Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Foreign Corporations Listing in the United States - Does Law Matter? Testing the Israeli Phenomenon
View through CrossRef
This Article attempts to discover the reasons behind the decision of Israeli corporations to go public in the U.S. To find the reasons behind this unique phenomenon, we use two hypotheses that we borrow from the current debate on the reasons for cross-listing of corporations in foreign countries. Under the first hypothesis, law does not matter for Israeli corporations that choose to go public in the U.S. and their decision was motivated by reasons such as liquidity of the U.S. markets, openness of markets to early stage corporations, and image concerns. The second hypothesis is that law does matter and the decision of Israeli corporations to migrate to the U.S. was motivated by their desire to opt into better investor protective laws. Therefore, under this hypothesis, Israeli corporations chose to go public in the U.S. to bond their insiders from expropriating the corporate assets. To decide which hypothesis represents the actual reasons behind the decision of Israeli corporations to migrate to the U.S., we compare the relevant Israeli and U.S. laws. If the U.S. laws provide a better protection for investors and therefore better bond insiders, then the second hypothesis, under which law does matter, is the correct hypothesis. However, if the differences between the two laws are insignificant and cannot justify incurring the high costs of going public in the U.S., then the first hypothesis under which law does not matter, is the more accurate hypothesis. The comparison between the Israeli and the U.S. securities law shows that there are insignificant differences between those laws. Those insignificant differences cannot justify incurring the high costs of going public in the U.S. To support this conclusion we use two sets of data. Both a quantitative data, on the number, industry and year of initial public offerings of Israeli corporations in the U.S., and a qualitative data that includes information collected from investors and attorneys who took part in conducting the initial public offerings of Israeli corporations in the U.S., supports the conclusion that law does not matter. According to this data, Israeli corporations chose to go public in the U.S. mostly in order to enjoy the liquidity of the U.S. markets and the openness of U.S. markets for early stage corporations.
Title: Foreign Corporations Listing in the United States - Does Law Matter? Testing the Israeli Phenomenon
Description:
This Article attempts to discover the reasons behind the decision of Israeli corporations to go public in the U.
S.
To find the reasons behind this unique phenomenon, we use two hypotheses that we borrow from the current debate on the reasons for cross-listing of corporations in foreign countries.
Under the first hypothesis, law does not matter for Israeli corporations that choose to go public in the U.
S.
and their decision was motivated by reasons such as liquidity of the U.
S.
markets, openness of markets to early stage corporations, and image concerns.
The second hypothesis is that law does matter and the decision of Israeli corporations to migrate to the U.
S.
was motivated by their desire to opt into better investor protective laws.
Therefore, under this hypothesis, Israeli corporations chose to go public in the U.
S.
to bond their insiders from expropriating the corporate assets.
To decide which hypothesis represents the actual reasons behind the decision of Israeli corporations to migrate to the U.
S.
, we compare the relevant Israeli and U.
S.
laws.
If the U.
S.
laws provide a better protection for investors and therefore better bond insiders, then the second hypothesis, under which law does matter, is the correct hypothesis.
However, if the differences between the two laws are insignificant and cannot justify incurring the high costs of going public in the U.
S.
, then the first hypothesis under which law does not matter, is the more accurate hypothesis.
The comparison between the Israeli and the U.
S.
securities law shows that there are insignificant differences between those laws.
Those insignificant differences cannot justify incurring the high costs of going public in the U.
S.
To support this conclusion we use two sets of data.
Both a quantitative data, on the number, industry and year of initial public offerings of Israeli corporations in the U.
S.
, and a qualitative data that includes information collected from investors and attorneys who took part in conducting the initial public offerings of Israeli corporations in the U.
S.
, supports the conclusion that law does not matter.
According to this data, Israeli corporations chose to go public in the U.
S.
mostly in order to enjoy the liquidity of the U.
S.
markets and the openness of U.
S.
markets for early stage corporations.
Related Results
Mezinárodní právo na prahu 21. století (dosažený stav, neúspěchy a perspektivy)
Mezinárodní právo na prahu 21. století (dosažený stav, neúspěchy a perspektivy)
The study deal with selected problems of international law at the time of change of the 20th and 21st centuries. Such a milestone gives an opportunity to review the achieved state ...
From Constitutional Comparison to Life in the Biosphere
From Constitutional Comparison to Life in the Biosphere
From Constitutional Comparison to Life in the Biosphere is a monograph that argues for a fundamental reorientation of constitutional law around the realities of biospheric interdep...
Envisioning Originalism Applied to Bioethics Cases
Envisioning Originalism Applied to Bioethics Cases
Photo ID 123697425 © Alexandersikov | Dreamstime.com
Abstract
Originalism is an increasingly prevalent method for interpreting provisions of the US Constitution. It requires strict...
International Construction Law
International Construction Law
International law is a body of legally binding norms that regulate relations between the subjects of the international legal system and structure the functioning of the internation...
Paul’s view of the law in Romans and the Ethiopic tradition
Paul’s view of the law in Romans and the Ethiopic tradition
ABSTRACT
This dissertation examines Paul’s view of the law in Romans, interacting with modern exegetical traditions addressing the Old, New, and Radical New Perspectives, aiming to...
Autonomy on Trial
Autonomy on Trial
Photo by CHUTTERSNAP on Unsplash
Abstract
This paper critically examines how US bioethics and health law conceptualize patient autonomy, contrasting the rights-based, individualist...
A Comparison of Business Management Characteristics in U.S., German, and Japanese Manufacturing Corporations
A Comparison of Business Management Characteristics in U.S., German, and Japanese Manufacturing Corporations
Abstract
Comparing the management characteristics of business firms in different countries has been a popular research topic in business administration. In this p...
Ab initio Binocular Formulation of Listing's Law
Ab initio Binocular Formulation of Listing's Law
Abstract
Human eyes do not have perfectly aligned optical components; the fovea is displaced from the posterior pole, and the crystalline lens is tilted away from the optic...

