Regulatory competition

Last updated

Regulatory competition, also called competitive governance or policy competition, is a phenomenon in law, economics and politics concerning the desire of lawmakers to compete with one another in the kinds of law offered in order to attract businesses or other actors to operate in their jurisdiction. Regulatory competition depends upon the ability of actors such as companies, workers or other kinds of people to move between two or more separate legal systems. Once this is possible, then the temptation arises for the people running those different legal systems to compete to offer better terms than their "competitors" to attract investment. Historically, regulatory competition has operated within countries having federal systems of regulation - particularly the United States, but since the mid-20th century and the intensification of economic globalisation, regulatory competition became an important issue internationally.

Contents

One opinion is that regulatory competition in fact creates a "race to the top" in standards, due to the ability of different actors to select the most efficient rules by which to be governed. The main fields of law affected by the phenomenon of regulatory competition are corporate law, labour law, tax and environmental law. Another opinion is that regulatory competition between jurisdictions creates a "race to the bottom" in standards, due to the decreased ability of any jurisdiction to enforce standards without the cost of driving investment abroad.

History

The concept of regulatory competition emerged from the late 19th and early 20th century experience with charter competition among US states to attract corporations to domicile in their jurisdiction. In 1890 New Jersey enacted a liberal corporation charter, which charged low fees for company registration and lower franchise taxes than other states. Delaware attempted to copy the law to attract companies to its own state. This competition ended when Woodrow Wilson as Governor tightened New Jersey's laws again through a series of seven statutes.

The landscape of competition policy has undergone continuous evolution globally since the late 19th century. Understanding the present-day economy necessitates a thorough grasp of the historical development of competition. [1]

In academic literature the phenomenon of regulatory competition reducing standards overall was argued for by AA Berle and GC Means in The Modern Corporation and Private Property (1932) while the concept received formal recognition by the US Supreme Court in a decision of Justice Louis Brandeis in the 1933 case Ligget Co. v. Lee [2] In 1932 Brandeis also coined the term “laboratories of democracy” in New State Ice Company v. Liebmann , [3] noting that the Federal government was capable of ending experiment.

Private law

Corporate law

American corporate law scholars have debated on the role of the regulatory competition on corporate law for more than one decade. A Comparative Bibliography In the United States legal academia, corporate law is conventionally said to be the product of a "race" among states to attract incorporations by making their corporate laws attractive to those who choose where to incorporate. Given that it has long been possible to incorporate in one state while doing business primarily in other states, US states have rarely been able or willing to use law tied to where a firm is incorporated to regulate or constrain corporations or those who run them. However, U.S. states have long regulated corporations with other laws (e.g., environmental laws, employment laws) that are not tied to where a firm is incorporated, but are based on where a firm does business.[ citation needed ]

From the "race" to attract incorporations, Delaware has emerged as the winner, at least among publicly traded corporations. The corporate franchise tax accounts for between 15% and 20% of the state's budget.[ citation needed ]

In Europe, regulatory competition has long been prevented by the real seat doctrine prevailing in private international law of many EU and EEA member countries, which essentially required companies to be incorporated in the state where their main office was located. However, in a series of cases between 1999 and 2003 (Centros Ltd. vs. Erhvervs- og Selskabsstyrelsen, Überseering BV v Nordic Construction Company Baumanagement GmbH, Kamer van Koophandel en Fabrieken voor Amsterdam v Inspire Art Ltd.), the European Court of Justice has forced member states to recognize companies chartered in other member states, which is likely to foster regulatory competition in European company law. For instance, in 2008, Germany adopted new regulations on the GmbH (Limited Liability Company), allowing the incorporation of Limited Liability Companies [UG (haftungsbeschränkt)] without a minimum capital of EUR 25,000 (though 25% of earnings have to be retained until this threshold is reached).

Labour law

Countries may, for instance, seek to attract foreign direct investment by enacting a lower minimum wage than other countries, [4] or by making the labor market more flexible. [5]

Taxation

Environmental law

Legal scholars often cite environmental law as a field in which regulatory competition is particularly likely to produce a “race to the bottom” due to the externalities produced by changes in any individual state's environmental law. Because a state is unlikely to bear all of the costs associated with any environment damage caused by industries in that state, it has an incentive to lower standards below the level that would be desirable if the state were forced to bear all of the costs. [6] One commonly cited example of this effect is clean air laws, as states may be incentivized to lower their standards to attract business, knowing that the effects of the increased pollution will be spread across a wide area, and not simply localized within the state. Furthermore, a reduction in the standards of one state will incentivize other states to similarly lower their standards so as to not lose business.

Public services

Education

Sometimes higher-level governing bodies institute incentives to competition among lower-level governing bodies, [7] an example being the Race to the Top program, designed by the United States Department of Education to spur reforms in state and local district K-12 education.

The German Federal Ministry of Education and Research likewise has initiated a program called InnoRegio to reward innovative practices.

Health

The high degree of politicization of the genetically modified organism issue made it a key battleground for competition for leadership, particularly between the European Commission and the European Council of Ministers. The result has been a protracted battle over agenda setting and issue framing and a cycle of competitive regulatory reinforcement. [8]

Security

The struggle between insurgents and various Afghanistan states for power, control, popular support and legitimacy in the eyes of the public has been described as competitive governance. [9]

While during the Cold War security was provided by centralized institutions such as NATO and the Warsaw Pact, now competing profit-seeking firms provide personal, national, and international security. [10]

Theory

Arnold Kling notes, "In democratic government, people take jurisdictions as given, and they elect leaders. In competitive government, people take leaders as given, and they select jurisdictions." [11] Competitive governance has thus far not produced an ultra-libertarian government; although Zac Gochenour has pointed out the role of potential international migrants' switching costs in hindering consumer choice from creating greater intergovernmental competition, Bryan Caplan has stated that "[t]he bigger problem is that almost all existing governments are either non-profits (the democracies), have short time horizons (the unstable dictatorships), or reasonably worry that if they liberalize they're lose power (the stable dictatorships)." Indeed, it has been argued by Maria Brouwer that most autocracies prefer stagnation to the vagaries inherent to expansion and other forms of innovation, since the exploration of new possibilities could lead to failure, which would undermine autocratic authority. [12] There has been some question as to whether competitive governance can be revived in Australia. [13]

Advantages

Brennan and Buchanan (1980) argue that the public sector is a 'Leviathan' which is inherently biased towards extracting money from taxpayers, but that competitive government structures can minimize such exploitation. [14] It has also been argued that a decentralized competitive government structure allows for an experimentation of new public policies without doing too much harm if they fail. [15]

Disadvantages

An alternative to market-based or competitive governance is civic-based or partnership governance. [16] Alleged disadvantages of competitive governance, compared to collaborative government, include less potential to harness the power of knowledge sharing, cooperation and collaboration within government. [17]

See also

Notes

  1. "Competition history". www.autoritedelaconcurrence.fr. 2019-10-22. Retrieved 2023-10-07.
  2. 288 U.S. 517, 558-559 (1933)
  3. 285 U.S. 262, 311 (1932)
  4. K Bjorvatn; C Eckel (October 2006), "Policy competition for foreign direct investment between asymmetric countries", European Economic Review, 50 (7): 1891–1907, doi:10.1016/j.euroecorev.2005.07.002, hdl: 11250/162818
  5. Haaland, Jan I. & Wooton, Ian (January 2002), Multinational Investment, Industry Risk and Policy Competition, CEPR Discussion Paper No. 3152, SSRN   298844
  6. Berkeley Law [ permanent dead link ]
  7. A Benz; A Meincke (2005), Policy Competition in Multilevel Governance, International Workshop "Regional Governance", CiteSeerX   10.1.1.134.5357
  8. Yves Tiberghien (May 2009), "Competitive Governance and the Quest for Legitimacy in the EU: the Battle over the Regulation of GMOs since the mid-1990s", Journal of European Integration, 31 (3): 389–407, doi:10.1080/07036330902782246, S2CID   154071994
  9. G Skogstad; A Verdun (2009), Taliban Governance: Can Canada Compete? (PDF), Journal of European Integration, archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-07-16
  10. Per Kristen Mydske; Ingo Peters. The transformation of the European nation state.
  11. Kling, Arnold (2008), Competitive Government vs. Democratic Government (PDF), archived from the original (PDF) on 2010-02-15
  12. M Brouwer (2006), Democracy and Dictatorship: The Politics of Innovation (PDF), archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-09-07
  13. W Kasper (October 2007), "Australia's hollow federalism: can we revive competitive governance?", Institute of Public Affairs Review: A Quarterly Review of Politics and Public Affairs, the, Institute of Public Affairs Review: A Quarterly Review, 59 (3): 34
  14. Boyne, George A. (3 Apr 2007), Local Government Structure and Performance: Lessons from America?, vol. 70, Public Administration, pp. 333–357[ dead link ]
  15. LP Feld; G Kirchgässner; CA Schaltegger (2003), Decentralized taxation and the size of government: evidence from Swiss state and local governments (PDF), doi:10.2139/ssrn.478261, SSRN   478261
  16. Enjolras, Bernard (September 2009), "Between Market and Civic Governance Regimes: Civicness in the Governance of Social Services in Europe", Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 20 (3): 274–290, doi:10.1007/s11266-009-9091-2, S2CID   144253817
  17. F Salem; Y Jarrar (2009), Government 2.0? Technology, Trust and Collaboration in the UAE Public Sector (PDF), archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-07-25, retrieved 2010-08-22

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Corporation</span> Legal entity incorporated through a legislative or registration process

A corporation is an organization—usually a group of people or a company—authorized by the state to act as a single entity and recognized as such in law for certain purposes. Early incorporated entities were established by charter. Most jurisdictions now allow the creation of new corporations through registration. Corporations come in many different types but are usually divided by the law of the jurisdiction where they are chartered based on two aspects: whether they can issue stock, or whether they are formed to make a profit. Depending on the number of owners, a corporation can be classified as aggregate or sole.

Business is the practice of making one's living or making money by producing or buying and selling products. It is also "any activity or enterprise entered into for profit."

A nonprofit organization (NPO) or non-profit organization, also known as a non-business entity, or nonprofit institution, is a legal entity organized and operated for a collective, public or social benefit, in contrary with an entity that operates as a business aiming to generate a profit for its owners. A nonprofit is subject to the non-distribution constraint: any revenues that exceed expenses must be committed to the organization's purpose, not taken by private parties. An array of organizations are nonprofit, including some political organizations, schools, business associations, churches, social clubs, and consumer cooperatives. Nonprofit entities may seek approval from governments to be tax-exempt, and some may also qualify to receive tax-deductible contributions, but an entity may incorporate as a nonprofit entity without securing tax-exempt status.

Race to the bottom is a socio-economic phrase to describe either government deregulation of the business environment or reduction in corporate tax rates, in order to attract or retain economic activity in their jurisdictions. While this phenomenon can happen between countries as a result of globalization and free trade, it also can occur within individual countries between their sub-jurisdictions. It may occur when competition increases between geographic areas over a particular sector of trade and production. The effect and intent of these actions is to lower labor rates, cost of business, or other factors over which governments can exert control.

Corporate governance are mechanisms, processes and relations by which corporations are controlled and operated ("governed").

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Corporate social responsibility</span> Form of corporate self-regulation aimed at contributing to social or charitable goals

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) or corporate social impact is a form of international private business self-regulation which aims to contribute to societal goals of a philanthropic, activist, or charitable nature by engaging in, with, or supporting professional service volunteering through pro bono programs, community development, administering monetary grants to non-profit organizations for the public benefit, or to conduct ethically oriented business and investment practices. While once it was possible to describe CSR as an internal organizational policy or a corporate ethic strategy similar to what is now known today as Environmental, Social, Governance (ESG); that time has passed as various companies have pledged to go beyond that or have been mandated or incentivized by governments to have a better impact on the surrounding community. In addition national and international standards, laws, and business models have been developed to facilitate and incentivize this phenomenon. Various organizations have used their authority to push it beyond individual or even industry-wide initiatives. In contrast, it has been considered a form of corporate self-regulation for some time, over the last decade or so it has moved considerably from voluntary decisions at the level of individual organizations to mandatory schemes at regional, national, and international levels. Moreover, scholars and firms are using the term "creating shared value", an extension of corporate social responsibility, to explain ways of doing business in a socially responsible way while making profits.

Tax competition, a form of regulatory competition, exists when governments use reductions in fiscal burdens to encourage the inflow of productive resources or to discourage the exodus of those resources. Often, this means a governmental strategy of attracting foreign direct investment, foreign indirect investment, and high value human resources by minimizing the overall taxation level and/or special tax preferences, creating a comparative advantage.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Corporate law</span> Body of law that governs businesses

Corporate law is the body of law governing the rights, relations, and conduct of persons, companies, organizations and businesses. The term refers to the legal practice of law relating to corporations, or to the theory of corporations. Corporate law often describes the law relating to matters which derive directly from the life-cycle of a corporation. It thus encompasses the formation, funding, governance, and death of a corporation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bank regulation</span> Rules and guidelines of financial institutions accepting deposits

Bank regulation is a form of government regulation which subjects banks to certain requirements, restrictions and guidelines, designed to create market transparency between banking institutions and the individuals and corporations with whom they conduct business, among other things. As regulation focusing on key factors in the financial markets, it forms one of the three components of financial law, the other two being case law and self-regulating market practices.

Regulatory economics is the application of law by government or regulatory agencies for various economics-related purposes, including remedying market failure, protecting the environment and economic management.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">State-corporate crime</span>

State-corporate crime is a concept in criminology for crimes that result from the relationship between the policies of the state and the policies and practices of commercial corporations. The term was coined by Kramer and Michalowski (1990), and redefined by Aulette and Michalowski (1993). These definitions were intended to include all "socially injurious acts" and not merely those that are defined by the local criminal jurisdiction as crime. This is not universally accepted as a valid definition so a less contentious version has been adopted here. As an academic classification, it is distinguished from:

A tax incentive is an aspect of a government's taxation policy designed to incentivize or encourage a particular economic activity by reducing tax payments.

A statutory corporation is a government entity created as a statutory body by statute. Their precise nature varies by jurisdiction, but they are corporations owned by a government or controlled by national or sub-national government to the extent provided for in the creating legislation.

A statutory body or statutory authority is a body set up by law (statute) that is authorised to implement certain legislation on behalf of the relevant country or state, sometimes by being empowered or delegated to set rules in their field. They are typically found in countries which are governed by a British style of parliamentary democracy such as the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth countries like Australia, Canada, India and New Zealand. They are also found in Israel and elsewhere. Statutory authorities may also be statutory corporations, if created as a body corporate.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States corporate law</span> Overview of United States corporate law

United States corporate law regulates the governance, finance and power of corporations in US law. Every state and territory has its own basic corporate code, while federal law creates minimum standards for trade in company shares and governance rights, found mostly in the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended by laws like the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002 and the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. The US Constitution was interpreted by the US Supreme Court to allow corporations to incorporate in the state of their choice, regardless of where their headquarters are. Over the 20th century, most major corporations incorporated under the Delaware General Corporation Law, which offered lower corporate taxes, fewer shareholder rights against directors, and developed a specialized court and legal profession. Nevada has attempted to do the same. Twenty-four states follow the Model Business Corporation Act, while New York and California are important due to their size.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Offshore financial centre</span> Corporate-focused tax havens

An offshore financial centre (OFC) is defined as a "country or jurisdiction that provides financial services to nonresidents on a scale that is incommensurate with the size and the financing of its domestic economy."

Fund governance refers to a system of checks and balances and work performed by the governing body (board) of an investment fund to ensure that the fund is operated not only in accordance with law, but also in the best interests of the fund and its investors. The objective of fund governance is to uphold the regulatory principles commonly known as the four pillars of investor protection that are typically promulgated through the investment fund regulation applicable in the jurisdiction of the fund. These principles vary by jurisdiction and in the US, the 1940 Act generally ensure that: (i) The investment fund will be managed in accordance with the fund's investment objectives, (ii) The assets of the investment fund will be kept safe, (iii) When investors redeem they will get their pro rata share of the investment fund's assets, (iv) The investment fund will be managed for the benefit of the fund's shareholders and not its service providers.

The California effect is the shift of consumer, environmental and other regulations in the direction of political jurisdictions with stricter regulatory standards. The name is derived from the spread of some advanced environmental regulatory standards that were originally adopted by the U.S. state of California and eventually adopted in other states. This spread is supported by large corporations, which stand to gain as they have the resources necessary to deal with the regulations, unlike their smaller competitors. This process is the opposite of the Delaware effect; this is simply the race to the bottom in which different countries are simply reducing their regulatory burden to attract more of the businesses into their jurisdiction. The assumption behind the Delaware effect is that in the competitive regulatory environment, governments have to remove their regulatory barriers to allow easier functioning of their corporations and to attract new companies to establish their business.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ireland as a tax haven</span> Allegation that Ireland facilitates tax base erosion and profit shifting

Ireland has been labelled as a tax haven or corporate tax haven in multiple financial reports, an allegation which the state has rejected in response. Ireland is on all academic "tax haven lists", including the § Leaders in tax haven research, and tax NGOs. Ireland does not meet the 1998 OECD definition of a tax haven, but no OECD member, including Switzerland, ever met this definition; only Trinidad & Tobago met it in 2017. Similarly, no EU–28 country is amongst the 64 listed in the 2017 EU tax haven blacklist and greylist. In September 2016, Brazil became the first G20 country to "blacklist" Ireland as a tax haven.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Global minimum corporate tax rate</span> Proposed international tax scheme

The global minimum corporate tax rate, or simply the global minimum tax, is a minimum rate of tax on corporate income internationally agreed upon and accepted by individual jurisdictions. Each country would be eligible to a share of revenue generated by the tax. The aim is to reduce tax competition between countries and discourage multinational corporations (MNC) from profit shifting to achieve tax avoidance.

References

General
Corporate law
Labour law