ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Corporate & Securities Law Blogs -> Truth on the Market

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Corporate & Securities Law

: Truth on the Market

Indoors and outdoors whistleblowing

ADVERTISEMENTS

Today?s WSJ notes criticism of Dodd-Frank?s bounty provision for whistleblowers on the ground that it undermines the internal reporting provisions of the previous financial law, Sarbanes-Oxley.  The WSJ notes that

plaintiffs lawyers eager to handle complaints on behalf of whistleblowers are getting the word out, issuing press releases and publishing articles about the new law and in some instances, running ads soliciting work. “We’re gearing up, we’re going to be very devoted to this topic,” said Rebecca Katz, a lawyer at Bernstein Liebhard LLP, a plaintiffs firm based in New York.

The article says companies are trying to beef up internal reporting incentives.  Indeed, firms have every incentive to encourage employees to report fraud.  After all, fraud is an agency cost that hurts companies as it helps employees cover up bad deeds or poor performance.  

Indeed, companies arguably can take care of these problems without a strong federal law.  Even if you don?t want to go that far, it?s still puzzling why Congress should want to bypass internal procedures altogether.  

There is another way:  authorizing insider trading about fraud, as I argued last summer:

The beauty of the insider trading approach to uncovering fraud is that it reduces the need for a lot of the Dodd-Frank whistle-blowing apparatus. The market decides through its price movements how important or original the information is and computes the insider’s compensation for disclosing it. While the insider might still worry about protecting his job, rewards from selling the information could make the disclosure worth the risk.

Another advantage of the insider trading approach is that it does not necessarily bypass the corporation as a first line of defense against employee fraud. The selling-induced stock drop could motivate honest executives to look into the cause of the decline and take action. The Dodd-Frank procedure always bypasses the corporation by rewarding only whistleblowers who bring new information to the SEC.

Anyway, it’s amusing to watch these misguided federal laws — SOX and Dodd-Frank — getting in each other’s way, with Dodd-Frank disabling the incentives SOX put in place.  I suppose we’ll need yet another federal law to referee.


Filed under: securities regulation

Full post as published by Truth on the Market on November 01, 2010 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0142 secs (new cache)