IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Lessons from the rise of the US limited liability partnership


  • Kern Alexander


The limited liability partnership has been heralded as a cost-effective way of doing business for professional firms that seek to reduce the personal liability risk of partners who are not directly involved in negligent acts or wrongdoing. The LLP business form has been adopted by all US states and has proved widely popular for lawyers and accountants/auditors in reducing vicarious and joint and several liability exposure for the rendering of professional advice. The LLP structure allows professional firms to retain the benefits of the partnership structure, such as tax breaks and ease of operation, while reducing the personal liability of individual partners for torts and negligent acts committed by other partners. This paper examines the rise of LLPs statutes in the US by analysing the LLP statutes of three states that have proved prominent in recent litigation involving professional firms performing services in a negligent or reckless manner. The paper suggests that the liability protections of the US LLPs have not reduced risk, but simply shifted it onto customers, pensioners and the investing public. The liability limitation provisions of the US LLPs create a disincentive for professional firms to adopt effective risk management systems to control negligence and malfeasance within the professional firm. The paper suggests that the UK LLP statute addresses some of these issues because it requires LLPs to operate in a transparent manner, but the courts have yet to determine the extent of protection against personal liability that will be available to members not directly involved in negligence or wrongdoing. Future research should examine the implementation of the UK LLP statute and whether it can address the needs of business without increasing risks for consumers, employees and the investing public.

Suggested Citation

  • Kern Alexander, 2002. "Lessons from the rise of the US limited liability partnership," Working Papers wp255, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
  • Handle: RePEc:cbr:cbrwps:wp255
    Note: PRO-1

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Fama, Eugene F & Jensen, Michael C, 1983. "Separation of Ownership and Control," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(2), pages 301-325, June.
    2. Alan J. Auerbach, 1988. "Corporate Takeovers: Causes and Consequences," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number auer88-1, January.
    3. Andrei Shleifer & Lawrence H. Summers, 1988. "Breach of Trust in Hostile Takeovers," NBER Chapters,in: Corporate Takeovers: Causes and Consequences, pages 33-68 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Luigi Zingales, 1997. "Corporate Governance," NBER Working Papers 6309, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Simon Deakin & Alan Hughes, 1999. "Economic Efficiency and the Proceduralisation of Company Law," Working Papers wp133, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    transactional relationships; contracts and reputations; Government policy and regulation; Tort law;

    JEL classification:

    • L14 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Transactional Relationships; Contracts and Reputation
    • G38 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Government Policy and Regulation
    • K23 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Regulated Industries and Administrative Law
    • K13 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Tort Law and Product Liability; Forensic Economics

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cbr:cbrwps:wp255. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ruth Newman and Georgie Cohen). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.