Exploiting Regulatory Inconsistencies

59 Pages Posted: 12 Feb 2018

See all articles by Emily Cauble

Emily Cauble

DePaul University - College of Law

Date Written: February 9, 2018

Abstract

In many instances, sophisticated parties exploit inconsistencies between regulatory regimes to achieve beneficial treatment under each regime by obtaining classification under one regime that is, at least superficially, inconsistent with classification under the other regime. For instance, parties might design an instrument that is treated as “debt” for tax purposes, but “equity” for purposes of capital requirements instituted by financial regulators.

This Article asks whether exploiting regulatory inconsistencies is problematic. This Article concludes that inconsistency, in and of itself, is not necessarily a problem. Different regulatory regimes might classify a transaction differently when doing so best serves the unique goals of each regime. However, in other cases, inconsistency could be a byproduct of inaccurate classification by at least one regulatory regime. In such cases, the relevant regulator needs to reconsider its classification scheme.

Suggested Citation

Cauble, Emily, Exploiting Regulatory Inconsistencies (February 9, 2018). Washington and Lee Law Review, Vol. 7, No. 4, 2017, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3121254

Emily Cauble (Contact Author)

DePaul University - College of Law ( email )

25 E. Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, IL Cook County 60604-2287
United States

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Downloads
45
Abstract Views
455
PlumX Metrics