Every year, Washington spends more than $90 billion on corporate welfare – giving taxpayer dollars to private businesses. The Export-Import Bank is one of the most flagrant corporate welfare programs. A vote to reauthorize it recently failed both Houses of Congress, but will likely come up again soon. Vice President for Strategy Iain Murray thinks the Export-Import Bank should become an ex-bank.
Ryan Young
Fellow in Regulatory Studies at the Competitive Enterprise Institute in Washington, DC. All opinions are mine.
Questions? Comments? Have a tip for a Regulation of the Day? Send me an email.
Follow me on Twitter - @RegoftheDay
Twitter Feed
- Regulation of the Day 231: Serving Olive Oil bit.ly/17UZOrr 11 hours ago
- Well played, sir. RT @cobrown: @RegoftheDay Immeasurable volumes of utility! <chortle> 14 hours ago
- Happy 207th birthday to John Stuart Mill. His writings have given the world much utility. 14 hours ago
- Battered Business Bureau: 71 new regulations, from synthetic marijuana to the American Lamb Board. bit.ly/161Svyf 16 hours ago
- The WSJ ed board takes a look at the new edition of @wayne_crews' new Ten Thousand Commandments study. on.wsj.com/13FDUVK @10KC 16 hours ago
Archives
Categories
- Books (82)
- CEI Podcast (134)
- Correspondence (29)
- Economics (632)
- Antitrust (34)
- Bailouts (19)
- Business Cycles (26)
- Competition (8)
- Development Economics (6)
- Monetary Theory (10)
- Price and Wage Controls (15)
- Public Choice (81)
- Spending (94)
- Stimulus (46)
- Taxation (59)
- The Market Process (21)
- Trade (51)
- education (18)
- Everybody Panic (10)
- Executive Power (11)
- Free Speech (34)
- Fun with Statistics (7)
- General Foolishness (90)
- Great Thinkers (78)
- Health Care (36)
- History (29)
- Housekeeping (35)
- Immigration (45)
- Innovation (13)
- International (64)
- Law (29)
- Media (32)
- Media Appearances (45)
- Nanny State (105)
- Philosophy (107)
- Argumentation (17)
- Certainty (12)
- Pith (46)
- Political Animals (273)
- Predicting the Future (8)
- prohibition (9)
- Publications (94)
- regulation (334)
- Regulation of the Day (231)
- Science (23)
- Security Theater (85)
- Sports (146)
- Technology (55)
- The Arts (14)
- Music (5)
- The New Religion (92)
- Mankind's Doom (22)
- The Old Religion (12)
- The Partisan Mind (62)
- Uncategorized (29)
Blogroll
Al's Ramblings (Brewers Blog)
Radley Balko (The Agitator)
Caleb Brown
Cafe Hayek
Cato Institute Blog
Coordination Problem (Peter Boettke, Pete Leeson, Steve Horwitz, et al)
William Easterly
EconLog (Bryan Caplan, David Henderson, Arnold Kling)
Jacob Grier
Gene Healy
Steven Landsburg
Jeremy Lott
Megan McArdle
Chris Moody
Carl Oberg
Open Market (CEI)
Tom Palmer
Reason Hit & Run
Jason Vines





Do Corporations Have Human Rights?
Intel’s defense in its EU antitrust case has taken the surprising line that the company’s human rights were violated. Over at Real Clear Markets, CEI colleague Hans Bader and I take a closer look. We conclude that Intel actually has a pretty good argument.
Corporations have human rights because doing so greatly reduces transaction costs: “suppose your company wants to buy some computer chips from Intel. You could have each shareholder sign the sales contract – good luck finding them all – or you could treat Intel as a person with the right to sign a contract, and the obligation to honor it. To deal with one person or millions? That is why corporations have legal standing as individuals.”
In short: no corporate rights, no modern economy. No exaggeration. There is a reason why legal conventions emerge as they do, even if they appear strange at first glance.
Iain Murray was kind enough to point out to me that the idea of corporate human rights has very deep roots. The 18th-century legal scholar William Blackstone, in his revered analysis of the English common law, wrote that corporations have the right “[T]o sue or be sued,, implead or be impleaded, grant or receive, by its corporate name, and do all other acts as persons may.”*
*William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, Volume 1: Of the Rights of Persons, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979 [1765]), p. 463.
→ Leave a comment
Posted in Antitrust, Economics, Law, Publications
Tagged Antitrust, cei, coase, commentaries on the laws of england, contract, contract law, eu, hans bader, human rights, iain murray, intel, ronald coase, transaction costs, william blackstone