An under-studied phenomenon: to what extent is higher CEO pay a result of the increased frequency with which prosecutors destroy the lives of CEOs by criminalizing unsuccessful business decisions or arbitrarily retroactively selectively criminalizing common business practices (compare Broadcom and Apple on question of options backdating)? Economic theory would predict that increased chances of having your wealth stripped and being sent to prison for years would require higher compensation ex ante. After Larry Ribstein's death, I'm not aware of anyone considering this at all. Today's DOJ has been surprisingly restrained in not prosecuting executives for foolish investments in the real estate bubble, and are largely being criticized, rather than praised, for their forebearance. Which academic is on the criminalization-of-risk beat these days?
Overcriminalization and CEO pay
Related Entries:
- Why does FDA keep drugmakers from informing doctors?
- More on Caronia
- Abuse of Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
- Overcriminalization sale on Amazon
- Overcriminalization videos
- Partners in Crime: Overcriminalization and Overfederalization
- Gibson Guitars settles
- Single Oxycontin pill = ruined life
- Is This What We Shipped For? US Government's Pursuit of Marine Biologist Nancy Black Continues
- Overcriminalization, the comic
- Gibson Guitar CEO on overcriminalizing businesses
- Greg Conko: GSK to pay $3 billion; FDA's "debarment trap" strikes again
- Manhattan Institute Event: Overcriminalizing the Empire State?
- James Copland on overcriminalization: NY prosecutors have too much power
![]() |
| Isaac Gorodetski Project Manager, Center for Legal Policy at the Manhattan Institute igorodetski@manhattan-institute.org |
![]() |
| Laura Eyi Press Officer, Manhattan Institute leyi@manhattan-institute.org |




Leave a comment
Once submitted, the comment will first be reviewed by our editors and is not guaranteed to be published. Point of Law editors reserve the right to edit, delete, move, or mark as spam any and all comments. They also have the right to block access to any one or group from commenting or from the entire blog. A comment which does not add to the conversation, runs of on an inappropriate tangent, or kills the conversation may be edited, moved, or deleted.
The views and opinions of those providing comments are those of the author of the comment alone, and even if allowed onto the site do not reflect the opinions of Point of Law bloggers or the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research or any employee thereof. Comments submitted to Point of Law are the sole responsibility of their authors, and the author will take full responsibility for the comment, including any asserted liability for defamation or any other cause of action, and neither the Manhattan Institute nor its insurance carriers will assume responsibility for the comment merely because the Institute has provided the forum for its posting.