Quacks or Bootleggers: Who's Really Regulating Hedge Funds?

49 Pages Posted: 2 Oct 2016 Last revised: 15 Feb 2017

Jeremy Kidd

Mercer University - Walter F. George School of Law

Date Written: February 7, 2017

Abstract

Influential scholars of corporate law have questioned previous federal interventions into corporate governance, calling it quackery. Invoking images of medical malpractice, these critiques have argued persuasively that Congress, in responding to crises, make policy that disrupts efficient private rules and established state laws. This article applies the Bootleggers and Baptists theory to show that Dodd-Frank’s hedge-fund rules are more than just negligent or reckless, but designed to benefit special interests that compete with the hedge fund model. Those rules offer no solutions to any real or perceived risks arising from hedge-fund investing, but might offer an advantage to competitors of hedge funds.

Keywords: Hedge Funds, corporate law, public choice, securities regulation

JEL Classification: D72, G38, K22, P16

Suggested Citation

Kidd, Jeremy, Quacks or Bootleggers: Who's Really Regulating Hedge Funds? (February 7, 2017). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2846243

Jeremy Kidd (Contact Author)

Mercer University - Walter F. George School of Law ( email )

1021 Georgia Ave
Macon, GA 31207-0001
United States

Paper statistics

Downloads
83
Rank
248,289
Abstract Views
437