arbiter
JournalsAccount

Designing Sovereign Debt Legislation: Learning from Comparative Experience

Simon Hinrichsen et al.

Journal of Financial Regulation2025https://doi.org/10.1093/jfr/fjaf012article
ABDC B
Weight
0.50

Abstract

The current international regime for restructuring sovereign debt largely relies on consensual processes and contract law. This has enabled uncooperative distressed debt investors to realize high profits by insisting on full payment in situations where most creditors have already agreed to debt relief. To counter the disruptive effects of holdout creditors, Belgium, the United Kingdom, and France have enacted domestic laws limiting the enforceability of distressed sovereign debt. Recent proposals for similar legislation in New York and other jurisdictions seek to facilitate efficient and equitable sovereign debt restructurings more generally. While the policy debate is often reduced to a binary choice between ‘statutory’ and ‘market based’ approaches, a comparative analysis reveals a range of different solutions. This article surveys existing laws and proposals in the context of underlying legal concepts and policy concerns, identifying nine design choices that can inform the legislative process.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/jfr/fjaf012

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{simon2025,
  title        = {{Designing Sovereign Debt Legislation: Learning from Comparative Experience}},
  author       = {Simon Hinrichsen et al.},
  journal      = {Journal of Financial Regulation},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/jfr/fjaf012},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Designing Sovereign Debt Legislation: Learning from Comparative Experience

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.