House Bill 4015 and the Proposed Regulation of Proxy Advisors

Dimitri Zagoroff is a Senior Proxy Research Analyst at Glass, Lewis & Co. This post is based on a Glass Lewis publication by Mr. Zagoroff.

Regulation of proxy advisors is back on the U.S. legislative agenda. If enacted, the proposed rules could create delays to the delivery and threats to the independence of proxy research, with investors footing the bill.

Introduced October 11, House Bill 4015 is mostly a resubmission of last year’s HR 5311—mostly. The proposed compliance regime is unchanged. Proxy advisors would be required to register with the SEC, meet extensive disclosure requirements relating to methodologies and conflicts of interest, and hire an ombudsperson to handle complaints. However, HR 4015 includes additional detail on how the bill’s thorniest provision would work in practice: allowing companies to vet proxy advisor’s recommendations, including access to analysts, before they are released to investors. The new bill would give companies three days to review draft analysis and submit a response to the proxy advisor’s ombudsperson; if they are “unable to resolve such complaints prior to voting” (whether to the ombudsperson’s satisfaction or the company’s remains unclear), the company would be given space to set out their case within the proxy report distributed to investors.

Besides representing a compliance and operational headache for proxy advisors, the proposed rules pose a threat to investors who rely on proxy research. In letter to the Senate regarding HR 5311, CII argues that the legislation would result in higher costs to investors with no clear benefit, and that the proposed company review process “would create an incentive for companies subject to criticism to delay publication of reports as long as possible” leaving investors “less time to analyze the reports and recommendations in the context of their own customized proxy voting guidelines to arrive at informed voting decisions.” More broadly, CII argues that “the proposed legislation would weaken corporate governance in the United States; undercut proxy advisory firms’ ability to uphold their fiduciary obligation to their investor clients; and reorient any surviving firms to serve companies rather than investors.”

The rationale for the legislation is questionable, resting primarily on a misunderstanding of how investors use proxy analysis and voting recommendations. Moreover, Glass Lewis already provides U.S. companies with an opportunity to vet the data used in its analysis through its Issuer Data Reports. The IDR program provides a meaningful review process to ensure accuracy without undermining timely delivery to investors or the independence of the research.

This is a third life for the bill. HR 5311 was introduced in May 2016 and got the support of the House Financial Services Committee, but didn’t make it to the Senate. Its provisions were then folded into the Financial CHOICE Act; now, with FCA unlikely to survive bipartisan review in the Senate, the standalone bill is back.

It is early days, the specific provisions are likely to change, and the bill is unlikely to go far in the Senate (when and if it gets there); but investors, advisors, and anyone else involved in proxy voting should have HR 4015, and its potential impact on corporate governance, on their radar.

Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

  • Subscribe or Follow

  • Cosponsored By:

  • Supported By:

  • Programs Faculty & Senior Fellows

    Lucian Bebchuk
    Alon Brav
    Robert Charles Clark
    John Coates
    Alma Cohen
    Stephen M. Davis
    Allen Ferrell
    Jesse Fried
    Oliver Hart
    Ben W. Heineman, Jr.
    Scott Hirst
    Howell Jackson
    Wei Jiang
    Reinier Kraakman
    Robert Pozen
    Mark Ramseyer
    Mark Roe
    Robert Sitkoff
    Holger Spamann
    Guhan Subramanian

  • Program on Corporate Governance Advisory Board

    William Ackman
    Peter Atkins
    Allison Bennington
    Richard Brand
    Daniel Burch
    Jesse Cohn
    Joan Conley
    Isaac Corré
    Arthur Crozier
    Ariel Deckelbaum
    Deb DeHaas
    John Finley
    Stephen Fraidin
    Byron Georgiou
    Joseph Hall
    Jason M. Halper
    Paul Hilal
    Carl Icahn
    Jack B. Jacobs
    Paula Loop
    David Millstone
    Theodore Mirvis
    Toby Myerson
    Morton Pierce
    Barry Rosenstein
    Paul Rowe
    Marc Trevino
    Adam Weinstein
    Daniel Wolf