St. John's Law Review

Rethinking the Corporation (and Race) in America: Can Law (and Professionalization) Fix “Minor” Problems of Externalization, Internalization, and Governance?

By: Steven A. Ramirez

Much misconduct has been laid at the doorstep of the modern corporation, particularly in light of a historic surge in corporate corruption beginning in 2001. This Article focuses on what is right about the modern publicly held corporation and attempts to decouple these attributes from the debate about what needs to be fixed. It instead argues for a more austere restructuring that actually transcends the corporation per se and focuses on the apparent locus of the difficulties—the management of the large, publicly held business enterprise.

The misdeeds commonly attributed to the corporation are hardly inherent to the corporation, or the inexorable result of exclusive attributes of the corporation. The essence of the modern corporation consists of two important elements: 1) limited liability and 2) the ability to lock-in capital regardless of the desires of individual owners or creditors. Combined with the shareholder primacy principle, these elements explain why society has—and needs—the modern corporation.  These elements need not be associated with the misconduct that corporations happen to perpetrate.  Nor do these elements logically create inappropriate incentives or proclivities towards such misconduct.

This is not to say there are no structural problems with the modern corporation. As a profit-maximizing institution, a corporation will rationally seek to externalize as many costs associated with its activities that it possibly can. Similarly, a corporation will fail to see socially desirable investments, which yield external benefits in excess of costs, if it cannot internalize sufficient benefits to justify its investment costs. There are also problems associated with corporate governance. A Chief Executive Officer of a modern corporation will often wield tremendous economic power, and be tempted to use such power to enrich himself without regard to the welfare of the corporation. These three issues pose economic challenges to the institutional structure of the corporation, but they do not give rise, inevitably, to the corporate misbehavior that has been a recurring historical experience.

Part I will seek to show what is right and wrong with the modern corporation. Part II will demonstrate, in general, how the law should respond to this realization of the fundamental strengths and the more “minor” weaknesses of the modern corporation. Part III will apply these lessons to the problems of race in America in 2005. The Article concludes that law plays an important role in the dementia of corporate wrongdoing, but that the legal foundation of the corporation itself is not to blame. Instead, the blame lies largely in the legal infrastructure surrounding the corporation, or the lack thereof.