Abstract

Debt limitations, though adopted with the noblest of intentions, have failed to reduce governmental borrowing because of the ease with which they can be circumvented. This article identifies a critical deficiency of debt limitations: the difficulty of developing a definition of debt that is broad enough to prevent governments from using subterfuges to increase borrowing capacity and yet is sufficiently narrow to enable them to carry out their assigned functions. It reviews the history of debt limitations and the judicial interpretations of them. It shows how courts have analyzed leases and other executory contracts that create debts so as to permit form to take precedence over economic substance.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.