Is There a Chinese “Code of Capital”?

ABSTRACT

[...]the question is there a Chinese “Code of Capital”? In posing the question of whether Professor Pistor’s analysis provides an explanatory lens for understanding comparative law and development and, specifically, Chinese law and development (Erie 2021, 54–55), I recognize that the litmus test of any theory is its ability to explain cases that may have been outside the purview of its original formulation. Professor Pistor’s paradigm helps explains the contemporary topography of global capitalism the concentration of financial and legal expertise in London and New York, as well as the roles of tax havens, which function, respectively, to transform and shield capital accumulation as financial assets. [...]one of the core attributes of state capitalism is the nature of law that underlies and enables that system, and critically, unlike the UK or US, China is not a rule-of-law state, but a Party-State.