混乱中的身份:联邦存款保险公司的政府机构地位

Adam Shajnfeld
{"title":"混乱中的身份:联邦存款保险公司的政府机构地位","authors":"Adam Shajnfeld","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1717247","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the last three years, the world has experienced one of the worst banking catastrophes in its history. In the United States alone, some 282 banks have failed since January 2008. This burgeoning devastation has catapulted the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) to the forefront of crisis-management as it acts as receiver for each of these failed institutions. With high stakes, vast consequences, and little time to dither, the receivership process and its participants require stable, clear and predictable jurisprudence. One issue, however, continues to elude these jurisprudential virtues: is the FDIC, when acting as a failed bank’s receiver, considered an agency of the United States, or merely a private party? Surprisingly, the answer is far from clear, and the ramifications significant and numerous. Years of judicial analysis have produced cacophony, not chorus, and there is a startling absence of scholarly exposition. This article, after outlining the problem, delineates and critically evaluates two solutions.","PeriodicalId":402940,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Governmentally Owned Firms (Topic)","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Identity in Disarray: The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s Government-Agency Status\",\"authors\":\"Adam Shajnfeld\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.1717247\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the last three years, the world has experienced one of the worst banking catastrophes in its history. In the United States alone, some 282 banks have failed since January 2008. This burgeoning devastation has catapulted the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) to the forefront of crisis-management as it acts as receiver for each of these failed institutions. With high stakes, vast consequences, and little time to dither, the receivership process and its participants require stable, clear and predictable jurisprudence. One issue, however, continues to elude these jurisprudential virtues: is the FDIC, when acting as a failed bank’s receiver, considered an agency of the United States, or merely a private party? Surprisingly, the answer is far from clear, and the ramifications significant and numerous. Years of judicial analysis have produced cacophony, not chorus, and there is a startling absence of scholarly exposition. This article, after outlining the problem, delineates and critically evaluates two solutions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":402940,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ERN: Governmentally Owned Firms (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-11-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ERN: Governmentally Owned Firms (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1717247\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Governmentally Owned Firms (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1717247","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在过去三年里,世界经历了历史上最严重的银行业灾难之一。自2008年1月以来,仅在美国就有282家银行倒闭。这种迅速发展的破坏使联邦存款保险公司(FDIC)成为危机管理的前沿,因为它是这些破产机构的接收者。由于风险高、后果大、没有时间犹豫,破产管理程序及其参与者需要稳定、清晰和可预测的法律。然而,有一个问题仍在回避这些法理上的优点:当FDIC作为破产银行的接管人时,它是被视为美国的一个机构,还是仅仅是一个私人方?令人惊讶的是,这个问题的答案远没有明确,而且其后果是巨大的和众多的。多年来的司法分析产生了不和谐的声音,而不是一致的声音,而且令人吃惊的是缺乏学术解释。本文在概述了问题之后,描述并批判性地评估了两种解决方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An Identity in Disarray: The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s Government-Agency Status
In the last three years, the world has experienced one of the worst banking catastrophes in its history. In the United States alone, some 282 banks have failed since January 2008. This burgeoning devastation has catapulted the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) to the forefront of crisis-management as it acts as receiver for each of these failed institutions. With high stakes, vast consequences, and little time to dither, the receivership process and its participants require stable, clear and predictable jurisprudence. One issue, however, continues to elude these jurisprudential virtues: is the FDIC, when acting as a failed bank’s receiver, considered an agency of the United States, or merely a private party? Surprisingly, the answer is far from clear, and the ramifications significant and numerous. Years of judicial analysis have produced cacophony, not chorus, and there is a startling absence of scholarly exposition. This article, after outlining the problem, delineates and critically evaluates two solutions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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