内幕交易监管的安慰剂效应。

IF 1 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Oxford Journal of Legal Studies Pub Date : 2025-06-10 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1093/ojls/gqaf019
Luca Enriques, Yoon-Ho Alex Lee, Alessandro Romano
{"title":"内幕交易监管的安慰剂效应。","authors":"Luca Enriques, Yoon-Ho Alex Lee, Alessandro Romano","doi":"10.1093/ojls/gqaf019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Insiders can profit from material non-public information pertaining to their own firm by trading in the shares of their own company (traditional insider trading) or in the shares of other companies whose stock prices may also be affected by such information (shadow trading). We show that traditional insider trading and shadow trading have the same consequences for financial markets and corporate governance, but only the former is pursued aggressively by regulators in the European Union, the UK and the United States. Drawing on a variety of evidence, including a survey of 200 retail investors, we suggest that, rather than protecting unsuspecting outside investors, such an arrangement enables insiders to profit at their expense. The ban on the more salient practice of traditional insider dealing regulation lulls outside investors into a false sense of security, thus effectively operating as a placebo, whilst insiders can still profit by engaging in shadow trading. We further argue that, ironically, this arrangement may nonetheless be efficient.</p>","PeriodicalId":47225,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Journal of Legal Studies","volume":"45 3","pages":"753-774"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12395251/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Placebo Effect of Insider Dealing Regulation.\",\"authors\":\"Luca Enriques, Yoon-Ho Alex Lee, Alessandro Romano\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ojls/gqaf019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Insiders can profit from material non-public information pertaining to their own firm by trading in the shares of their own company (traditional insider trading) or in the shares of other companies whose stock prices may also be affected by such information (shadow trading). We show that traditional insider trading and shadow trading have the same consequences for financial markets and corporate governance, but only the former is pursued aggressively by regulators in the European Union, the UK and the United States. Drawing on a variety of evidence, including a survey of 200 retail investors, we suggest that, rather than protecting unsuspecting outside investors, such an arrangement enables insiders to profit at their expense. The ban on the more salient practice of traditional insider dealing regulation lulls outside investors into a false sense of security, thus effectively operating as a placebo, whilst insiders can still profit by engaging in shadow trading. We further argue that, ironically, this arrangement may nonetheless be efficient.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47225,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Oxford Journal of Legal Studies\",\"volume\":\"45 3\",\"pages\":\"753-774\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12395251/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Oxford Journal of Legal Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqaf019\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oxford Journal of Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqaf019","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

内部人可以通过买卖自己公司的股票(传统的内幕交易)或买卖其他公司的股票(影子交易)从与自己公司有关的重大非公开信息中获利,这些公司的股票价格也可能受到这些信息的影响。我们表明,传统的内幕交易和影子交易对金融市场和公司治理具有相同的影响,但只有前者受到欧盟、英国和美国监管机构的积极追究。根据各种证据,包括对200名散户投资者的调查,我们认为,这种安排非但没有保护毫无戒心的外部投资者,反而使内部人士以牺牲他们的利益为代价获利。对更为突出的传统内幕交易监管做法的禁令,让外部投资者产生了一种虚假的安全感,从而有效地起到了安慰剂的作用,而内部人士仍可以通过参与影子交易获利。我们进一步认为,具有讽刺意味的是,这种安排可能仍然是有效的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

The Placebo Effect of Insider Dealing Regulation.

The Placebo Effect of Insider Dealing Regulation.

Insiders can profit from material non-public information pertaining to their own firm by trading in the shares of their own company (traditional insider trading) or in the shares of other companies whose stock prices may also be affected by such information (shadow trading). We show that traditional insider trading and shadow trading have the same consequences for financial markets and corporate governance, but only the former is pursued aggressively by regulators in the European Union, the UK and the United States. Drawing on a variety of evidence, including a survey of 200 retail investors, we suggest that, rather than protecting unsuspecting outside investors, such an arrangement enables insiders to profit at their expense. The ban on the more salient practice of traditional insider dealing regulation lulls outside investors into a false sense of security, thus effectively operating as a placebo, whilst insiders can still profit by engaging in shadow trading. We further argue that, ironically, this arrangement may nonetheless be efficient.

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
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
8.30%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: The Oxford Journal of Legal Studies is published on behalf of the Faculty of Law in the University of Oxford. It is designed to encourage interest in all matters relating to law, with an emphasis on matters of theory and on broad issues arising from the relationship of law to other disciplines. No topic of legal interest is excluded from consideration. In addition to traditional questions of legal interest, the following are all within the purview of the journal: comparative and international law, the law of the European Community, legal history and philosophy, and interdisciplinary material in areas of relevance.
×
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