A Critique of the Nyse's Director Independence Listing Standards

Stephen M. Bainbridge
{"title":"A Critique of the Nyse's Director Independence Listing Standards","authors":"Stephen M. Bainbridge","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.317121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Under the New York Stock Exchange's (NYSE) aegis, a blue ribbon panel has proposed new listing standards that would, inter alia, significantly increase the role of independent directors in public corporations. Despite the considerable hullabaloo surrounding the report's release, however, the report's recommendations in fact consist of little more than the warmed-over rejects of past corporate governance \"reform\" initiatives. This essay critiques the key director independence provisions of the NYSE Committee's report. The essay argues that those proposals are not supported by the evidence on director performance and, moreover, adopt an undesirable one size fits all approach. Firms have unique needs and should be free -- as state law now allows -- to develop unique accountability mechanisms carefully tailored for the firm's special needs. The SEC should not be further empowered to use its \"raised eyebrow\" regulatory powers as a vehicle to federalize corporate law. For all of these reasons, the NYSE should reject the Committee's proposals and leave development of corporate governance to state law and market forces.","PeriodicalId":127611,"journal":{"name":"CGN: Boards & Directors (Topic)","volume":"82 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"21","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CGN: Boards & Directors (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.317121","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21

Abstract

Under the New York Stock Exchange's (NYSE) aegis, a blue ribbon panel has proposed new listing standards that would, inter alia, significantly increase the role of independent directors in public corporations. Despite the considerable hullabaloo surrounding the report's release, however, the report's recommendations in fact consist of little more than the warmed-over rejects of past corporate governance "reform" initiatives. This essay critiques the key director independence provisions of the NYSE Committee's report. The essay argues that those proposals are not supported by the evidence on director performance and, moreover, adopt an undesirable one size fits all approach. Firms have unique needs and should be free -- as state law now allows -- to develop unique accountability mechanisms carefully tailored for the firm's special needs. The SEC should not be further empowered to use its "raised eyebrow" regulatory powers as a vehicle to federalize corporate law. For all of these reasons, the NYSE should reject the Committee's proposals and leave development of corporate governance to state law and market forces.
纽交所董事独立上市标准批判
在纽约证券交易所(New York Stock Exchange)的支持下,一个蓝带委员会提出了新的上市标准,除其他外,该标准将显著提高独立董事在上市公司中的作用。然而,尽管围绕报告的发布引起了相当大的喧嚣,但报告的建议实际上只不过是对过去公司治理“改革”举措的热烈反对。本文对纽交所委员会报告中的关键董事独立性条款进行了批评。本文认为,这些建议没有得到董事绩效证据的支持,而且采用了一种不可取的一刀切方法。律所有独特的需求,应该自由地——正如州法律现在所允许的那样——开发独特的问责机制,为律所的特殊需求精心定制。证交会不应被进一步授权利用其“扬起眉毛”的监管权力,作为将公司法联邦化的工具。基于所有这些原因,纽交所应拒绝委员会的提议,将公司治理的发展留给州法律和市场力量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信