Can an Old Dog Learn New Tricks? Applying Traditional Corporate Law Principles to New Social Enterprise Legislation
Georgetown University Law Center
February 1, 2012
13 Transactions: Tenn. J. Bus. L. 221 (2012)
Georgetown Law and Economics Research Paper No. 12-030
Seven U.S. states have recently adopted the benefit corporation or the flexible purpose corporation — two novel corporate forms intended to house social enterprises, i.e., those ventures that pursue social and environmental missions along with profits. And yet, these corporate forms are not viable or sustainable if they do not attract social entrepreneurs or social investors due to the lack of understanding and inquiry into how traditional corporate law principles will be applied to them. This Article begins this necessary examination. As a first approach, this article assesses shareholder primacy and the shareholder wealth maximization norm in the context of the sale of an early-stage flexible purpose corporation. As the market for products and services produced by social enterprises grows, traditional “profit-maximizing” corporations, which may have given limited attention to their social or environmental outputs in the past, want a piece of this market share and can make a rapid market entrance by acquiring an established social enterprise. Using the lens of a corporate acquisition, this article argues that the shareholder wealth maximization norm must be rejected for flexible purpose corporations given the statute’s legislative history and a contractarian view of shareholder primacy where shareholders’ interests are both economic and non-economic. Nonetheless, rejection of the norm leaves a gap in directors’ accountability to shareholders. This article examines alternative accountability mechanisms, including employing a heightened standard of review to the sale of flexible purpose corporations.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 46
Keywords: social enterprise, flexible purpose corporation, benefit corporation, shareholder wealth maximization norm, shareholder primacy, fiduciary duty
JEL Classification: K20, K22, K29
Date posted: February 25, 2012 ; Last revised: October 28, 2015
© 2016 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollobot1 in 2.219 seconds