Dodd-Frank Section 953(b): A Legislated Disaster

I recently wrote this article for BNA.

It is © 2012 Bloomberg Finance, LP. Originally published by Bloomberg Finance LP.  Reprinted with Permission. The opinions expressed are those of the author.

You may view the article by clicking on the link below, but you are not authorized to edit, reproduce or distribute copies of the article without the express written consent of Bloomberg Finance LP and the author.

Here is an excerpt:


In my experience, what I would describe as reactionary laws are bad laws. In other words, when Congress
runs across a particularly unforeseen problem, it has a habit of over-legislating in an effort to solve that
problem. I’m not saying that every bill that is written this way is bad, or that even among the bad bills that
the entirety of every bill is bad, but reactionary bills tend to have some horrible provisions. Perhaps this is
why we are burdened with Section 953(b) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection
Act.

The requirements of this provision seem simple enough. Each issuer [of a proxy] is to provide three
items:


You can read the full article here.