IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jlawec/doi10.1086-728427.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regulatory Similarity

Author

Listed:
  • Jason (Pang-Li) Chen
  • Joseph Kalmenovitz

Abstract

Using the full text of the Federal Register, the official publication of the US government, we develop a similarity score that compares the regulatory exposure of pairs of companies. A higher score means that the two firms comply with similar regulations by the same regulatory agencies. Existing similarity measures such as industry boundaries, geographic proximity, and product markets account for only one-quarter of the variation in regulatory similarity. Nevertheless, firms with high regulatory similarity comove along key dimensions such as overhead costs, profitability, and investment. Using a supervised machine-learning algorithm, we decompose the similarity into 12 topics and find that it is driven by regulatory issues related to fiscal policy and labor. Each firm has a unique set of peers for each topic, and they all lobby the government on similar topics. Combined, our results uncover economically important links between companies centered around regulatory issues.

Suggested Citation

  • Jason (Pang-Li) Chen & Joseph Kalmenovitz, 2024. "Regulatory Similarity," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 67(3), pages 691-730.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jlawec:doi:10.1086/728427
    DOI: 10.1086/728427
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/728427
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/728427
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/728427?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    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:ucp:jlawec:doi:10.1086/728427. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLE .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.