Introducing the Totally Unnecessary Benefit LLC

M. Manesh
{"title":"Introducing the Totally Unnecessary Benefit LLC","authors":"M. Manesh","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3219956","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Unlike statutes authorizing benefit corporations, which have been recently enacted in over 30 states to accommodate social enterprises, no one has articulated a legal justification for benefit LLCs. Indeed, no plausible legal justification can be articulated. The expansive flexibility of conventional LLC law is already perfectly amenable to social enterprises. Instead, the advent of the benefit LLC, embraced most prominently by Delaware in 2018, plainly reveals what was arguably already apparent in the context of its corporate predecessor: that the aim of benefit entity statutes is not law reform. Rather, it is about branding. \n \nBut the creation of this legislatively-endorsed brand should raise serious concerns. In the absence of meaningful accountability measures to ensure that businesses embracing the statutory “benefit” label are actually deserving of it, the state-sanctioned “benefit” designation may be exploited by entrepreneurs to mislead the public and compete unfairly with conventional for-profit businesses. Moreover, even if statutory benefit entities do live up to their “benefit” aspiration, they impose their own costs by adding needless complexity to the law and exacerbating the popular misperception that conventional for-profit businesses are purely profit-driven. It is hard to see why legislatures should employ state power for private gain in this way, especially where there already exist non-governmental certifications available to socially-minded, purpose-driven businesses seeking to distinguish themselves in the marketplace. Accordingly, this Article makes the case that statutory benefit entities—both corporations and especially LLCs—are unnecessary as a legal matter and unwise as a policy matter.","PeriodicalId":82179,"journal":{"name":"North Carolina law review","volume":"97 1","pages":"603"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"North Carolina law review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3219956","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Unlike statutes authorizing benefit corporations, which have been recently enacted in over 30 states to accommodate social enterprises, no one has articulated a legal justification for benefit LLCs. Indeed, no plausible legal justification can be articulated. The expansive flexibility of conventional LLC law is already perfectly amenable to social enterprises. Instead, the advent of the benefit LLC, embraced most prominently by Delaware in 2018, plainly reveals what was arguably already apparent in the context of its corporate predecessor: that the aim of benefit entity statutes is not law reform. Rather, it is about branding. But the creation of this legislatively-endorsed brand should raise serious concerns. In the absence of meaningful accountability measures to ensure that businesses embracing the statutory “benefit” label are actually deserving of it, the state-sanctioned “benefit” designation may be exploited by entrepreneurs to mislead the public and compete unfairly with conventional for-profit businesses. Moreover, even if statutory benefit entities do live up to their “benefit” aspiration, they impose their own costs by adding needless complexity to the law and exacerbating the popular misperception that conventional for-profit businesses are purely profit-driven. It is hard to see why legislatures should employ state power for private gain in this way, especially where there already exist non-governmental certifications available to socially-minded, purpose-driven businesses seeking to distinguish themselves in the marketplace. Accordingly, this Article makes the case that statutory benefit entities—both corporations and especially LLCs—are unnecessary as a legal matter and unwise as a policy matter.
介绍完全不必要的利益有限责任公司
与最近在30多个州为适应社会企业而颁布的授权福利公司的法规不同,没有人明确说明福利有限责任公司的法律依据。事实上,没有任何合理的法律理由可以阐明。传统有限责任公司法律的广泛灵活性已经完全适合社会企业。相反,2018年特拉华州最突出的福利有限责任公司的出现,清楚地揭示了在其公司前身的背景下已经很明显的一点:福利实体法规的目的不是法律改革。相反,它是关于品牌的。但这个获得立法机构认可的品牌的诞生应该引起严重的担忧。由于缺乏有意义的问责措施来确保拥有法定“利益”标签的企业确实值得拥有它,国家批准的“利益”名称可能被企业家利用来误导公众,并与传统的营利性企业进行不公平竞争。此外,即使法定利益实体确实实现了他们的“利益”愿望,他们也会给法律增加不必要的复杂性,从而增加自己的成本,并加剧了人们普遍的误解,即传统的营利性企业纯粹是利润驱动的。很难理解为什么立法机构要以这种方式利用国家权力为私人利益服务,尤其是在已经有非政府认证的情况下,那些具有社会意识、以目的为导向、寻求在市场中脱颖而出的企业可以获得这些认证。因此,本文认为法定利益实体——公司,尤其是有限责任公司——作为一个法律问题是不必要的,作为一个政策问题是不明智的。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书