Monthly Archives: May 2026

Prevalence of CEO Personal Security Perquisites Continues to Rise

Kyle Eastman is a Partner and Gray Broaddus is a Senior Analyst at Compensation Advisory Partners. This post is based on their CAP memorandum.

The fatal shooting of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in December 2024 brought renewed attention to executive security programs and prompted widespread discussions among boards and compensation committees regarding whether to introduce or enhance security protections for senior executives. While the incident intensified these discussions, proxy disclosures suggest that the upward trend in CEO personal security perquisites was already underway and has continued at a similar pace.

READ MORE »

Weekly Roundup: May 1-7, 2026


More from:

This roundup contains a collection of the posts published on the Forum during the week of May 1-7, 2026

What Explains the Rise in CEO Age?


Socially Minded Investors and Corporate Behavior


The Path to the Boardroom for Technology Executives


Chancery Finds Investment Manager’s Board May Have Breached Fiduciary Duties, Aided and Abetted by the Buyer


Why Employee Share Ownership Matters for Long-Term Value Creation




Statement by Commissioner Uyeda on Proposing Release for Semiannual Reporting


Statement by Chair Atkins on Proposing Release for Semiannual Reporting


SEC Order Allows 10-Business-Day Minimum Offer Periods


Leader-Follower Dynamics in Shareholder Activism


ESG Shifting Tides: An Analysis of the Changing Narrative around Sustainability and ESG Investment Contraction


ESG Shifting Tides: An Analysis of the Changing Narrative around Sustainability and ESG Investment Contraction

Eleanor Viney is an Analyst, Neil McCarthy is Co-Founder and Chief Product Officer, and Emily Drazan Chapman is a Legal AI Architect at DragonGC. This post is based on their DragonGC memorandum.

Executive Summary

The Environmental, Social, and Governance (“ESG”) framework, once a dominant feature across corporate governance and sustainable finance, has declined in prominence, retreating from both corporate disclosures and investor focus. This report quantifies that retreat through two lenses: (1) the elimination and re-branding of ESG terminology in S&P 500 and Fortune 1000 DEF 14A proxy and Form 10-K filings, and (2) the sustained capital exodus from ESG-designated mutual funds and ETFs. Together, these illuminate the impact of recent regulatory, political, and market developments on the ESG framework, indicating that the tides are turning against ESG narratives as well as ESG investment.

READ MORE »

Leader-Follower Dynamics in Shareholder Activism

Gonzalo Cisternas is a Financial Research Advisor in the Research and Statistics Group at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. This post is based on a recent article, forthcoming in the Journal of Finance, by Mr. Cisternas; Doruk Cetemen, an Associate Professor at LUISS Guido Carli and Royal Holloway, University of London; Aaron Kolb, an Associate Professor of Business Economics and Public Policy (BEPP) at Indiana University Kelley School of Business; and S. “Vish” Viswanathan, the F.M. Kirby Professor of Investment Banking at the Fuqua School of Business, Duke University.

Activist shareholders play a central role in moderns corporations. Such blockholders range from investors who actively jawbone or break up firms, to index funds that are largely passive in that they limit themselves to voting. Crucially, in between is a group of hedge funds that have embraced activism as a business strategy in the last decades. Campaigns involving these highly strategic and trading-intensive blockholders have become ubiquitous, often featuring a “lead investor” supported by group of “follower funds”, all with stakes that, individually, are not enough to control targets. This phenomenon—termed “wolf pack activism”—has received considerable attention by practitioners, policymakers and academics, both due to its importance and its rather secretive nature. In fact, while the current regulation in the U.S. permits some degree of communication among blockholders, there are substantial costs for activists who are perceived as acting as a formal group. A fundamental question then arises, one that goes beyond hedge funds: how do leader blockholders gear up to intervene in firms in settings when (i) other investors think alike and can be influenced, but (ii) explicit agreements are not possible?

READ MORE »

SEC Order Allows 10-Business-Day Minimum Offer Periods

Piotr Korzynski, Mark Mandel, and Steven Sandretto are Partners at Baker & McKenzie LLP. This post is based on a Baker McKenzie memorandum by Mr. Korzynski, Mr. Mandel, Mr. Sandretto, Michael Pilo, and Carol Stubblefield.

In brief

On April 16, 2026, the US Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) Division of Corporation Finance, Office of Mergers and Acquisitions issued an exemptive order that establishes a new framework for certain qualifying equity tender offers to remain open for a minimum of 10 business days, instead of the 20-business-day minimum generally required under Exchange Act Rules 13e-4(f)(1)(i) and 14e-1(a). The relief is designed to address market inefficiencies, reflect technological developments and reduce exposure to market fluctuations, while remaining consistent with investor protection goals. The order applies to (i) certain negotiated, all-cash third‑party tender offers for US reporting companies, (ii) certain issuer self-tender offers by reporting companies, and (iii) certain issuer (or wholly owned subsidiary) tender offers by nonreporting companies (i.e., private companies which are not required to file reports under Exchange Act Section 15(d)).

For public company M&A practitioners and parties, the primary impact will be on so‑called two-step mergers in which the first step is a tender offer that otherwise qualifies under the order for the abbreviated initial minimum offer period and immediately precedes a second-step, back-end merger, allowing such mergers the opportunity to close faster than existing SEC rules permit.

READ MORE »

Statement by Chair Atkins on Proposing Release for Semiannual Reporting

Paul S. Atkins is the Chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. This post is based on his recent statement. The views expressed in the post are those of Chairman Atkins and do not necessarily reflect those of the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff.

Today, the Commission proposed amendments to provide public companies with the option of filing one semiannual report, on a new Form 10-S, in lieu of three quarterly reports on Form 10-Q.[1] This proposal is part of my Make IPOs Great Again agenda that is aimed at incentivizing companies to go and stay public.

Public companies have an obligation under the federal securities laws to provide information that is material to investors. Yet, the rigidity of the SEC’s rules has prevented companies and their investors from determining for themselves the interim reporting frequency that best serves their business needs and investors. Today’s proposed amendments, if ultimately adopted, would provide companies with increased regulatory flexibility in this regard.

READ MORE »

Statement by Commissioner Uyeda on Proposing Release for Semiannual Reporting

Mark T. Uyeda is a Commissioner of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. This post is based on his recent statement. The views expressed in this post are those of Commissioner Uyeda and do not necessarily reflect those of the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff.

Quarterly reporting has its roots in post-World War II industrial recovery.[1] But is there any particular magic to quarterly reporting? Why not monthly? Or weekly? Or real-time reporting? Modern technology makes faster and more frequent reporting possible, but that does not necessarily mean it is better. On the other hand, should the Commission continue to mandate a quarterly reporting cycle at all? If investors are unsatisfied with the cycle of corporate financial reporting, they will attach higher risk to that company and raise the cost of capital.

Today, the Commission proposes changes to our reporting framework to give companies more options in fulfilling their reporting obligations. A framework built nearly 75 years ago, when public companies tended to be in manufacturing and the roles of institutional investors and asset managers in the markets were different, should not be presumed to serve all companies optimally in 2026. This proposal would permit companies that go—and remain—public to be subject to a more flexible SEC reporting framework. Specifically, the Commission proposes to allow companies to meet their Exchange Act interim reporting obligations[2] by filing semiannual reports on new Form 10-S, rather than quarterly reports on Form 10-Q. The Commission is also proposing corresponding amendments to Regulation S-X to facilitate this change.

READ MORE »

Defending the Disclosure Ecosystem: The Essential Role of Shareholder Proposals and Regulation S-K

Sanford Lewis is General Counsel, Khadija Foda is an Associate Counsel, and Tanya Agarwal is a Research Associate at the Shareholder Rights Group. This post is based on an SEC comment letter submitted by the Shareholder Rights Group.

The SEC Division of Corporation Finance is conducting a comprehensive review of Regulation S-K, and Chairman Paul Atkins has indicated that the current disclosure regime elicits significant volumes of immaterial information. As such, it appears the agency will seriously consider revisions to reduce disclosure requirements.

However, paring back Regulation S-K disclosures would harm a critically valuable disclosure ecosystem that provides investors with information on emerging risks and helps investors assess their portfolio companies and engage in stewardship in alignment with their fiduciary duties. Shareholder proposals and Regulation S-K disclosures work together in this ecosystem of disclosures. Shareholder engagement often leads to voluntary reporting, which, in turn, informs and ultimately expands Regulation S-K disclosures.

READ MORE »

SEC Enforcement FY2025 Results Signal Shift in Priorities in Direct Critique of Prior Administration

Lara Shalov Meharban, Ranah Esmaili, and Steve Cohen are Partners at Sidley Austin LLP. This post is based on their Sidley memorandum.

On April 7, 2026, the SEC Division of Enforcement published its annual enforcement results for the 2025 fiscal year (October 2024 through September 2025). The Division reported 456 total enforcement actions, the lowest number in at least 20 years, including 303 “stand-alone” actions; 69 “follow-on” administrative proceedings arising from other civil, criminal, or administrative events; and 84 actions against delinquent filers. The SEC also reported approximately $17.9 billion in monetary relief.

These results were published several months later than is typically expected. The following day, the SEC announced that David Woodcock, a law firm partner and former Director of the SEC’s Fort Worth Regional Office from 2011 to 2015, will be appointed Director of Enforcement, effective May 4, 2026. Woodcock is a well-known and widely respected attorney with experience in both government and private practice.

READ MORE »

Why Employee Share Ownership Matters for Long-Term Value Creation

Nicolai Tangen is the Chief Executive Officer, Carine Smith Ihenacho is the Chief Governance and Compliance Officer, and Shilpi Nanda is a Policy Advisor at Norges Bank Investment Management. This post is based on their NBIM memorandum.

Our view

  • Employee share ownership can create long-term value for companies, shareholders, employees and society.
  • Plans work best when they are offered broadly across the workforce, transparent in design, and complementary to wages.

READ MORE »

Page 1 of 2
1 2