Search results

The Bureau of Economics in the Federal Trade Commission has a three-part role in the Agency and the strength of its functions changed over time depending on the preferences and ideology of the FTC’s leaders, developments in the field of economics, and the tenor of the times. The over-riding current role is to provide well considered, unbiased economic advice regarding antitrust and consumer protection law enforcement cases to the legal staff and the Commission. The second role, which long ago was primary, is to provide reports on investigations of various industries to the public and public officials. This role was more recently called research or “policy R&D”. A third role is to advocate for competition and markets both domestically and internationally. As a practical matter, the provision of economic advice to the FTC and to the legal staff has required that the economists wear “two hats,” helping the legal staff investigate cases and provide evidence to support law enforcement cases while also providing advice to the legal bureaus and to the Commission on which cases to pursue (thus providing “a second set of eyes” to evaluate cases). There is sometimes a tension in those functions because building a case is not the same as evaluating a case. Economists and the Bureau of Economics have provided such services to the FTC for over 100 years proving that a sub-organization can survive while playing roles that sometimes conflict. Such a life is not, however, always easy or fun.

In June of 2004, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“the SEC”) voted to publish Proposed Regulation B (“Regulation B”), which will implement provisions of the Gramm‐Leach‐Blily Act of 1999 (“GLBA”) that identify activities which banks may engage in without registering as brokers or dealers under The Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (“The Exchange Act”); effectively governing the manner in which banks, savings associations and savings banks effect securities transactions. By enacting the GLBA, Congress repealed most of the remaining vestiges of the ownership restrictions that prevented banks, securities and insurance firms from combining, thereby allowing them to adopt the universal banking model through the creation of financial conglomerates known as “financial holding companies.” Proposed Regulation B (“Regulation B”) supercedes the SEC's final interim rules issued in May of 2001 with respect to banking and brokering activities. In general, banks and their regulators have found Regulation B to be far more acceptable than the final interim rules of 2001. On a practical level, Regulation B results in considerably more work for banks. This article will examine the existing law as it pertains to banks engaging in broker‐dealer activities and highlight the key provisions of Regulation B.

Knight's Industrial Law Reports goes into a new style and format as Managerial Law This issue of KILR is restyled Managerial Law and it now appears on a continuous updating basis rather than as a monthly routine affair.

This paper aims to provide a detailed description of the four releases issued by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on October 14 and 15, 2008 in connection with the three SEC emergency orders that were adopted on September 17 and 18, 2008, relating to the regulation of short selling.

The paper presents a general overview of: Interim Final Temporary Rule 204‐T; Interim Final Temporary Rule 10a‐3T; the Amendments to Regulation SHO; and the Final Rule 10b‐21, each regulating short selling; and highlights each rule's new requirements, the exceptions to those requirements, and the material differences between the new rules and the rules as they were originally adopted.

The Interim Temporary Rules, the Amendments to Regulation SHO and the Final Rule 10b‐21 are important because: Interim Final Temporary Rule 204‐T imposes a penalty on any “participant” of a “registered clearing agency”, as defined below, and any associated broker‐dealer for having a fail‐to‐deliver position at a registered clearing agency in any equity security; Interim Final Temporary Rule 10a‐3T requires certain institutional investment managers to file a new form with the SEC on the last business day of every calendar week subsequent to the manager effecting a short sale; the Amendments to Regulation SHO eliminate the “options market maker exception” from Regulation SHO's close‐out requirement; and Final Rule 10b‐21 prohibits any person from intentionally deceiving a broker‐dealer, or a buyer as to the intention or ability of that person to deliver shares on the settlement date. Each of these actions creates new day‐to‐day compliance responsibility for market participants generally and for US‐registered broker‐dealers in particular.

The paper provides expert guidance on recent SEC releases by experienced securities lawyers.

An Act to amend the law relating to employers and workers and to organisations of employers and organisations of workers; to provide for the establishment of a National Industrial Relations Court and for extending the jurisdiction of industrial tribunals; to provide for the appointment of a Chief Registrar of Trade Unions and Employers' Associations, and of assistant registrars, and for establishing a Commission on Industrial Relations as a statutory body; and for purposes connected with those matters. [5th August 1971]

Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some legal aspects concerning MNEs, cyberspace and e‐commerce as the means of expression of the digital economy. The whole effort of the author is focused on the examination of various aspects of MNEs and their impact upon globalisation and vice versa and how and if we are moving towards a global digital economy.

This study examines emotionologies (Stearns & Stearns, 1985), that is, attitudes that members of an inter-organizational information systems (IOIS) project hold toward emotions and their appropriate expression and regulation in this project. In order to understand attitudes toward emotions and emotion regulation, we suggest the adoption of the concept of emotion structure, consisting of emotion rules and resources (Callahan, 2004).

To investigate the kinds of emotionologies present in this IOIS development project, we have chosen a qualitative case study approach. Our data consists of 41 qualitative interviews, collected in two phases.

We trace how emotion rules and corresponding emotion regulation strategies change among the sub-groups working in the project throughout their first year of collaborating. We show that organizational actors are skilled emotion managers, whose behavior is guided not only by many collective emotion rules (professional, organizational, social) but also by personal emotion rules. Our findings also suggest the need to critically reflect on certain emotion rules, such as those pertaining to the expression of fear and anger, and their potential positive and negative implications on project work.

We argue that group emotionologies with their professional, organizational, and social emotion rules interact with personal emotion rules, resulting in interesting emotion regulation strategies that often try to minimize emotional dissonance, sometimes at the expense of risking open conflict among project members. With this in mind, one theoretical and practical suggestion is to further explore the potential constructive implications of experiencing and expressing fear in projects.

The purpose of this paper is to summarize and explain amendments to SEC Regulation SHO adopted on June 13, 2007

The paper explains elimination of “grandfather” exception to Reg SHO close‐out requirement, explains proposed amendments to options market maker exception and long locate requirement, and explains elimination of all price tests that were designed to restrict short selling in bear markets.

The paper finds that, in June 2007, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) adopted and proposed amendments to the short sales rules under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”). The SEC: adopted amendments to Rules 200 and 203 of Regulation SHO to: the eliminate the “grandfather” exception to the “close out” requirement, extend the current close out requirement of 13 consecutive settlement days for securities sales pursuant to Rule 144 under the Exchange Act to 35 settlement days, and update the market decline limitation relating to index arbitrage trading activity;proposed and re‐proposed amendments to Regulation SHO to eliminate the “option market maker” exception to the close out requirement, and to require broker‐dealers making a sale as “long” to document the present location of the securities being sold; and adopted amendments to Rule 10a‐1 and Regulation SHO to repeal all price tests, including the “tick” test, and to provide that no price test, including any price tests of any self‐regulatory organization (“SRO”), shall apply to short sales of any securities. The adopted amendments to Rule 10a‐1 and Regulation SHO to repeal all price tests took effect on July 3, 2007. The other adopted amendments to Regulation SHO will take effect 60 days after publication in the Federal Register.

The paper provides a concise, practical summary by lawyers who specialize securities markets regulations.

The relatively low capital cost and contributions to mitigating global warming have favoured the continuous construction and operation of nuclear power plants (NPPs) across the world. One critical phase in the operation of nuclear plants for ensuring the safety and security of radioactive products and by-products is decommissioning. With the advent of digital twinning in the building information modelling (BIM) methodology, efficiency and safety can be improved from context-focus access to regulations pertaining to demolition of structures and the cleaning-up of radioactivity inherent in nuclear stations. The purpose of this study, therefore, is to propose a BIM-driven framework to achieve a more regulation-aware and safer decommissioning of nuclear power plants.

The framework considers task requirements, and landscape and environmental factors in modelling demolition scenarios that characterise decommissioning processes. The framework integrates decommissioning rules/regulations in a BIM linked non-structured query system to model items and decommissioning tasks, which are implemented based on context-focussed retrieval of decommissioning rules and regulations. The concept’s efficacy is demonstrated using example cases of digitalised NPPs.

This approach contributes to enhancing improvements in nuclear plant decommissioning with potential for appropriate activity sequencing, risk reduction and ensuring safety.

A BIM-driven framework hinged on querying non-structured databases to provide context-focussed access to nuclear rules and regulations and to aiding decommissioning is new.

To explain the requirements of Regulation Systems Compliance and Integrity (“Regulation SCI”) and the new responsibilities of organizations defined as “SCI entities.”

Explains the purpose of Regulation SCI, the responsibilities of SCI entities, systems covered by the rules (“SCI systems”), and specific obligations of SCI entities, including the establishment and periodic review of policies and procedures, compliance with the Exchange Act, designation of “responsible SCI personnel,” appropriate corrective action in response to “SCI events,” notification of systems changes, annual “SCI reviews,” business continuity and disaster recovery testing, and recordkeeping and filing. Discusses future implications for SCI Entities and other market participants.

Regulation SCI launches a broad and extensive overlay of rules and guidance to address systems capacity and integrity issues that have increasingly affected the securities markets. The adoption of this regulation suggests that there will continue to be increased scrutiny by the SEC, FINRA and other regulators of the automated systems and related policies and procedures of all market participants.

SCI entities will need to devote considerable attention and resources not just to prevent incidents where possible, but also to establish systems for ensuring thorough compliance and well-documented and reasonable follow-up actions where necessary. All market professionals – including broker-dealers, investment advisers, pension funds and investment companies – should study the new regulation and consider adopting appropriate policies and procedures to address operating as well as cyber security issues with respect to their own critical operating technology.

Practical guidance from experienced financial services lawyers.