SSRN Home Search and Download Papers Browse Abstract and Paper Submission Subscribe to Networks View Briefcase Top Papers Top Authors Top Institutions

 

Abstract

 


 



Equity Swaps and Schedule 13D

Bernard S. Black
University of Texas at Austin - School of Law; McCombs School of Business, University of Texas at Austin; European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI); Northwestern University - School of Law; Northwestern University - Kellogg School of Management


May 2008

U of Texas Law, Law and Econ Research Paper No. 133

Abstract:     
In a series of articles with Henry Hu (Hu and Black, 2006, 2007, 2008a, 2008b), I explore the emerging practice of equity decoupling, including both "empty voting" (voting while holding greater voting power than economic ownership) and "hidden (morphable) ownership" (economic ownership which remains undisclosed under current disclosure rules, but can often quickly morph to include voting ownership as well). These forms of decoupling pose risks to the one-share-one-vote paradigm that underlies conventional U.S. models of corporate governance and shareholder voting. We argue that an initial U.S. regulatory response to equity decoupling should be to expand the principal shareholder ownership disclosure rules (Schedule 13D, Schedule 13G, and Form 13F) to cover both economic and voting ownership.

I argue here that rulemaking is the right way to go. An effort by the courts or the SEC to stretch the concept of beneficial ownership under the current 13D rules, to cover equity swaps would be a mistake. Equity swaps alone clearly do not convey beneficial ownership over shares. The case for thinking that equity swaps might convey beneficial ownership relies instead on a complex set of market practices which surround the equity swaps business.. However, these market practices are evolving, and will surely shift in response to whatever the courts or the SEC do. They offer an unstable basis for finding beneficial ownership. Moreover, while the distinction between economic and voting ownership is increasingly unsatisfactory as a basis for regulation, it is an intelligible basis, reflected in a number of SEC rules. Twisting 13(d) to capture equity swaps will produce an unintelligible, inconsistent line, which will soon be evaded.

This paper takes an unusual form. I first introduce, and then present, a letter I wrote to the SEC in connection with ongoing litigation between CSX, which finds itself the target of activist hedge funds, and the hedge funds, which initially acquired equity swaps and today hold a combination of shares and equity swaps.

Conflict disclosure: I was compensated by The Children's Investment Fund and 3G Capital Partners for preparing the letter to the SEC.

Keywords: equity decoupling, equity swaps, hidden ownership, Schedule 13D

JEL Classifications: G18, G32, G34, K22

Working Paper Series

Date posted: ; Last revised: July 07, 2008

Suggested Citation

Black, Bernard S., Equity Swaps and Schedule 13D (May 2008). U of Texas Law, Law and Econ Research Paper No. 133. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1138299


Export to: Export Citation What's this?

Contact Information

Bernard S. Black (Contact Author)
University of Texas at Austin - School of Law ( email )
Austin, TX 78705
United States
512-471-4632 (Phone)
McCombs School of Business, University of Texas at Austin
Austin, TX 78712
United States
European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI)
Brussels Belgium
Northwestern University - School of Law
375 E. Chicago Ave
Chicago, IL 60611
United States
Northwestern University - Kellogg School of Management
2001 Sheridan Road
Evanston, IL 60208
United States
Feedback to SSRN (Beta)


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 120
Downloads: 2

© 2009 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use  Privacy Policy
This page was served by apollo4 in 0.094 seconds.