The rule of law is key to capitalism − eroding it is bad news for American business
Something dangerous is happening to the U.S. economy, and it's not inflation or trade wars. Chaotic deregulation and the selective enforcement of laws have upended markets and investor confidence. At one point, the threat of tariffs and resulting chaos evaporated US$4 trillion in value in the U.S. stock market. This approach isn't helping the economy, and there are troubling signs it will hurt both the U.S. and the global economy in the short and long term.
The rule of law – the idea that legal rules apply to everyone equally, regardless of wealth or political connections − is essential for a thriving economy. Yet globally the respect for the rule of law is slipping, and the U.S. is slipping with it. According to annual rankings from the World Justice Project, the rule of law has declined in more than half of all countries for seven years in a row. The rule of law in the U.S., the most economically powerful nation in the world, is now weaker than the rule of law in Uruguay, Singapore, Latvia and over 20 other countries.
When regulation is unnecessarily burdensome for business, government should lighten the load. However, arbitrary and frenzied deregulation does not free corporations to earn higher profits. As a business school professor with an MBA who has taught business law for over 25 years, and the author of a recently published book about the importance of legal knowledge to business, I can affirm that the opposite is true. Chaotic deregulation doesn't drive growth. It only fuels risk.
Chaos undermines investment, talent and trust
Legal uncertainty has become a serious drag on American competitiveness.
A study by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce found that public policy risks — such as unexpected changes in taxes, regulation and enforcement — ranked among the top challenges businesses face, alongside more familiar business threats such as competition or economic volatility. Companies that can't predict how the law might change are forced to plan for the worst. That means holding back on long-term investment, slowing innovation and raising prices to cover new risks.
When the government enforces rules arbitrarily, it also undermines property rights.
For example, if a country enters into a major trade agreement and then goes ahead and violates it, that threatens the property rights of the companies that relied on the agreement to conduct business. If the government can seize assets without due process, those assets lose their stability and value. And if that treatment depends on whether a company is in the government's political favor, it's not just bad economics − it's a red flag for investors.
When government doesn't enforce rules fairly, it also threatens people's freedom to enter into contracts.
Consider presidential orders that threaten the clients of law firms that have challenged the administration with cancellation of their government contracts. The threat alone jeopardizes the value of those agreements.
If businesses can't trust public contracts to be respected, they'll be less likely to work with the government in the first place. This deprives the government, and ultimately the American people, of receiving the best value for their tax dollars in critical areas such as transportation, technology and national defense.
Regulatory chaos also allows corruption to spread.
For example, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which prohibits businesses from bribing foreign government officials, has leveled the playing field for firms and enabled the best American companies to succeed on their merits. Before the law was enacted in 1977, some American companies felt pressured to pay bribes to compete. 'Pausing' enforcement of the law, as the current presidential administration has done, increases the cost of doing business and encourages a wild west economy where chaos thrives.
When corruption grows, stable and democratic governments weaken, opportunities for terrorism increase and corruption-fueled authoritarian regimes, which oppose the interests of the U.S., thrive. Halting the enforcement of an anti-bribery law, even for a limited time, is an issue of national security.
Legal uncertainty fuels brain drain
Chaotic enforcement of the law also corrodes labor markets.
American companies require a strong pool of talented professionals to fuel their financial success. When legal rights are enforced arbitrarily or unjustly, the very best talent that American companies need may leave the country.
The science brain drain is already happening. American scientists have submitted 32% more applications for jobs abroad compared with last year. Nonscientists are leaving too. Ireland's Department of Foreign Affairs has witnessed a 50% increase in Americans taking steps to obtain an Irish passport. Employers in the U.K. saw a spike in job applications from the United States.
Business from other countries will gladly accept American talent as they compete against American companies. During the Third Reich, Nazi Germany lost its best and brightest to other countries, including America. Now the reverse is happening, as highly talented Americans leave to work for firms in other nations.
Threats of arbitrary legal actions also drive away democratic allies and their prosperous populations that purchase American-made goods and services. For example, arbitrarily threatening to punish or even annex a closely allied nation does not endear its citizens to that government or the businesses it represents. So it's no surprise that Canadians are now boycotting American goods and services. This is devastating businesses in American border towns and hurts the economy nationwide.
Similarly, the Canadian government has responded to whipsawing U.S. tariff announcements with counter-tariffs, which will slice the profits of American exporters. Close American allies and trading partners such as Japan, the U.K. and the European Union are also signaling their own willingness to impose retaliatory tariffs, increasing the costs of operations to American business even more.
Modern capitalism depends on smart regulation to thrive. Smart regulation is not an obstacle to capitalism. Smart regulation is what makes American capitalism possible. Smart regulation is what makes American freedom possible.
Clear and consistently applied legal rules allow businesses to aggressively compete, carefully plan, and generate profits. An arbitrary rule of law deprives business of the true power of capitalism – the ability to promote economic growth, spur innovation and improve the overall living standards of a free society. Americans deserve no less, and it is up to government to make that happen for everyone.
Robert Bird is Professor of Business Law & Eversource Energy Chair in Business Ethics, University of Connecticut.
The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.
External Link
https://theconversation.com/the-rule-of-law-is-key-to-capitalism-eroding-it-is-bad-news-for-american-business-254922
© The Conversation
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Diplomat
4 hours ago
- The Diplomat
Why the MCC's Continuation is in the Interest of Nepal — and the US
After putting MCC projects on hold in January this year, the Trump administration recently said that its projects in Nepal would go ahead. The Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), an American bilateral foreign aid agency, has been mired in controversy in Nepal since the get-go. It signed a $500 million compact with Nepal in September 2017. Proposed projects aimed to maintain road quality, increase the availability and reliability of electricity, and facilitate cross-border electricity trade between Nepal and India, which in turn would 'spur investments, accelerate economic growth, and reduce poverty.' As part of the deal, besides the $500 million the Americans were giving, Nepal would pitch in $197 million for the completion of the MCC projects. The projects ran into controversy after senior American officials started linking them to the Indo-Pacific Strategy (IPS), an American military construct designed to curtail China's rise. The common sentiment was that Nepal should not be a part of any military or strategic pact, especially one that harms its relations with China, the large neighbor to the north. Early in 2022, senior American officials like the MCC's then-Vice President Fatema Z. Sumar and the then-U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Donald Lu threatened Nepal's political leadership that the failure to ratify the MCC on time could lead to a 'review' of America's ties with Nepal. The compact's stipulation that future disputes in the projects would be settled in line with the compact's provisions — and not Nepal's domestic laws — also irked Nepalis. At the height of the MCC disputes in 2022, Nepali political leaders, especially senior hands in the country's largest party, the Nepali Congress, strongly backed the MCC projects, even when it was not a popular thing to do. Many left-leaning leaders, too, lent their tacit support to the compact — provided it was amended before parliamentary ratification. Eventually, a middle way was found: Nepal's parliament would ratify the compact while also passing an accompanying 'interpretative declaration.' Among other things, the declaration clarified that the compact's endorsement did not mean Nepal will be 'a part of any United States' strategy, military or security alliance including the Indo-Pacific Strategy.' And in case of disputes, the Constitution of Nepal would prevail over the compact. The ratification came at the end of 2022, and the Americans accepted the interpretative declaration, clearing the way for project implementation. Nepal's interests had been secured and the country had locked in an advantageous deal. First, the MCC projects would be built on grants, thus creating no additional liability on the Nepali state. Second, its time-bound nature would be a breath of fresh air in a country where vital infrastructure projects tend to be delayed by years or even decades. Third, as the power lines being built with American money would be used to take Nepal's excess energy to India, it would help Nepal realize its old dream of prospering through the export of its electricity. Then, Donald Trump came to power in January 2025 and declared that all American aid projects, including the MCC, had been put on hold. This created confusion in Nepal as it was unclear whether the funds for Nepal would be exempted. In fact, the common belief was that the Nepal compact was dead and buried — even though it had been signed during Trump's first term as U.S. president. Nepal's liberal-minded politicians had staked their careers and credibility to push for the compact's ratification—and now the Americans were seemingly backing out. Pulling the plug on the compact would thus have made it difficult for the Nepali political class to endorse any future American project or funding. Amid this uncertainty, in the middle of June, the U.S. Embassy in Kathmandu announced that Nepal had been exempted from budget cuts and the MCC projects were still scheduled for completion by their original August 2028 deadline. The announcement was timely. The projects' cancellation would have damaged bilateral ties and harmed Nepal's interests. The U.S. helps balance the oft-overwhelming influence of India and China, Nepal's two big (and only) neighbors, which is why the U.S. is often called Nepal's 'sky' or 'third' neighbor. When India blockaded landlocked Nepal in 2015-16, the United States consistently highlighted the resulting hardships of Nepali people, helping build international pressure on India to quickly lift the embargo. Even for the United States, reneging on the compact would have backfired. (It still could if Trump changes his mind again.) If their goal is to check China's rise in the region, it can only be done by winning the confidence of smaller countries like Nepal and helping them in their development endeavors. The lofty democratic ideals American officials like to emphasize tend to grate when not backed by such solid support. Of late, the U.S. has taken some dubious decisions like the suspension of visa interviews for Nepali students wanting to study in the U.S., and shutting down the USAID that was supporting key health initiatives in Nepal. But the continuity of the MCC projects suggests the Americans are not 'abandoning' Nepal. Even more importantly for Nepalis, the MCC's presence in Nepal undercuts the 'foreign policy myth' that the U.S. views Nepal through Indian lens.
The Diplomat
15 hours ago
- The Diplomat
China-US Relations: Looking for an Edge
The relationship with China that the Biden administration built was seen as a competitive one: both parties sought to avoid conflict, encouraged cooperation where it was needed, and emphasized communication to maintain the relationship. That's why Secretary of State Antony Blinken met frequently with Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi. Communication is vital for deterrence, and both China and the U.S. took a textbook approach. Climate change encouraged the two superpowers to pursue cooperation. Under the Trump administration, this framework has collapsed. Climate change is no longer an area of cooperation. Tariffs are now the main point of dialogue, and certainly remain a major headache for China. When the international environment deteriorates, China tends to look to strengthen ties with Russia and other partner states, while building closer relationships with its neighbors. Beijing has already taken steps in this direction, holding the Central Conference on Work Related to Neighboring Countries in April 2025. Even before Trump returned to power, it was clear that he would make the U.S. trade deficit with China an issue. It was also clear that his foreign policy and national security team would take a hardline stance on China in terms of economic security. Concerned about food and energy security, China has worked to insulate itself from American influence, finding alternative soybean suppliers and stepping up imports of Iranian crude oil. Just as many developed nations have reduced their economic reliance on China, China itself is working to reduce its economic dependence on the U.S. Right now, China's economic policy is focused on building an economic structure centered on domestic demand. This differs sharply from the 'Reform and Opening Up' period, when there was a focus on foreign trade. As a result, the pressure from U.S. tariffs gives China an opportunity to double down on an inwardly focused economic model. There are, of course, sectors where trade with the U.S. remains essential. However, for those sectors where it is not vital, we can expect China to pursue a shift to domestic production or to diversify its trade partners in ASEAN and Central Asia. Faced with harsh tariffs, China has limited means to respond. Even if wanted to buy American, Beijing's shift towards a focus on domestic demand makes it less likely to be interested in boosting imports. Even with aircraft, to take one example, China is already stepping up its own production for domestic flights, making large-scale imports from the U.S. undesirable. Likewise, economic security restrictions make it extremely difficult for Chinese companies to invest in America, even if those companies wanted to contribute to job creation in the U.S. As such, one of the only options remaining for China is to impose its own retaliatory tariffs. Another avenue is to use rare earth metals and lithium-ion batteries as leverage, with the former being essential for the automotive industry and a major weapon in tariff negotiations. China has meanwhile sought to portray the U.S. to the rest of the world – and the Global South in particular – as a disruptor of the free trade system. At the same time, it has worked to rally allies of the U.S. that have been hit with high tariffs, calling on them to work with China to confront Washington over tariffs. Beijing has identified many elements within the Trump administration's policies that it thinks are to its advantage. Tariffs are one example, but there is also the effective dismantling of USAID, the elimination of funding for Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA), and more. Many USAID projects have been suspended, and there have been significant repercussions and criticism from countries in the Pacific and Africa. Although China is also dealing with many economic issues of its own and cannot provide the same level of funding to these countries as it did in the late 2010s, this still represents an opportunity. The decline of VOA is particularly advantageous to China, which has long tried to expand its discourse power on the global stage. RFA once actively reported on human rights issues in China's Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region. It goes without saying that China welcomes the suspension of these activities. In reality, the de facto dismantling of USAID appears to affect not only developing countries but also the state of global discourse. There are growing concerns that this will lead to a breakdown in the mechanisms that fact-check disinformation. Right now, China appears to be in the process of assessing the Trump administration's policies, looking for potential openings. The rest of the world will watch with interest to see if Washington can respond nimbly once China begins to pursue its own policies, exploiting any weaknesses in the U.S. position. KAWASHIMA Shin is a professor at the University of Tokyo.
SoraNews24
18 hours ago
- SoraNews24
Soon you'll be able to spend the night in a convenience store parking lot when traveling in Japan
Lawson convenience stores adding car camping program at select locations. When looking for a place to spend the night while traveling in Japan, the standard first question you need to ask yourself is whether you want to stay in a modern hotel or a traditional ryokan inn. However, as of this summer there's a new option for where to spend the night: a convenience store parking lot. That doesn't mean that convenience store chain Lawson is encouraging people to toss their sleeping bags down on the pavement, though, Instead, the chain is entering a partnership with the Japan Recreational Vehicle Association to expand its network of RV Park facilities to Lawson parking lots at select locations. It's an idea that sounds pretty unusual at first, but in some ways makes a lot of sense. Once you get outside of the big city centers, most roadside convenience stores in Japan have attached parking lots, but once customer traffic drops off in the late-night hours, most of the spaces go unused until the next morning, so making some of those spots available for travelers camping in their cars overnight is a potential new revenue stream for Lawson. From the user side, being parked next to a convenience store that's open 24 hours gives them easy access to food, drinks, and various sundry goods from brands they're used to and at reasonable prices, as well as a clean bathroom. The service also supplies users with electrical hookups and trash disposal service. Rates run between 2,500 and 3,000 yen (approximately US$17.25-US$20.75) per night, with check-in times between 6 and 9 p.m. and a check-out time of 9 p.m. And though this program is organized in conjunction with the Japan Recreational Vehicle Association, you can spend the night in a Lawson parking lot in regular, non-RV cars and vans too. The initial trial period for the program begins on July 14 and is scheduled to run until Jun 30 of next year. Six sites will be available to start, all in Chiba Prefecture, at the Ichinomiya Torami Lawson branch in the town of Chosei, the Onjuku Shinmachi branch in Isumi, the Amatsuko Minato branch in Kamogawa, the Futtsu Miinato branch in Futtsu, and the Tomiura Interchange and Minamiboso Iwaii Kaigan braches in Minamiboso. As shown in the map above, all of the branches are in towns situated on the coast of Chiba, the prefecture to the east of Tokyo, which has a wealth of beaches, surf spots, and other outdoor attractions. That's in keeping with the program's goal of providing a place for travelers to spend the night en route to destinations in less-developed areas, allowing them to wake up closer to where they want to spend the day and also allowing them to skip spending for a night in a hotel, something that's getting more and more expensive to do as rates rise across the travel industry in Japan. Reservations are open as of July 8 and can be made through the Japan Recreational Vehicle Association website here. Source: PR Times, Japan Recreational Vehicle Association via Nihon Keizai Shimbun, Itai News Top image: Japan Recreational Vehicle Association Insert images: PR Times, Japan Recreational Vehicle Association ● Want to hear about SoraNews24's latest articles as soon as they're published? Follow us on Facebook and Twitter!
