Does Regulatory Jurisdiction Affect the Quality of Investment-Adviser Regulation?

被引:32
作者
Charoenwong, Ben [1 ]
Kwan, Alan [2 ]
Umar, Tarik [3 ]
机构
[1] Natl Univ Singapore, Business Sch, 15 Kent Ridge Dr 07-69, Singapore 119245, Singapore
[2] Univ Hong Kong, Lung Fu Shan, KK Leung Bldg KK923,Univ Dr, Hong Kong, Peoples R China
[3] Rice Univ, McNair Hall 324,1900 Rice Blvd, Houston, TX 77005 USA
关键词
FINANCIAL ADVICE; BROKERS; HOME; CONSTRAINTS; MISCONDUCT; MARKETS; FRAUD; ACT;
D O I
10.1257/aer.20180412
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
The Dodd-Frank Act shifted regulatory jurisdiction over "midsize" investment advisers from the SEC to state-securities regulators. Client complaints against midsize advisers increased relative to those continuing under SEC oversight by 30 to 40 percent of the unconditional probability. Complaints increasingly cited fiduciary violations and rose more where state regulators had fewer resources. Advisers responding more to weaker oversight had past complaints, were located farther from regulators, faced less competition, had more conflicts of interest, and served primarily less-sophisticated clients. Our results inform optimal regulatory design in markets with informational asymmetries and search frictions.
引用
收藏
页码:3681 / 3712
页数:32
相关论文
共 25 条