state, which have tended to focus on communities of color in urban areas.

The purpose of this paper is to understand if and how industrialized house building (IHB) could support productivity developments for housebuilding on project and industry levels. The take is that fragmentation of construction is one explanation for the lack of productivity growth, and that IHB could be an integrating method of overcoming horizontal and vertical fragmentation.

Singe-factor productivity measures are calculated based on data reported by IHB companies and compared to official produced and published research data. The survey covers the years 2013–2020 for IHB companies building multi-storey houses in timber. Generalization is sought through descriptive statistics by contrasting the data samples to the used means to control vertical and horizontal fragmentation formulated as three theoretical propositions.

According to the results, IHB in timber is on average more productive than conventional housebuilding at the company level, project level, in absolute and in growth terms over the eight-year period. On the company level, the labour productivity was on average 10% higher for IHB compared to general construction and positioned between general construction and general manufacturing. On the project level, IHB displayed an average cost productivity growth of 19% for an employed prefabrication degree of about 45%.

Empirical evidence is presented quantifying so far perceived advantages of IHB. By providing analysis of actual cost and project data derived from IHB companies, the article quantifies previous research that IHB is not only about prefabrication. The observed positive productivity growth in relation to the employed prefabrication degree indicates that off-site production is not a sufficient mean for reaching high productivity and productivity growth. Instead, the capabilities to integrate the operative logic of conventional housebuilding together with logic of IHB platform development and use is a probable explanation of the observed positive productivity growth.

This chapter estimates heterogeneous productivity growth and spatial spillovers through industrial linkages in the United States and China from 1981 to 2010. The authors employ a spatial Durbin stochastic frontier model and estimates with a spatial weight matrix based on inter-country input–output linkages to describe the spatial interdependencies in technology. The authors estimate productivity growth and spillovers at the industry level using the World KLEMS database. The spillovers of factor inputs and productivity growth are decomposed into domestic and international effects. Most of the spillover effects are found to be significant and the spillovers of productivity growth offered and received provide detailed information reflecting interdependence of the industries in the global value chain (GVC). The authors use this model to evaluate the impact of a US–Sino decoupling of trade links based on simulations of four scenarios of the reductions in bilateral intermediate trade. Their estimation results and their simulations are as mentioned based on date that ends in 2010, as this is the only KLEMS data available for these countries at this level of industrial disaggregation. As the GVC linkages between the United States and China have expanded since the end of their sample period their results can be viewed as informative in their own right for this period as well as possible lower bounds on the extent of the spillovers generated by an expanding GVC.

This study aims to examine the mediating role of organisational fairness on the association between the emphasis on budgets and budget difficulty with budget value and job stress. Data were collected using an online survey questionnaire with 515 responses from middle and lower-level managers in Australian business organisations. The results indicate that organisational fairness fully mediates the association between budget difficulty with both budget value and job stress. Organisational fairness was not found to mediate the association between the emphasis on budgets with budget value and job stress. Rather, the emphasis on budgets was significantly negatively associated with job stress, implying that a greater emphasis on budgets is desirable in alleviating job stress. The findings have important implications for practice.