Contractual Tradeoffs and SMEs Choice of Organizational Form, A View from U.S. and French History, 1830-2000
Today the vast majority of multi-owner firms in the United States are corporations, but that was not the case in the past. Before the advent of the income tax, tort litigation, and significant federal regulation, entrepreneurs more often than not chose to organize as partnerships, a form that economists consider seriously flawed. Why would they make such a terrible mistake? We begin by noting that corporations created new types of contracting problems for businesses at the same time as they solved problems afflicting partnerships. We then model the tradeoffs involved in the choice of corporations versus partnerships and confirm that the model's assumptions are consistent with U.S. legal rules up through the 1940s. The model implies that partnerships and corporations are complementary organizational forms, and we show that data from the U.S. Census of Manufactures strongly supports that implication. We also verify that the model's assumptions hold for the broader set of organizational choices available under the French Code de Commerce and use data on multi-owner firms registered in Paris in the 1830s and 1840s to demonstrate the complementary character of the basic forms. Despite much literature emphasizing the fundamentally different environments for business associated with the French and U.S. legal regimes, the basic calculus underpinning the choice of organizational form was the same in both countries.
|Date of creation:||Aug 2006|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A.|
Web page: http://www.nber.org
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Patrick Bolton & Ernst-Ludwig von Thadden, 1998.
"Blocks, Liquidity, and Corporate Control,"
Journal of Finance,
American Finance Association, vol. 53(1), pages 1-25, 02.
- Bolton, P. & von Thadden, E.L., 1996. "Blocks, liquidity and corporate control," Discussion Paper 1996-80, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
- Patrick BOLTON & Ernst-Ludwig VON THADDEN, 1996. "Blocks, Liquidity, and Corporate Control," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'Econométrie et d'Economie politique (DEEP) 9619, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, DEEP.
- Cai, Hongbin, 2003. " A Theory of Joint Asset Ownership," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 34(1), pages 63-77, Spring.
- Lucian Arye Bebchuk & Allen Ferrell, 2000. "Federalism and Takeover Law: The Race to Protect Managers from Takeovers," NBER Working Papers 7232, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Jeffrey Zwiebel, 1995. "Block Investment and Partial Benefits of Corporate Control," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 62(2), pages 161-185.
- Marco Pagano & Ailsa Röell, 1998. "The Choice of Stock Ownership Structure: Agency Costs, Monitoring, and the Decision to Go Public," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 113(1), pages 187-225.
- Alchian, Armen A & Demsetz, Harold, 1972.
"Production , Information Costs, and Economic Organization,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 62(5), pages 777-95, December.
- Armen A. Alchian & Harold Demsetz, 1971. "Production, Information Costs and Economic Organizations," UCLA Economics Working Papers 10A, UCLA Department of Economics.
- Demsetz, Harold & Lehn, Kenneth, 1985. "The Structure of Corporate Ownership: Causes and Consequences," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(6), pages 1155-1177, December.
- Yarrow, George K, 1985. "Shareholder Protection, Compulsory Acquisition and the Efficiency of the Takeover Process," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(1), pages 3-16, September.
- Henry Hansmann & Reinier Kraakman, 2000. "The Essential Role of Organizational Law," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm147, Yale School of Management, revised 01 Nov 2001.
- Stanley E. Howard, 1934. "The Limited Partnership in New Jersey," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 7, pages 296.
- Forbes, Kevin F, 1986. "Limited Liability and the Development of the Business Corporation," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 163-77, Spring.
- Patrick Bolton & David S. Scharfstein, 1998. "Corporate Finance, the Theory of the Firm, and Organizations," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 95-114, Fall.
- Luigi Zingales, 1995. "Insider Ownership and the Decision to Go Public," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 62(3), pages 425-448.
- Naomi R. Lamoreaux, 2005. "Legal Regime and Contractual Flexibility: A Comparison of Business's Organizational Choices in France and the United States during the Era of Industrialization," American Law and Economics Review, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(1), pages 28-61.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:12455. 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: ()
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.