Single point of entry doctrine in the United States as a form of corporate liability: Рossibilities of legal adoption in the Russian Federation

Abstract

The article analyzes various aspects of the single point of entry bank resolution strategy in the United States and seeks to determine the viability of legally adopting this approach in the Russian Federation. The single point of entry strategy provides an alternative to “bailing out” large bank groups and bankruptcy proceedings via controlled liquidation of the parent company with simultaneous financial rehabilitation of the subsidiary bank. Orderly Liquidation Authority detailed by Title II of the Dodd-Frank Act provides a legislative framework for the single point of entry strategy, but due to the doctrine only existing as a guideline and not directly regulated by legislation, there are several gaps in legislation that cause various problems in both the practical implementation of the single point of entry doctrine and its scientific evaluation. The insufficiently studied topic of single point of entry doctrine as a form of corporate liability is also examined in the article. Russian legislation and court practices regarding bank rehabilitation and the doctrine of “piercing the corporate veil” are examined to determine the possibility of legally adopting the single point of entry doctrine due to similarities between doctrines. The flaws and merits of the single point of entry doctrine are studied while accounting for potential ways to overcome the legal gaps in the strategy. The article reaches the conclusion that while the single point of entry doctrine is far from perfect, the basic principles can be applied to Russian legislation and serve as a viable alternative to the prevalent “bailout” practice.