Tag Archives | Rule 14a-8(i)(9)

Do the opposite

Do the Opposite: Franklin Resources Plays George

Do the Opposite was funny in the sitcom Seinfeld but not so funny when Franklin Resources does the opposite of shareholder proposals. In fact, doing the opposite threatens the existence of even the facade of democratic corporate governance, alive since 1947 with the legal right of shareholders to file and vote on proposals. (more…)

Continue Reading ·
AES logo

AES “Games” SEC: CII Seeks Correction

CII sent an important letter to the SEC on a recent no-action issued to the AES Corporation (AES) (not yet posted). A similar no-action had been granted in 2016 to Illumina (ILMN) on a proposal I (James McRitchie) had submitted. ISS referenced both. From the facts regarding AES, it appears John Chevedden submitted a proposal […]

Continue Reading ·
Foiled Without Binding Proxy Access Proposals

Foiled Without Binding Proxy Access Proposals

There will be no rush to binding proxy access proposals, thanks to a July 21 denial of a no-action request filed by H&R Block. Corporations (HRB) continue with Wile E. Coyote type plots to derail genuine proxy access. See this incoming no-action request from Microsoft (MFST). However, in the case of H&R Block we foiled the […]

Continue Reading ·
Substantial Implementation

Substantial Implementation: Proxy Access Lite

Substantial implementation, that’s what SEC staff deemed proxy access ‘lite’ last week. Investor rights were eroded again as staff granted a number of no-action letters on February 12th to companies based on “substantial implementation” of proxy access. At its founding, the SEC was largely a champion of shareholder rights. The SEC required companies to include proposals […]

Continue Reading ·

SEC Reverses No-Actions Under Rule 14a-8(i)(9) On Request

Just a quick note to other shareholders who have filed proxy proposals this season. If the company you filed with requested and obtained a no-action letter from the SEC under Rule 14a-8(i)(9), you might obtain a reversal of that sanctioned exclusion. However, as far as I know, you need to ask for reconsideration. I don’t think […]

Continue Reading ·

Recommendations to SEC-IAC on Proxy Access

I’m delighted to see “Discussion of Proxy Access” (11:05-12:05 p.m.) as one of the items on the agenda for the SEC’s Investor Advisory Committee (SEC-IAC) at the upcoming February 12th meeting. I discuss two recommendations below. Take Action: Please submit your own and paste into comments below. See comments submitted. Proxy Access: Rule 14a-11 In light […]

Continue Reading ·
Seal of SEC

SEC Withdraws No-Action: Rule 14a-8(i)(9) Suspended

The SEC has essentially suspended Rule 14a-8(i)(9) Conflicts with company’s proposal. Shareowners at Whole Foods Market and at many other companies have scored a huge victory. Last Friday the SEC issued the following: Statement from Chair White Directing Staff to Review Commission Rule for Excluding Conflicting Proxy Proposals Chair Mary Jo White Jan. 16, 2015 The […]

Continue Reading ·
Whole Foods Market

Whole Foods Market Appeal in the Press

Nice to see the Gretchen Morgenson of the New York Times writing about my appeal of the SEC’s no-action letter allowing Whole Foods Market to exclude my proxy access proposal. (Whole Foods’ High Hurdle for Investors, 1/3/2015)  As Morgenson, writes: (more…)

Continue Reading ·

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes