Embargoed Access
White shoes in gray areas : a conceptual history of regulatory arbitrage
Loading...
Files
Embargoed until 2029
License
Cadmus Permanent Link
Full-text via DOI
ISBN
ISSN
Issue Date
Type of Publication
Keyword(s)
LC Subject Heading
Other Topic(s)
EUI Research Cluster(s)
Initial version
Published version
Succeeding version
Published version part
Earlier different version
Initial format
Author(s)
Citation
Florence : European University Institute, 2025
EUI; LAW; PhD Thesis
Cite
MURRAY, Ian Joseph, White shoes in gray areas : a conceptual history of regulatory arbitrage, Florence : European University Institute, 2025, EUI, LAW, PhD Thesis - https://hdl.handle.net/1814/92802
Abstract
The term regulatory arbitrage gained currency in the financial regulatory literature of the 1980s to describe clever strategies firms used to avoid or mitigate regulatory burdens. It captured broader attention after the financial crisis, when banks came under scrutiny for structuring their assets and affairs deliberately to avoid regulations. Since then, commentators have seized on it to describe a broad array of practices across diverse economic sectors. Despite the term’s prevalence, there is scant agreement on the scope of activities it describes. For some, it is merely a catch-all for legal avoidance from time immemorial. Answering calls for work placing this concept in a richer context, this project retraces regulatory arbitrage’s expansion not only as a real-world phenomenon, but equally as a unit of discourse. Regulatory arbitrage is a conceptual metaphor, based on the audacious assumption that every legal principle has its price. It is also a grammatical metaphor: a noun used to describe a process (in lieu of a verb). As such, it naturalizes the behavior it describes as eternal and inevitable, fostering a dangerous conventional wisdom that all regulation is futile. It also obscures the identities of its beneficiaries, curtailing conversations about how uneven access to sophisticated legal advice exacerbates wealth inequality. Through this lens, the concept appears inextricably linked with the ascendancy of financialized business models across the contemporary economy, especially legal practice. It reflects the paramount importance contemporary capitalism, fueled by advances in technology epitomized by artificial intelligence, places on quantitative measures of value. It encourages an instrumental perspective on law, reinforced by law and economics thinking and declining faith in the law’s capacity to vindicate countervailing non-economic values. In so doing, it casts what might otherwise be seen as brazen attempts to undermine the rule of law as innocent efforts to enhance the law’s efficiency.
Table of Contents
Additional Information
Defence date: 03 June 2025
Examining Board: Prof. Peter Frank Drahos (European University Institute, Supervisor); Prof. Martijn Hesselink (European University Institute); Prof. Desmond Manderson (Australian National University); Prof. Imelda Maher (University College Dublin Sutherland School of Law)
Examining Board: Prof. Peter Frank Drahos (European University Institute, Supervisor); Prof. Martijn Hesselink (European University Institute); Prof. Desmond Manderson (Australian National University); Prof. Imelda Maher (University College Dublin Sutherland School of Law)
External Links
Publisher
Version
Chapter 3 'The calculus of compliance: the costs of cost-benefit analysis' of the PhD thesis draws upon an earlier version published as an article 'Law, commodification, and the distribution of resources'(2024) in the journal 'Global jurist'. Chapter 4 'Attorney work product: the commodification of compliance' draws upon an earlier versions published as an articles 'Commodification and EU law : a genealogy' (2023) and 'Facing the fiction : can the European Union regulate fictitious commodities and capital?' (2023) in the journal 'European law open'.