Transfer Pricing in the Decentralized Multinational Corporation

This paper considers how the multinational corporation's transfer price responds to changes in international corporate effective tax rates. It extends the decentralized decision-making analysis of transfer pricing in the context of different tax rates. It adopts and extends Bond's (1980) model of the decentralized multinational corporation that assumes centralized transfer pricing. The direction of transfer price change is as expected, while the magnitude of change is likely to be less than predicted by the Horst (1971), centralized decision-making model. The paper extends the model further by assuming negotiated transfer pricing, where the analysis is partitioned into perfect and imperfect information cases. The negotiated transfer pricing result reverts to the Horst (1971), or centralized decision-making, result, under perfect information. Under imperfect information, the centralized decision-making result obtains when top management successfully informs division general managers or it successfully implements a non-monetary reward scheme to encourage division general managers to cooperate. Under simplifying assumptions, centralized decision-making dominates decentralized decision-making, while negotiated transfer pricing weakly dominates centralized transfer pricing.

Refined second law of thermodynamics for fast random processes

We establish a refined version of the Second Law of Thermodynamics for Langevin stochastic processes describing mesoscopic systems driven by conservative or non-conservative forces and interacting with thermal noise. The refinement is based on the Monge-Kantorovich optimal mass transport and becomes relevant for processes far from quasi-stationary regime. General discussion is illustrated by numerical analysis of the optimal memory erasure protocol for a model for micron-size particle manipulated by optical tweezers.

An Introduction to Conservation Easements in the United States: A Simple Concept and a Complicated Mosaic of Law

The idea of a conservation easement – restrictions on the development and use of land designed to protect the land’s conservation or historic values – can be relatively easily understood. More significant and more challenging is the complex body of state and federal laws that shapes the creation, funding, tax treatment, enforcement, modification, and termination of conservation easements. The explosion in the number of conservation easements over the past four decades has made them one of the most popular land protection mechanisms in the United States. The National Conservation Easement Database estimates that the total number of acres encumbered by conservation easements exceeds 40 million.Because conservation easements are both novel and ubiquitous, understanding how they actual work is essential for practicing lawyers, policymakers, land trust professionals, and students of conservation. This article provides a “quick tour” through some of the most important aspects of the developing mosaic of conservation easement law. It gives the reader a sense of the complex inter-jurisdictional dynamics that shape conservation transactions and disputes about conservation easements. Professors of property law, environmental law, tax law, and environmental studies who wish to cover conservation easements in the context of a more general course can use the article to provide their students with a broad but comprehensive overview of the relevant legal and policy issues.

The Jewish Law Firm: Past and Present

The rise and growth of large Jewish law firms in New York City during the second half of the twentieth century was nothing short of an astounding success story. As late as 1950, there was not a single large Jewish law firm in town. By the mid-1960s, six of the largest twenty law firms were Jewish, and by 1980, four of the largest ten prestigious law firms were Jewish firms. Moreover, the accomplishment of the Jewish firms is especially striking because, while the traditional large White Anglo-Saxon Protestant law firms grew at a fast rate during this period, the Jewish firms grew twice as fast, and they did so in spite of experiencing explicit discrimination. What happened? This book chapter is a revised, updated study of the rise and growth of large New York City Jewish law firms. It is based on the public record, with respect to both the law firms themselves and trends in the legal profession generally, and on over twenty in-depth interviews with lawyers who either founded and practiced at these successful Jewish firms, attempted and failed to establish such firms, or were in a position to join these firms but decided instead to join WASP firms. According to the informants interviewed in this chapter, while Jewish law firms benefited from general decline in anti-Semitism and increased demand for corporate legal services, a unique combination of factors explains the incredible rise of the Jewish firms. First, white-shoe ethos caused large WASP firms to stay out of undignified practice areas and effectively created pockets of Jewish practice areas, where the Jewish firms encountered little competition for their services. Second, hiring and promotion discriminatory practices by the large WASP firms helped create a large pool of talented Jewish lawyers from which the Jewish firms could easily recruit. Finally, the Jewish firms benefited from a flip side of bias phenomenon, that is, they benefited from the positive consequences of stereotyping. Paradoxically, the very success of the Jewish firms is reflected in their demise by the early twenty-first century: because systematic large law firm ethno-religious discrimination against Jewish lawyers has become a thing of the past, the very reason for the existence of Jewish law firms has been nullified. As other minority groups, however, continue to struggle for equality within the senior ranks of Big Law, can the experience of the Jewish firms serve as a “separate-but-equal” blueprint for overcoming contemporary forms of discrimination for women, racial, and other minority attorneys? Perhaps not. As this chapter establishes, the success of large Jewish law firms was the result of unique conditions and circumstances between 1945 and 1980, which are unlikely to be replicated. For example, large law firms have become hyper-competitive and are not likely to allow any newcomers the benefit of protected pockets of practice. While smaller “separate-but-equal” specialized firms, for instance, ones exclusively hiring lawyer-mothers occasionally appear, the rise of large “separate-but-equal” firms is improbable.

Saint Mathew Law and Bonini Paradox in Textual Theory of Complex Models

The mathematical models of the complex reality are texts belonging to a certain literature that is written in a semi-formal language, denominated L(MT) by the authors whose laws linguistic mathematics have been previously defined. This text possesses linguistic entropy that is the reflection of the physical entropy of the processes of real world that said text describes. Through the temperature of information defined by Mandelbrot, the authors begin a text-reality thermodynamic theory that drives to the existence of information attractors, or highly structured point, settling down a heterogeneity of the space text, the same one that of ontologic space, completing the well-known law of Saint Mathew, of the General Theory of Systems and formulated by Margalef saying: “To the one that has more he will be given, and to the one that doesn't have he will even be removed it little that it possesses.

Petition of Sever and Welsteed to the General Court (manuscript copy), [1723 June-August]

Two folio-sized leaves containing a two-page handwritten copy of the June 21, 1723 petition of Sever and Welsteed requesting the question of non-resident Fellows in the Corporation be readdressed by the General Court, and a one-page handwritten copy of the answer to the petition passed by the General Court on August 7, 1723. The text of the petition begins "Sheweth that we have formerly represented to the Overseers of the College the Difficulty we were under in the business of it by reason of our not being vested with the power of its Charter..." The petition is incorrectly dated as "June 24th 1722" instead of 1723.

Draft of law related to the settling of chambers after Commencement, 1742

One-page handwritten draft of a law created by the president and tutors requiring juniors to inform the Faculty of their intent to stay in dormitory rooms following Commencement. The document is undated and unsigned, but appears to be in the hand of President Edward Holyoke, and has a note in shorthand in the left margin. The text is included in College Book IV and was presented at a meeting of the Harvard Corporation on September 6, 1742.

Memorial of the President and Fellows of Harvard College to the General Court for the enlargement of their power to hold real estate. Copy, [1797 July 15]

Four folio-sized leaves containing a handwritten copy of a petition to the Massachusetts General Court from the Harvard Corporation requesting the College's amount of tax exempt real estate be enlarged.

Vote of the Corporation respecting the readmission of Tudor and others, 1768 July 5

Handwritten copy of the vote of the Corporation to readmit Austin, Tudor, and Peabody, with the note that "The President entered his protest against the above vote." The document also transcribes a vote to amend the College Law Chapter V, Law 1 regarding students' quarterly charges from the Steward and Butler.

Vote of the Corporation, 1799 June 10

Two octavo-sized leaves containing a handwritten copy of the vote of the Harvard Corporation during the June 10, 1799 meeting authorizing Judge John Lowell and Judge Oliver Wendell to be a committee to attend to business with the state legislature related to the pending bill before the General Court regarding the College's real estate tax exemptions. The vote also authorized Professor Pearson to work with the Committee as needed. The document is addressed to Professor Pearson and signed by President Willard.

Abstracts of legislation relating to Harvard College governance (manuscript notebook), ca. 1723

Octavo-sized notebook containing handwritten abstracts of Massachusetts General Court legislation between 1650 and August 24, 1723 related to Harvard governance. The volume contains informal notes with extracts and summaries of legislation that established or amended the makeup and power of the Harvard Corporation. The authors of the volume are unidentified, but the notes appear to be in two different hands. The volume was presumably created during the fellowship controversy that erupted in the early 1720s after tutors Henry Flynt, Nicholas Sever, and Thomas Robie presented a memorial to the Board of Overseers calling for the tutors' right of fellowship in the Corporation.

Notes of proceedings and cases determined in the high court of errors and appeals, the court of chancery, and the orphans court of the state of Delaware, 1792-1832

Contains summaries of cases heard by the Delaware Supreme Court and the Delaware Appeals Court in the counties of Sussex, Kent, and Newcastle covering a variety of legal topics. Supposedly based on Wilson's Red Book.

Read's Delaware cases, 1793-1794

Contains legal cases transcribed by George Read containing accounts of cases before the Delaware Supreme Court.

Lawyer's case book containing notes of cases adjudged and determined in the courts of Delaware, 1793-1796

Lawyer's case book containing notes on cases before the Delaware Supreme Court and Delaware Court of Common Pleas. Contains information on the cases and judgements.