Money as Infrastructure

Traditional infrastructure regulation—the law of regulated industries—rests atop three pillars: rate regulation, entry restriction, and universal service. This mode of regulation has typically been applied to providers of network-type resources: resources that are optimally supplied as integrated systems. The monetary system is such a resource; and money creation is the distinctive function of banks. Bank regulation can therefore be understood as a subfield of infrastructure regulation. With few exceptions, modern academic treatments of banking have emphasized banks’ intermediation function and downplayed or ignored their monetary function. Concomitantly, in recent decades U.S. bank regulation has strayed from its infrastructural roots. This regulatory drift has been unwise

Deal Breakage in Domestic and Cross-Border Mergers

This Article presents a newly constructed mergers and acquisitions (M&A) data set that can support detailed analysis of deal outcomes, including deal breakage. The main novelty of the data set is a detailed classification scheme for characterizing deal outcomes, using information drawn from public announcements and news reports. The data set also includes a number of variables, hand gathered from press releases and merger agreements, that are unavailable in existing data sets in reliable form, or at all. The data set consists of all definitive, signed M&A transactions involving US public company targets with a deal value of at least $1 billion from 1996 to 2018. The data set excludes negotiations, hostile bids, and unsolicited offers not resulting in a definitive transaction, which cannot be compared apples to apples with deals involving definitive agreements

Federal Corporate Law and the Business of Banking

The only profit-seeking business enterprises chartered by a federal government agency are banks. Yet there is barely any scholarship justifying this exception to state primacy in U.S. corporate law. This Article addresses that gap. It reinterprets the National Bank Act (NBA) the organic statute governing national banks, the heavyweights of the financial sec- tor-as a corporation law and recovers the reasons why Congress wrote this law: not to catalyze private wealth creation or to regulate an existing industry, but to solve an economic governance problem. National banks are federal instrumentalities charged with augmenting the money supply-- a delegated sovereign privilege. Congress recruited private shareholders and managers to run these instrumentalities as a check on monetary overissue and to prevent politicized asset allocation by government officials-a form of premodern agency independence. Viewing the NBA as a corporation law yields surprising dividends. First, it exposes a major flaw at the heart of U.S. banking jurisprudence. In recent decades, the Supreme Court and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), the chartering authority for national banks, have interpreted national banks\u27 corporate powers expansively, allowing them to enter a vast range of new business lines. But the corporate powers provision of the NBA is not a regulatory statute to which courts should apply Chevron deference, nor is it part of the OCC\u27s enabling act. It is part of the corporate charters of national banks. Accordingly, the opposite, settled rule of construction applies: ambiguity is construed strictly against the corporation. Second, interpreting the NBA as a corporation law reveals that the OCC\u27s current campaign to unhitch national bank charters from the deposit business lacks a statutory basis and threatens an unprecedented colonization of U.S. enterprise law by a federal government agency that is ill-suited to this mission and was never congressionally tasked with it

Foreword to Revisiting the Public Utility Symposium: Revisiting the Public Utility

In Munn v. Illinois the U.S. Supreme Court upheld state price regulation of grain elevators. The Court took some inspiration from Lord Mathew Hale\u27s notion that a business affected with a public interest requires special regulatory attention. Every ferry, Lord Hale wrote in the Seventeenth Century, ought to be under public regulation, to wit: that it give attendance at due time, keep a boat in due order, and take a reasonable toll

Regulation and the Geography of Inequality

We live in an era of widening geographic inequality. Around the country, the spread between economically and culturally thriving places and those that are struggling has been increasing. Superstar cities like New York, San Francisco, Boston, and Atlanta continue to attract talent and grow, while the economies of other cities and rural areas are left behind. Troublingly, escalating geographic inequality in the United States has arrived hand in hand with serious economic, social, and political problems. Areas that are left behind have not only failed to keep up with their thriving peers; in many ways, they have stagnated and seen opportunities evaporate. At the same time, superstar cities are running up against extreme housing affordability problems, rendering middle- class life all but unsustainable. To make matters worse, the widening gulf between dynamic and stagnant places increasingly feeds into a democratic crisis of unrepresentative government at the federal level. The dominant explanations for widening geographic inequality focus largely on inexorable economic trends. Forces like agglomeration effects and globalization have reshaped the economy, benefitting some areas and harming others. We think these explanations leave out a crucial factor: the effects of specific regulatory choices on economic geography. The Progressive Era and New Deal regulatory order in the United States promoted geographic dispersion of economic activity. The unraveling of this regulatory order around 1980 coincided with the reversal in geographic convergence and the beginning of an era of growing divergence. More specifically, regulatory policies in the areas of transportation, communications, trade, and antitrust helped construct an era of geographic convergence in the mid-twentieth century, and deregulation in those same areas contributed to the rise of geographic inequality over the last generation. Though the COVID-19 pandemic has produced unprecedented awareness of and interest in remote work- raising the possibility of greater economic dispersion-the extent to which this potential can be realized will likely also depend upon regulatory choices. To combat geographic inequality and its attendant downsides, we make the case for reincorporating geographic factors into federal regulatory policymaking in transportation, communications, trade, antitrust, and other domains

FedAccounts: Digital Dollars

We are entering a new monetary era. Central banks around the world— spurred by the development of privately controlled digital currencies as well as competition from other central banks—have been studying, building, and, in some cases, issuing central bank digital currency (“CBDC”). Although digital fiat currency is one of the hottest topics in macroeconomics and central banking today, the discussion has largely overlooked the most straightforward and appealing strategy for implementing a U.S. dollar-based CBDC: expanding access to bank accounts that the Federal Reserve already offers to a small, favored set of clients. These accounts consist of entries in a digital ledger—like other digital currencies—and are extremely desirable, offering high interest, instant payments, and full government backing with no limit. But U.S. law restricts these accounts to an exclusive clientele consisting primarily of banks. Privileged access to these accounts creates a striking asymmetry at the core of our monetary framework: government-issued physical currency is available to all, but government-issued digital currency (in the form of central bank accounts) is not. This dichotomy is unwarranted. Congress should authorize the Federal Reserve to give everyone—individuals, businesses, and institutions—the option to maintain accounts at the central bank. We call these accounts FedAccounts. Unlike the CBDC approaches currently under discussion, which would use complicated and inefficient distributed ledger technology and be walled off from the existing system of money and payments, FedAccounts would be seamlessly interoperable with the mainstream payment system, relying on technologies that the Federal Reserve has used for decades

Impaired Competence for Pretense in Children with Autism: Exploring Potential Cognitive Predictors.

Lack of pretense in children with autism has been explained by a number of theoretical explanations, including impaired mentalising, impaired response inhibition, and weak central coherence. This study aimed to empirically test each of these theories. Children with autism (n=60) were significantly impaired relative to controls (n=65) when interpreting pretense, thereby supporting a competence deficit hypothesis. They also showed impaired mentalising and response inhibition, but superior local processing indicating weak central coherence. Regression analyses revealed that mentalising significantly and independently predicted pretense. The results are interpreted as supporting the impaired mentalising theory and evidence against competing theories invoking impaired response inhibition or a local processing bias. The results of this study have important implications for treatment and intervention

Grey matter in shadow banking: international organizations and expert strategies in global financial governance

Who controls global policy debates on shadow banking regulation? We show how experts secured control over how issues in shadow banking regulation are treated by examining the policy recommendations of the Bank of International Settlements, the International Monetary Fund and the Financial Stability Board. The evidence suggests that IO experts embedded a bland reformism opposed to both strong and ‘light touch’ regulation at the core of the emerging regulatory regime. Technocrats reinforced each other's expertise, excluded some potential competitors (legal scholars), co-opted others (select Fed and elite academic economists), and deployed measurement, mandate, and status strategies to assert issue control. In the field of shadow banking regulation, academic economists’ influence came from their credibility as arbitrageurs between several professional fields rather than their intellectual output. The findings have important implications for how we study the relationship between IO technocrats and experts from other professional field

Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis and migration to Europe.

Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) in low-incidence countries in Europe is more prevalent among migrants than the native population. The impact of the recent increase in migration to EU and EEA countries with a low incidence of TB (<20 cases per 100 000) on MDR-TB epidemiology is unclear. This narrative review synthesizes evidence on MDR-TB and migration identified through an expert panel and database search. A significant proportion of MDR-TB cases in migrants result from reactivation of latent infection. Refugees and asylum seekers may have a heightened risk of MDR-TB infection and worse outcomes. Although concerns have been raised around 'health tourists' migrating for MDR-TB treatment, numbers are probably small and data are lacking. Migrants experience significant barriers to testing and treatment for MDR-TB, exacerbated by increasingly restrictive health systems. Screening for latent MDR-TB is highly problematic because current tests cannot distinguish drug-resistant latent infection, and evidence-based guidance for treatment of latent infection in contacts of MDR patients is lacking. Although there is evidence that transmission of TB from migrants to the general population is low-it predominantly occurs within migrant communities-there is a human rights obligation to improve the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of MDR-TB in migrants. Further research is needed into MDR-TB and migration, the impact of screening on detection or prevention, and the potential consequences of failing to treat and prevent MDR-TB among migrants in Europe. An evidence-base is urgently needed to inform guidelines for effective approaches for MDR-TB management in migrant populations in Europe