Hedge Funds and the Financial Market: Written Testimony Submitted to the United States House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

Author(s):  
Houman B. Shadab
2021 ◽  
pp. 58-75
Author(s):  
Eiji Hotori

This chapter aims to identify the real drivers of financial deregulation in Japan. Japan’s financial deregulation drivers clearly changed over time. In the late 1960s and the early 1970s, the liberalization of capital movement in Japan caused an administrative shift from its conventional rigid regulatory regime. From the mid-1970s, a rapid increase of Japanese government bonds issuances, as well as financial innovation, acted to remove the barriers between the banking and the securities businesses. From the mid-1980s, the pressure from the United States, as well as from domestic depositors and banks, urged the Japanese financial authorities to liberalize the financial market. It is evident that the drivers of financial deregulation in Japan in the 1980s were not only the pressure from abroad (as generally accepted), but that the deregulation was also driven by domestic interests including fiscal reasons.


2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 173-184
Author(s):  
Calum Watt

Ten years on from the 2008 global financial crisis, this article sets in dialogue two French treatments – by the novelist Mathieu Larnaudie and the philosopher Bernard Stiegler – of footage of the 2008 testimony of Alan Greenspan, former chairman of the US Federal Reserve, before the United States House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. The article introduces and compares the concepts of ‘effondrement’ and ‘prolétarisation’ developed by the two writers in relation to the Greenspan hearing, and analyses how both understand the question of ideology as it emerges in the hearing. Informed by interviews conducted by the author with Larnaudie and Stiegler, the piece concludes by discussing the notion common to both writers that Greenspan is a ‘saint’ of the crisis.


2017 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 858-886 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric S. Zeemering

As neighboring federal systems, Canada and the United States provide an opportunity to compare institutional collective action (ICA) by proximate local governments. After explaining the importance of understanding local governance in Canada and the United States in comparative context, the ICA framework is used to highlight propositions along two paths of inquiry. First, the ICA framework can be used to compare responses to ICA dilemmas in two distinct systems of local governance, focusing on the comparative instance of use and performance of ICA mechanisms. Second, the ICA framework can be used to analyze collaboration and paradiplomacy across the international border. Deploying the ICA framework for comparative research can improve our understanding of local governance and local government reform in both countries.


1956 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 967 ◽  
Author(s):  
William C. Havard ◽  
Alfred Diamant

2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 241-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucia Quaglia

AbstractThe international financial crisis was followed by waves of domestic regulatory reforms, first and foremost, in the United States and the European Union. Post-crisis financial regulation was sometimes different across jurisdictions. Moreover, the United States and the European Union sought in various ways to (re)assert their regulatory power not only vis-à-vis the market, but also with regard to other jurisdictions, which often resisted the projection of regulatory power beyond national borders. Consequently, a handful of important post-crisis transatlantic regulatory disputes emerged concerning E.U. rules on hedge funds, U.S. rules on bank structure and E.U. and U.S. rules on over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives. These disputes mainly involved the terms of access to each other's markets, the equivalence between domestic rules, and the extraterritorial effects of those rules. Some of these disputes were also intra-E.U. disagreements, whenever the preferences of the United Kingdom were different from those of Continental countries and similar to those of the United States. The network structure of the financial industry and the patterns of financial interdependence across the Atlantic amplified the extra territorial effects of domestic reforms, but at the same time triggered an active involvement of the transnational financial industry in the management and, eventually, the settlement of these disputes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document