Search results

The purpose of this paper is to discuss state securities legend requirements for private offerings made pursuant to Rule 506 of Regulation D, with a particular focus on hedge fund and private equity fund issuers.

The paper explains relevant federal and state securities registration laws, including the National Securities Market Improvement Act of 1956 (“NSMIA”), which creates a category of “covered securities” that are partially preempted from certain state securities regulations. Explains that offerings under Rule 506 of Regulation D are “covered securities” under NSMIA, but that an issuer that offers its securities may be considered a broker‐dealer under some state broker‐dealer laws; those state broker‐dealer registration laws may require a state securities legend on offering documents in order to meet a state exemption from registering as a broker‐dealer in the state. It also explains state legend requirements under state broker‐dealer laws in general and then provides detail on four states whose legends practitioners often include in private placement memos: Florida, Georgia, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania.

The paper finds that state securities legends, other than Florida's legend, will never be required for a Rule 506 offering, and the inclusion of unnecessary legends, even as a precaution, can result in confusion or possibly claims that the issuer has violated state securities laws or included misleading information.

The paper provides practical advice from an experienced securities lawyer.

In this paper, the author develops a game theoretical model to understand why Union Government of India, as a third party, has used different schemes at different times in history to assist the State Governments in fighting the Naxalite insurgency. Comparing across schemes, it was found that though Matching Security Grants scheme was preferred in general, during asymmetric information scenario it led to an emergency situation wherein the Union Government had to provide the less preferred Bulk Security Grants. Later, it became difficult to withdraw these grants as the State Governments free rode by reducing own security contribution. The author finds that instead, in this scenario, Matching Development Grants are more suitable, as they incentivize the State Governments to reveal private information and help the Union Government exit its third-party role. For a practitioner involved in conflict resolution, these conclusions imply that as the desirability of policies can change diametrically overtime, Union Government must spend resources only on those heads of expenditure that provide both security and development benefits provided they aid in preventing flow of resources to Naxalites. Further, to end its assistance, the Union Government’s expenditures should also complement the capabilities of the State Government rather than substituting them. These results can also guide policy in other protracted civil wars with substantial third-party intervention, which are common these days.

The paper is an historical analysis of strategies used by Union and State Governments and Naxalites. The analysis is based on game theoretic tools supported with examples.

The Union Government must provide matching grants instead of bulk grants such as Central Armed Police Forces, and the grants should be aimed at building complementarities with the state governments’ security contributions. Under asymmetric information scenario, the Union and State Governments reduce their expenses incurred to fight the Naxalites. A Matching Development Grants scheme would have done better. Union Government must spend resources on heads of expenditure that provides both Development and Security benefits, to curb flow of resources to Naxalites, besides complementing the Security Contributions of the State Government.

The research is limited by disaggregated data to test the hypotheses. It is also limited by the data on hidden variables like the contribution of the Naxalites to fighting. The research is also limited to the extent that individual groups in the war like police commanders, politicians and Naxalite commanders are not incorporated. Multiple asymmetric parties are also not considered; that may generalize the model to other theaters of insurgency.

Certain heads of expenditure such as roads, mobile communication, improving quality of investigation, preventing human rights violations by the security forces, etc. are both security and development enhancing. The Union Government's expenditures must be directed toward this end. Therefore, from a practitioner's perspective, the debate between greed and grievances exists not as a limitation but as a guide. The relevant articles of Constitution of India must be redrafted on these principles. Third-party interventions in other insurgencies may be revisited under these conclusions.

Security and Development policies are tools for controlling Naxalite insurgency, which can also be used to prevent flow of resources to Naxalites. Security and development policies to resolving insurgencies are useful at different information scenarios. Therefore, information neutral policies should be preferred.

This paper has contributed theoretically in modeling continuing conflicts like Naxalite insurgency, explicitly. The author also shows that though the field of civil wars may have evolved along the Greed vs Grievance debate (Collier and Hoeffler, 2004), for a practitioner, the lines blur when it comes to solutions, as many heads of expenditures have features of both security and development. This paper also shows that when the Union Government faced asymmetric information scenario, the policy of matching development grants would be beneficial in long run though of limited value in short run. This is an important conclusion as the most intense period of violence was preceded by the asymmetric information scenario. Besides, it has relevance for the other civil wars with third-party intervention, such as NATO in Afghanistan.

The events of September 11, 2001 forever changed policing with state and local law enforcement now playing a central role. In this new role many agencies have begun to re‐assess how they best fulfil the demands of homeland security and provide traditional law enforcement. Intelligence‐led policing (ILP) has been advocated as one approach with the potential to confront both terrorism and traditional crime problems; however, the degree to which ILP has been widely embraced remains relatively unexamined. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate whether level of involvement with homeland security related intelligence subsequent to 9/11 has had a significant impact on interactions between state and federal agencies, and facilitated organizational change in state law enforcement agencies.

Using data collected from a survey of state law enforcement agencies, the paper examines whether involvement in homeland security and the allocation of resources toward intelligence have had an impact on organizational change consistent with ILP.

Findings suggest increased involvement in homeland security significantly increased interaction between some state and federal agencies and significantly impacted organizational functions of intelligence, grants, and planning. However, contrary to expectations, allocation of resources had little impact on levels of interaction between agencies or broader organizational functions.

Findings suggest that while advances are being made which are consistent with ILP, improvements could be made in the role of theory and evidence‐based practice in driving reforms. More thoughtful distribution of homeland security grants targeting organizational change may be useful in stimulating such efforts. The findings are instructional in how the contemporary context and emerging trends such as ILP are likely to affect organizational change. Specifically, they suggest that if ILP is a desired model for reform in policing, further incentives to pursue its objectives may be necessary.

Most studies of ILP focus on case studies of single agencies. There are no studies which explicitly examine the degree to which principles of ILP have been reflected in organizational change within a broad sample of agencies. The present paper assesses such changes within a national (US) sample of law enforcement agencies.

This study aims to analyze the impact of Arab Revolution on the Arabian Gulf security by applying on Yemeni Revolution. This can be achieved by analyzing the threat of Arab Spring Revolutions to the national security of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries after the breakout of demonstrations and protests in some of the member states. In addition to its analysis of threat of the Regional Security of the Gulf as a result of Yemeni Revolution and Civil War and Iranian intervention to support Houthis within light of regional anarchy and security competition according to the Neorealism and how the GCC Countries face such threats.

The study depended on the historical methodology to track the developments of some events related to the Gulf Security and crisis in Yemen. Moreover, it used the analytical approach to analyze the impact of Arab Revolutions and Yemeni Civil War on the Arab Gulf Security. In addition, it depended on the realistic approach to explain the security state at the national and regional level of the Arab Gulf countries within light of regional anarchy, security competition and Iranian support to Houthis “Non-State Actors” (Kenneth Waltz), as well as the offensive realism (John Mearsheimer).

The Arab Revolutions had an effect on the national security of GCC countries according to the Neorealism due to the breakout of demonstrations and protests in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Sultanate of Oman which reached to the degree of threatening the existence of the state as in Bahrain. The Gulf Regional Security is influenced by Revolution and Civil War in Yemen as a result of that Iranian support to Houthis within light of security competition between Iran and Saudi Arabia, leading to the threat of the Arabian Gulf Security as Yemen is the southern gate to the GCC Countries and having joint borders with Saudi Arabia and Sultanate of Oman. Moreover, the GCC countries dealt with that threat individually, such as, performing internal reforms, or collectively through using military force, such as Bahrain and Yemen (Offensive Realism).

This study is an introduction to explain the Arab Spring Revolutions, conflict in Yemen and its threat to the Arab Gulf Security according to the Neorealism based on that the GCC countries sought to keep its existence and sovereignty in confrontation to the demonstrations and internal protests and to keep the regional security in confrontation to the threats of neighboring countries such as the Civil War in Yemen and the Iranian Support to Houthis in light of the regional anarchy.

If complaints about an agent’s sale of “ABC” mutual fund are handled by the state securities commissioner… Why should complaints about the same agent’s sale of a variable annuity invested in “ABC” mutual fund be handled exclusively by the state insurance commissioner? Are state laws enacted 35 years ago still relevant today when most agents who sell variable annuities are also licensed to sell mutual funds?

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the current problems and the main perspectives of the development of state regulation of the Russian system of higher education in the context of the provision of Russia’s national security.

The research of formation of the system of national security in Russia and the problems of the development of education is based on the methods of Russian and foreign Institutionalists (D. North, S.G. Kirdina, R.M. Nureev, Y.V. Latov, etc.). The research is also based on the theory of inequality in the system of education (D.L. Konstantinovsky), the idea of cultural aspects of social inequality (Pierre Bourdieu) and the theory that connects the problem of the development of the educational system with the system of national security and social inequalities (A.V. Vereshchagina, S.I. Samygina, etc.).

The modern state and perspectives of state regulation of higher education in the modern Russian conditions are analyzed in this paper. A complex analysis of risks of the modern state of Russia’s educational system is performed, and educational inequality as a risk to national security is studied in this paper. Perspectives of state regulation of higher education in view of the national model of socio-economic activities and principles of national security are viewed in this paper. The main directions of improving the educational system in the context of the provision of national security of the state are given in this paper.

The results of the research could be used for correcting the main directions of Russia’s socio-economic policy in the long term. The central trend of this policy is the reformation of the development of the sphere of education as a factor of the formation of the system of Russia’s national security.

The results of the research could be used for correcting the main directions of Russia’s socio-economic policy in the long term. The central trend of this policy is the reformation of the development of the sphere of education as a factor of formation of the system of Russia’s national security.

The ideas of the research could stimulate the reconsideration and harmonization of perspectives of the development of social policy of the state, which includes the interaction of the development of higher education and system of national security.

Originality of this paper consists in setting the problem of the implementation of social senses of the development of state policy in the sphere of higher education into the discourse of theoretical and practical consideration of the problems of national security.

Throughout the history of commerce, individuals have searched for informational advantages that will lead to their enrichment. In a time of global capital markets, 24 hours a day trading opportunities, and a professional services corps of market experts, informational advantages are pursued by virtually every market participant. This paper examines one of the most vilified informational advantages in modern capital markets: insider trading. In the USA during the 1980s, insider trading scandals occupied the front pages of not only the trade papers, but also quotidian tabloids. Assailed for its unfairness and characterised by some as thievery, insider trading incidents increased calls for stricter regulation of the marketplace and its participants. In the aftermath of the spectacular insider trading litigation in the USA in the late 1980s, many foreign states began to re‐evaluate the effectiveness of their own regulatory structures. In large part, this reassessment was not the produce of domestic demand, but constituted a response to American agitation for increased regulation of insider trading.