4 ms·

That seems fixable. But anytime a corporation is charged with any crime, at least one executive should also be charged.

by ncmncm 4y ago

jpgvm 4y ago
Why even charge corporations? Charge the ultimate beneficiaries and the decision makers. The executives and the board should be the ones with their balls in a vice rather than indirectly harming investors that were already harmed as part of the malicious act.
- ncmncm 4y ago
  There is a legal miasma around "piercing the corporate veil", originally about limiting investors' financial liability for acts of the corporation to their stake in it. Instead it mostly protects officers against criminal charges, which turn into fines borne by those investors in place at the time the fine is finally collected. Officers almost always get off scot-free; often enough, investors too, with the corp simply enjoined to pledge "not to do it anymore". Allegedly this is to protect employment or something, or to encourage boards to exercise control over officers. Instead it encourages officers to keep boards toothless.
kennend3 4y ago
Corporations should NEVER be charged. They are nameless legal constructs incapable of making decisions. Worse, when corporations pay fines this is with SHAREHOLDER money. The leaders / decision makers should be fined and corporations forbidden from paying these fines. Having more "prohibited from taking on a leadership role in any publicly traded company for 5 years" rulings would also help. These actions would put a quick end to what takes place these days.
- ncmncm 4y ago
  The sentiment is correct. But the whole purpose of corporations' existence is to provide a vehicle by which to evade all personal responsibility. Thus, every legislative attempt to define avenues for accountability for people wielding corporations is neutered by Supreme Court legal invention. US Congress defined legal status of "person", which SCOTUS extended to include corporations, "legal persons". Then Congress defined "natural person", and SCOTUS extended that to include corporations, too. Congress gave up, after that. US Department of Justice technically has power to "pierce the corporate veil" and charge investors or corporate officers, but practically never does, possibly for fear of collecting a SCOTUS decision eliminating its ability ever to do it at all. As we say, "the fix is in". The only effective legal bound on behavior of people wielding corporations is that it cannot vote or serve on juries, which is not wanted in any case, or be elected to public office. It will be at least a generation before SCOTUS could be constituted to overturn corporate "natural" personhood.

That seems fixable. But anytime a corporation is charged with any crime, at least one executive should also be charged.

by ncmncm 4y ago

That seems fixable. But anytime a corporation is charged with any crime, at least one executive should also be charged.

Why even charge corporations? Charge the ultimate beneficiaries and the decision makers. The executives and the board should be the ones with their balls in a vice rather than indirectly harming investors that were already harmed as part of the malicious act.

ncmncm 4y ago
There is a legal miasma around "piercing the corporate veil", originally about limiting investors' financial liability for acts of the corporation to their stake in it. Instead it mostly protects officers against criminal charges, which turn into fines borne by those investors in place at the time the fine is finally collected. Officers almost always get off scot-free; often enough, investors too, with the corp simply enjoined to pledge "not to do it anymore". Allegedly this is to protect employment or something, or to encourage boards to exercise control over officers. Instead it encourages officers to keep boards toothless.

kennend3 4y ago

Corporations should NEVER be charged. They are nameless legal constructs incapable of making decisions. Worse, when corporations pay fines this is with SHAREHOLDER money. The leaders / decision makers should be fined and corporations forbidden from paying these fines. Having more "prohibited from taking on a leadership role in any publicly traded company for 5 years" rulings would also help. These actions would put a quick end to what takes place these days.

ncmncm 4y ago
The sentiment is correct. But the whole purpose of corporations' existence is to provide a vehicle by which to evade all personal responsibility. Thus, every legislative attempt to define avenues for accountability for people wielding corporations is neutered by Supreme Court legal invention. US Congress defined legal status of "person", which SCOTUS extended to include corporations, "legal persons". Then Congress defined "natural person", and SCOTUS extended that to include corporations, too. Congress gave up, after that. US Department of Justice technically has power to "pierce the corporate veil" and charge investors or corporate officers, but practically never does, possibly for fear of collecting a SCOTUS decision eliminating its ability ever to do it at all. As we say, "the fix is in". The only effective legal bound on behavior of people wielding corporations is that it cannot vote or serve on juries, which is not wanted in any case, or be elected to public office. It will be at least a generation before SCOTUS could be constituted to overturn corporate "natural" personhood.