E-Proxy: Retail Voting Still Low
Submitted by: L. Reed Walton, Publications
U.S. companies using online proxies and mailed notices--also known as “notice and access”--continue to see sharp declines in voting by individual investors, but some shareholder advocates are re-examining their previously pessimistic views on e-proxy.
Since July, when firms could begin electronic distribution of their proxy materials, 92 companies have held annual meetings, according to Broadridge Financial, which processes proxy votes for most of the issuers that have adopted notice and access. At those 92 firms, retail shareholder participation dropped more than 75 percent from the previous year. Only 4.5 percent of individual investors voted at e-proxy firms in late 2007 and early 2008, down from 19.2 percent participation in late 2006 and early 2007, according to Broadridge.
According the latest statistics from Broadridge, 283 public companies adopted electronic proxy material delivery as of March 31. In July 2007, the Securities and Exchange Commission adopted a rule allowing public firms an alternative to sending full packets of proxy materials to each shareholder--the “notice and access” model--whereby issuers would mail a notice to shareholders telling them that proxy materials are available via a Web site other than the SEC’s EDGAR site. By January, large companies were required to post proxy materials online, though they could still choose to send full packets of voting materials in advance of their annual meetings. Small companies will have until 2009 to post proxy information online.
The possibility of a drop in retail shareholder participation was raised by many of the investors who commented on the SEC’s notice and access rule. During the first comment period in 2006, shareholders Nick and Emil Rossi warned in a letter to the SEC that electronic proxy delivery “is another attempt to disenfranchise small individual shareholders.” A survey conducted by Forrester Research--on behalf of Broadridge and included in the proxy processing company’s comments to the SEC--indicated that 38 percent of shareholders who vote would be less likely to look at proxy materials online and less likely to vote under a notice and access model.
At the time, investor groups expressed concern that older or less technologically savvy shareholders would be reluctant to use the computer technology required to view e-proxies. The Association of BellTel Retirees wrote in its letter that it was “premature” of the SEC to expect that retirees and other shareholders over the age of 65 are comfortable enough with the Internet to access corporate proxy disclosures.
The initial decline in retail voting appears to bear out these warnings. But the dip may be temporary, some advocates say. Richard Clayton, research director for the CtW Investment Group, told Risk & Governance Weekly that a number of factors could be contributing to the drop in retail participation--including frustration with a flagging economy and a declining real estate market. Trouble using the new online proxy voting applications could contribute to a temporary drop in participation, as well. “With a lot of online services, there tends to be a learning curve,” Clayton said.
Richard Ferlauto, director of pension and benefit policy for the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, agreed. Ferlauto told R&GW that it would probably take at least five years for some retail shareholders to become familiar with the technology, have the broadband network access necessary to download large files, and cope with the hassle and expense of printing out long proxy forms. “These are significant barriers that will be overcome with time,” Ferlauto said.
Ferlauto also noted that notice and access may have dampened support levels for “say and pay” and other shareholder proposals this year. However, CtW’s Richard Clayton told R&GW that because it’s difficult to measure how many retail investors are voting for shareholder resolutions, it’s too early to tell whether the e-proxy rules are having a real effect on proposal support.
A number of early-adopter companies reported shareholder complaints over the mailed notice cards. A few shareholders wrote their votes on the notice cards and sent those back to the company, Gail Smith, director of corporate development for pharmaceutical firm Pharmos, said in a January interview on e-proxies with Broadridge.
Dominic Jones, editor of the IR Web Report, wrote about problems he had accessing online proxy materials for Applied Micro Circuits in July of last year. Mistyping the Web address for Broadridge’s proxy voting site, Investor E-Connect, brought up a “spam” advertising site he suspected preyed on people who accidentally visited the wrong Web page, Jones wrote. Other investors complained about the mailed notice that Broadridge used to alert shareholders to online availability. The notice form was too small and not very “user-friendly,” Helen Kaminski, assistant general counsel for food company Sara Lee told Broadridge.
Broadridge has no plans now to redesign its mailed notice, Chuck Callan, the company’s senior vice president of regulatory affairs, told Risk & Governance Weekly. This is partly because the SEC requires that certain text be printed on the notice of online proxy material availability. “You get the notice, but it’s not in and of itself a ballot,” Callan said.
He contends that the new, unfamiliar proxy delivery method is causing retail shareholder participation to drop. According to Broadridge statistics, in cases in which e-proxy companies sent certain shareholders a “full set” of proxy materials, and among the 0.5 percent of shareholders who “opted in” for full paper copies, voting was much higher. For retail shareholders receiving the full set of proxy materials this year, the voting rate was approximately 66.5 percent. “The basic conclusion is that opt-in rates are low, opt-out rates are low, and if there is a change in the default, people tend to take no action,” Callan told R&GW.
Two new initiatives may also help individual investors become more informed about governance matters and vote their shares. A new Web site, ProxyDemocracy.org allows shareholders to see how institutional investors plan to vote at upcoming meetings. The California Public Employees’ Retirement System, Calvert Funds, Christian Brothers Investment Services, and Domini Social Investments are among the investors that have signed up to make their vote recommendations available on the site. Investors can also assign their voting rights to a third party, such as an environmental or social group, through the Investor Suffrage Movement. The proxy exchange, currently in trial phase, will help members transfer ballot rights to other members online.
Continue reading "E-Proxy: Retail Voting Still Low
Submitted by: L. Reed Walton, Publications" »
| Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0) | Print Article | Back To Top |
Thursday, March 6, 2008 |
Finnish Market Removes Barrier to Proxy Voting
Submitted by: Gary Hewitt, Marketing
The necessity for multiple copies of a Power of Attorney (POA) signed by the beneficial owner is seen by many to be a deterrent to vote, given the additional complexity, cost and administrative burden – particularly for cross border votes. We're pleased to announce some positive developments in this area in Finland.
On 27 February 2008 the major Finnish sub-custodians announced that power of attorneys (POAs) signed by the beneficial owner will no longer be required to vote at shareholder meetings in Finland. This positive market practice change, which is effective immediately, is the result of discussions between market participants that have been ongoing for several months. These discussions culminated in several sub-custodian banks obtaining a legal opinion confirming that there was no legal obstacle for removing the requirement for PoAs.
While we agree that this is a great step forward for corporate governance, there remains a possibility that an Issuer will not accept the new practice with immediate effect and will demand to see a signed POA. All participants will be monitoring the situation to ensure that the Issuers accept the new process.
About 15% of markets, many of them European, still require that beneficial owners sign a power of attorney (POA) in order to be eligible to vote. It remains to be seen if other markets will follow the Finnish example and remove existing barriers to cross-border proxy voting.
| Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0) | Print Article | Back To Top |
Thursday, April 12, 2007 |
ISS to Hold Second Share Lending Webcast April 17
Submitted by: Sarah Cohn, Director of Communications
ISS will hold a special second Governance Forum webcast, Share Lending Practices and Share Recall Challenges, on Tuesday, April 17 at 11 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time.
Due to overwhelming demand for more information on the topic of securities lending, ISS is offering webcast participants the opportunity to engage directly with panelists Chris Kunkle, Vice President of JP Morgan Chase; Ed Blount, Founder and Executive Director of Astec Consulting Group; Henry Hu, University of Texas Law School; and W. Tredick McIntire of Goldman Sachs and Chair of the Risk Management Association's Committee on Securities Lending. Diana Bourke, ISS' Executive Vice President of Global Voting and Transaction Services, will moderate the discussion.
Panelists will share their views on proxy voting and securities lending, including: existing regulations and law, institutional investor best practices, and challenges related to foreign markets. Additionally, panelists will discuss what steps the industry is taking to support securities lending best practices.
To register for the forum, please visit here.
| Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0) | Print Article | Back To Top |
Thursday, March 15, 2007 |
ISS to Hold March 21 Webcast on Share Lending
Submitted by: Sarah Cohn, Director of Communications
ISS will hold a special Governance Forum webcast, Share Lending Practices and Share Recall Challenges, on Wednesday, March 21 at 1 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time.
Securities lending and its impact on proxy voting policies and practices are gaining significant attention in the corporate governance industry since potentially market participants can acquire voting rights in a company without an accompanying financial stake. This separation of economic from voting interest in a company bends one of the basic assumptions behind the one-share, one-vote principle, and places investors who retain the economic interest in a challenging position. Yet, share lending has become a lucrative practice for many institutions.
Panelists Chris Kunkle, Vice President of JP Morgan Chase, and Ed Blount, Founder and Executive Director of Astec Consulting Group, will share their views on the challenges share lending creates for investors. Diana Bourke, ISS' Executive Vice President of Global Voting and Transaction Services, will moderate the panel and also discuss the findings from ISS' recent Share Lending Survey. To register for the webcast, please visit here.
| Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0) | Print Article | Back To Top |
Tuesday, February 27, 2007 |
Moving Ahead with the Action Plan: Cross-Border Voting in European Member States
Submitted by: Christel Dumas, Marketing and Communications Manager, ISS Europe
On February 15, 2007, the European parliament approved the "Proposal for a Directive on Shareholder Voting Rights." This directive comes after the European Commission's consultation in July 2005, on "Fostering an Appropriate Regime for Shareholders' Rights," which ISS had responded to along with many other concerned parties.
The objective of the directive is for foreign shareholders to vote as easily as national shareholders do in European listed companies. This is to be achieved via a variety of measures described in the directive. These include:
* Complete and timely disclosure 21 days before a meeting (Article 5)
* Procedures to add agenda items and ask questions (Articles 6 & 9)
* End of block voting in favor of record dates (Article 7)
* Electronic voting (Article 8)
* Role of proxy holders (Article 10)
* Publication of outcome of votes (Article 14).
This directive is a welcome step, moving forward the Commission's Action Plan. However, it could be years before it takes effect since EU states now have to inscribe this into national law. The provisions in the EU directive set minimum expectations of the information and procedures that should be available to shareholders. Although, EU member states may go beyond the EU directive to advance shareholder rights even further. Going forward, ISS hopes the EU will consider adopting ways to guarantee issuers' adherence to the measures that will ultimately be implemented.
| Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0) | Print Article | Back To Top |
Thursday, December 21, 2006 |
Examining the Practice of Empty Voting
Submitted by: Pete Friz, Vice President of Global Voting and Transaction Services
Reuters ran an article today titled "MergerTalk: Hedge Funds Find New Ways to Sway Votes," which looks at the practice of empty voting. The practice of "empty voting" entails borrowing shares prior to a record date, which then gives the borrower the voting rights. Once the record date has passed, the borrower returns the shares and effectively controls a large number of votes without a continuing economic interest. Some critics say this creative share borrowing is being done to manipulate voting outcomes and seriously undermines corporate governance transparency for large shareholdings.
The story specifically cited hedge fund's ability to purchase over-the-counter (OTC) equity swaps, obtaining large blocks of shares for voting without any true ownership. Holders are also not required to disclose their current assets in OTC swaps, nor are the banks that structure the swaps. Henry Hu, a University of Texas Law Professor, recently came out with a study on the practice of share lending and empty voting and is advocating fixing the disclosure system to make this practice more transparent.
Industry and academic focus is growing on instances where manipulating the vote is the objective, but similar problems can exist through normal sharelending, even if the motivation is benign. What are your thoughts on the practice of share lending and its impact on voting as well as the practice of "empty voting"...widespread problem or an anomaly to be watched? We welcome your comments.
| Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0) | Print Article | Back To Top |
Tuesday, September 19, 2006 |
Asian Corporate Governance Association Announces Asian Proxy Voting Survey 2006
Submitted by: Sarah Cohn, Director of Communications
The WSJ has an interesting article today titled, "Proxy-Voting Systems Improve, But Investors Still Face Hurdles." The piece discusses the Asian Corporate Governance Association's (ACGA) Asian Proxy Voting Survey 2006, which addresses the obstacles shareholders face when voting in Asia.
According to the WSJ's summary of the report, often times institutions in Asia don't bother to vote due to cumbersome procedures and out of apathy. The ACGA estimates that no more than 20% to 30% of minority investors vote, however this is expected to change as foreign holdings in Asia rise.
What are your thoughts on proxy voting in Asia? We welcome your comments.
| Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0) | Print Article | Back To Top |
Friday, March 10, 2006 |
E-Proxies Examined at This Year's SEC Speaks
Submitted by: Mark Saltzburg, Associate Counsel
Securities and Exchange Commission staff and commissioners gathered on March 3 and 4 for the Practicing Law Institute's annual "SEC Speaks" conference to detail a host of ongoing commission initiatives.
Speakers focused on topics including the commission's efforts to tackle accounting fraud, fairness opinions, enforcement actions, and its proposed Internet proxy rule. Staff members also provided some 2005 shareholder proposal statistics. Division of Corporation Finance Chief Counsel David Lynn noted that companies sought no-action on 337 companies, which is fewer than in past years, while the commission averaged roughly 42 days to respond to no-action requests.
| Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0) | Print Article | Back To Top |
Monday, February 27, 2006 |
2006 Preview: Continental Europe
Submitted by: Thaddeus C. Kopinski, International Editor
Efforts to facilitate proxy voting, improve executive compensation disclosure, and to limit the use of takeover defenses will likely dominate continental Europe's corporate governance debate this proxy season.
| Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0) | Print Article | Back To Top |
Wednesday, February 22, 2006 |
SEC Comment Letter on e-Proxy
Submitted by: John M. Connolly, President and CEO
ISS' SEC Comment Letter Regarding the Internet Availability of Proxy Materials
Dear Mr. Katz:
Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. ("ISS") is pleased to submit these comments on the Commission's proposed amendments to the proxy rules under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. We commend the Commission both for its consideration of widely adopted technical advances and for the range of questions asked in an attempt to improve the proxy materials distribution process for investors and issuers. Institutional Shareholder Services generally endorses the proposed amendments with the expectation that these changes will facilitate wider access to, and review of, proxy materials helping investors to make more informed investment decisions, increase investor participation in the proxy voting process, save money for issuers (ultimately benefiting their stockholders) and allow for additional "low cost" communication between investors and issuers as well as between dissident shareholders. Finally, these proposed changes will accelerate the ongoing movement of proxy voting in the United States from a paper based process to a electronic, data based process which should increase timeliness, accuracy and consistency.
Continue reading "SEC Comment Letter on e-Proxy
Submitted by: John M. Connolly, President and CEO" »
| Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0) | Print Article | Back To Top |










