Session 1 - Engelen c.s. - Insider trading Flashcards
Name the 3 different points of view regarding insider trading
- Economic
- Legal
- Ethical
Explain the economic point of view
From an economic point of view, inside information refers to ever situation in which some market participants are better informed than others about the relevant aspects of the valuation of a share of a certain company
Explain the legal point of view
From a legal point of view, legal rules determine the threshold of admissible versus inadmissible use of asymmetric information
Explain the ethical point of view
From an ethical point of view, acts which might be legally acceptable, might be unacceptable ethically
What is special about insider trading from the 3 points of view
Not every case of insider trading from an economic point of view will be considered insider trading from a legal or ethical point of view
Give the legal rules for insider trading from Europe
Europe directive, early 1990’s, updated with the Market Abuse Directive (2003), prohibits primary and secondary insiders to :
- Use inside information in conducting a transaction
- Disclose the inside information to a 3rd party
- Recommend a transaction to a 3rd party
Give the legal rules for insider trading from USA
US insider trading rules are governed by Securities Exchange Act (1934), plus US rulings. Insiders are only liable if they breach a fiduciary duty to the source of information
Give 2 arguments in favour of insider trading
- Market efficiency : Insider trading brings information into the open - the price of a stock will move closer to its fundamental value - market efficiency increases
- Attract more creative managers
Explain the utilitarian perspective of insider trading
Ethical acceptability is dependent on balancing the pros and cons of insider trading with respect to social utility. This mainly coincides with an economic analysis
Give the pros based on the utilitarian perspective of insider trading
- Contribution to market efficiency : prices become a more reliable criterion for the optimal allocation of scarce financial ressources at a fair price
- An additional method for communicating information and an efficient replacement for public disclosure is created
- Insider’s counterparts are better off than in a situation in which insiders do not use their privileged information
- Banning insider trading could cause the stock markets to be less liquid
- Small investors will benefit by the enhanced shareholder value creation because of equity-based compensation of management
- Banning insider trading, market professionals will obtain benefits of the insider trading regulation, while imposing the cost on a large number of small investors
Give an argument against insider trading based on the fairness perspective
Insider trading is unethical because it is simply unfair. It gives the outsiders an unfair comparative disadvantage that skews competition.
Give the 2 version of the fairness argument
- Absolute equality version : focuses on the possession of information and pursues an absolute equality of markets participants. Every transaction in which there is asymmetric information becomes unethical
- Equal access view : Given that unequal possession is an advantage, which cannot be competed away since it depends upon a lawful privilege to which an outsider cannot acquire access, Brudney (1979) focuses on access to inside information
What is the issue about this equal access view ?
It is unclear. Access to information is a function of the costs of obtaining informationThe resulting inequality of information is a result of the division of labor.
Wherane (1991) rejects insider trading because it ignores 2 conditions necessary for fair competition. Give the 2
- An efficient market where as much as possible complete information is available to everyone
- The ideal of an equal comparative advantage between competitors
Give an argument against insider trading based on the property rights perspective
Insider trading is wrong because it involves a violation of property rights and can be seen as a form of theft or misappropriation.