Search

Begin New Search Topic Regulation Political Geography United States of America

21. The Regulatory Costs of Being Public

Author:
Michael Ewens, Kairong Xiao, and Ting Xu
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
An important explanation for the significant decline in the number of publicly listed companies in the United States is the increased burden of disclosure and governance regulations. Indeed, practitioners often point to heightened regulatory costs as the culprit of the disappearing public firms, while major deregulations such as the 2012 Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act were directly motivated by perceived costs of being public. Thus, understanding the role of regulations in the cost of being public and the decline in the number of public firms can address concerns about possible capital market dysfunction.
Topic:
Markets, Governance, Regulation, and Business
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

22. Cyber Posture Trends in China, Russia, the United States and the European Union

Author:
Lora Saalman, Fei Su, and Larisa Saveleva Dovgal
Publication Date:
12-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI)
Abstract:
Current understanding of the cyber postures of China, Russia, the United States and the European Union (EU) merits re-evaluation. It is often assumed that China and Russia are aligned, yet this is not always the case. Unlike Russia, which has an ongoing focus on information security, China’s official documents incorporate both information security and cybersecurity concerns that are similar to those of the EU and the USA. Moreover, while often paired, the EU and the USA have differing regulatory structures in cyberspace. Further, both actors increasingly mirror Chinese and Russian concerns about the impact of information warfare on domestic stability. By examining key trends in each actor’s cyber posture, this SIPRI Research Report identifies points of convergence and divergence. Its conclusions will inform a broader SIPRI project that maps cyber posture trajectories and explores trilateral cyber dynamics among China, Russia and the USA to assist the EU in navigating future cyber escalation and enhancing global cyber stability.
Topic:
European Union, Cybersecurity, Geopolitics, Regulation, and Information Security
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Eurasia, Asia, and United States of America

23. State Regulatory Compliance Processes: Lessons Learned From COVID-19

Author:
Neil Kerwin, Aretha Ferrell-Benavides, Stan Meiburg, Shelley Metzenbaum, and Courtney Phillips
Publication Date:
12-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA)
Abstract:
Over the past 18 months, the nation’s economy and society have been upended by the COVID-19 pandemic. To protect public health while minimizing economic disruption, state and local governments took action to improve the regulatory compliance process, such as: Utilized additional online mechanisms for some regulatory compliance processes; Addressed business pain points and concerns about timeliness; and Improved sequencing and routing of regulatory approvals (for example, by allowing offices to do concurrent reviews) Supported by a grant from the Pew Charitable Trusts, the Academy's Center for Intergovernmental Partnerships analyzed states' actions related to their regulatory standards. The report discovered several main steps state governments took regarding: Simplified permitting paved the way for business start-ups; New permissions allowed bars and restaurants to resume operations; Streamlined licensing allowed healthcare professionals to continue to practice; and The authorization of telehealth allowed millions of people to receive remote healthcare services. The report noted several important implications along these investigative lines and detailed additional opportunities for research into lessons learned and preparations for future crises. See Chapter 5 of the report to read the complete conclusions and recommendations.
Topic:
Regulation, Public Health, COVID-19, Compliance, and Public Administration
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

24. Barber Licensing in Arkansas: Public Health or Private Gain?

Author:
Tanner Corley and Marcus M. Witcher
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Cato Journal
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
In Arkansas, the barber profession has been regulated and licensed for more than 80 years, and until recently, the issue was mostly absent from the political debate. During a regular session of Arkansas’s 92nd General Assembly in 2019, however, state Sen. John Cooper presented a bill to “repeal the [1937] Arkansas Barber Law” and to “abolish the State Board of Barber Examiners” (Briggs 2019). The average Arkansan probably was not aware of the bill, but occupational licensing reformers saw this as a great opportunity for Arkansas to pave the way for other states to reform their own license laws. If Cooper’s bill had passed, Arkansas’s economy would have likely benefited (Timmons and Thornton 2010, 2018). By removing restrictive requirements to becoming a barber, the bill would have allowed more Arkansans to enter the profession. This reform would have ­provided people with more economic opportunities, increased competition, and benefited consumers.
Topic:
Regulation, Business, Public Health, and Licensing
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

25. Why the CHIPS Are Down: Stock Buybacks and Subsidies in the U.S. Semiconductor Industry

Author:
William Lazonick and Matt Hopkins
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET)
Abstract:
The Semiconductor Industry Association (SIA) is promoting the Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors (CHIPS) for America Act, introduced in Congress in June 2020. An SIA press release describes the bill as “bipartisan legislation that would invest tens of billions of dollars in semiconductor manufacturing incentives and research initiatives over the next 5-10 years to strengthen and sustain American leadership in chip technology, which is essential to our country’s economy and national security.” On June 8, 2021, the Senate approved $52 billion for the CHIPS for America Act, dedicated to supporting the U.S. semiconductor industry over the next decade. This paper highlights a curious paradox: Most of the SIA corporate members now lobbying for the CHIPS for America Act have squandered past support that the U.S. semiconductor industry has received from the U.S. government for decades by using their corporate cash to do buybacks to boost their own companies’ stock prices. Among the SIA corporate signatories of a letter to President Biden in February 2021, the five largest stock repurchasers—Intel, IBM, Qualcomm, Texas Instruments, and Broadcom—did a combined $249 billion in buybacks over the decade 2011-2020, equal to 71 percent of their profits and almost five times the subsidies over the next decade for which the SIA is lobbying. In addition, among the members of the Semiconductors in America Coalition (SIAC), formed specifically in May 2021 to lobby Congress for the passage of the CHIPS for America Act, are Apple, Microsoft, Cisco, and Google. These firms spent a combined $633 billion on buybacks during 2011-2020. That is about 12 times the government subsidies provided under the CHIPS for America Act to support semiconductor fabrication in the United States in the upcoming decade. If the Congress wants to achieve the legislation’s stated purpose of promoting major new investments in semiconductors, it needs to deal with this paradox. It could, for example, require the SIA and SIAC to extract pledges from its member corporations that they will cease doing stock buybacks as open-market repurchases over the next ten years. Such regulation could be a first step in rescinding Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 10b-18, which has since 1982 been a major cause of extreme income inequality and loss of global industrial competitiveness in the United States.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Regulation, Legislation, Strategic Competition, Subsidies, and Lobbying
Political Geography:
United States of America

26. Supply Chain Regulation in the Service of Geopolitics: What’s Happening in Semiconductors?

Author:
Dieter Ernst
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI)
Abstract:
Supply chain regulation can be a formidable tool to protect a country’s resilience against unexpected disruptions of trade, investment and the supply of skilled labour. Its utility, however, may erode when geopolitics rather than economics becomes the primary objective. This paper examines the implementation problems and the unintended consequences of a new supply chain doctrine in the service of geopolitics, with a focus on US President Joe Biden’s Executive Order on America’s Supply Chains to protect US technological leadership and national security against China. With semiconductors as a primary target, America’s supply chain controls are designed to exploit China’s most glaring weaknesses as supply chain chokepoints that the US Commerce Department can block, thus impeding timely and cost-effective access to essential products, services and technologies. The paper also highlights a second defining characteristic of America’s supply chain doctrine — regulatory supply chain controls are combined with a big push in domestic semiconductor manufacturing. Three propositions are presented as guideposts for further research. The paper concludes with a brief discussion of the implications for future US supply chain control against China: Will the quest for improved supply chain resilience succeed in mobilizing enough forces to shift the focus of US policy away from supply chain regulation in the service of geopolitics?
Topic:
International Cooperation, Labor Issues, Regulation, Rivalry, and Supply Chains
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

27. How the rest of the world responds to the US-China split

Author:
Hung Tran
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
The election of Joe Biden as the forty-sixth US president is not expected to change the list of substantive issues dividing the United States and China, such as trade, investment, technology, geopolitical competition, national security, and human rights—except that the priority among them may change, with human rights concerns moving more to the forefront. However, the tone and modality of the unfolding of the US-China competition will change from Donald Trump’s unilateralism to Biden’s efforts to build alliances with “likeminded” countries in Europe, Asia, and elsewhere to deal with the challenges China has posed. In a way, Biden’s alliance-building approach may intensify pressure on the rest of the world to take sides. How countries respond to this challenge, unwelcome by most, depends on whether they see themselves as competitors to China, or as “price takers” in the international economic system.
Topic:
Global Markets, Regulation, Finance, Economy, Trade, and Digital Policy
Political Geography:
China, Europe, Asia, North America, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific

28. Transatlantic tools: Harmonizing US and EU approaches to China

Author:
David Barkin and Agatha Kratz
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
Close cooperation between the United States and the European Union is essential if advanced economies are to develop effective responses to the array of challenges presented by China. Washington and Brussels share concerns regarding competitive distortions arising through the state’s role in the Chinese economy, the use of advanced technologies to repress ethnic minorities and fuel its military, and the spread of authoritarian influence through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). However, there has been a lack of coordination and cooperation in recent years between the US and EU when it comes to responding to China’s policies and behaviors. Washington’s focus on risks to US economic and national security contrasts with an emphasis in Brussels on ensuring reciprocity and leveling the economic playing field. But, with the transatlantic relationship back on a better footing under the Biden administration, new structures for transatlantic dialogue being put in place, and a greater focus on the Indo-Pacific in both Washington and Brussels, this paper argues there is now an opportunity for the United States and Europe to learn from each other and harmonize some of their China-related efforts.
Topic:
Human Rights, Markets, Sanctions, European Union, Regulation, Trade, and Transatlantic Relations
Political Geography:
China, Europe, and United States of America

29. The GameStop Episode: What Happened and What Does It Mean?

Author:
Allan M. Malz
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Cato Journal
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
The GameStop stock trading episode that began in January 2021 has been unprecedented in some ways, especially in the ability of market participants to organize collective action openly yet anonymously. In other ways, it’s been an unsurprising repetition of past experience. Financial markets are imperfect, they display many frictions, and the imperfect alignment of interests is a perpetual dilemma in designing both contracts and public policy.
Topic:
Regulation, Economy, Public Policy, and Stock Markets
Political Geography:
United States of America

30. Common‐​Sense Policy Reforms for California Housing

Author:
Lee E. Ohanian
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
California housing has become unaffordable. As of February 2021, the median California home price was nearly $700,000 and the median condominium price was $515,000. The median rent for the same month was $1,733. Based on industry mortgage financing and renting standards, this means that both homebuyers and renters require household incomes of nearly $100,000 to qualify for housing.
Topic:
History, Reform, Regulation, and Housing
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America