<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance</title>
	<atom:link href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2026/09/08/doj-withdraws-1987-iss-business-review-letter-thereby-signaling-continued-proxy-advisor-scrutiny/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu</link>
	<description>The leading online blog in the fields of corporate governance and financial regulation.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Sep 2026 11:32:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.5.10</generator>

 
	<item>
		<title>DOJ Withdraws 1987 ISS Business Review Letter, Thereby Signaling Continued Proxy-Advisor Scrutiny</title>
		<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2026/09/08/doj-withdraws-1987-iss-business-review-letter-thereby-signaling-continued-proxy-advisor-scrutiny/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=doj-withdraws-1987-iss-business-review-letter-thereby-signaling-continued-proxy-advisor-scrutiny</link>
		<comments>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2026/09/08/doj-withdraws-1987-iss-business-review-letter-thereby-signaling-continued-proxy-advisor-scrutiny/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Sep 2026 11:30:32 +0000</pubDate>
<!-- 		<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator> -->
				<category><![CDATA[Practitioner Publications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Antitrust Division]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ISS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Proxy Advisor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/?p=183655?d=20260904150449EDT</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Amidst growing federal and state scrutiny of proxy advisory firms, the U.S. Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division (the “Division”) recently entered the fray. On August 5, 2026, the Division withdrew its 1987 business review letter (the “Letter”) to proxy advisory firm Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. (ISS), stating that the Letter no longer reflects ISS’s current [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<hgroup><em>Posted by Megan Gerking, Joe Folio, and Natalie George, Morrison & Foerster LLP, on Tuesday, September 8, 2026 </em><div class='e_n' style='background:#F8F8F8;padding:10px;margin-top:5px;margin-bottom:10px;text-indent:2.5em;'><strong style='margin-left:-2.5em;'>Editor's Note: </strong> <p style="margin:0; display:inline;">Megan Gerking and Joe Folio are Partners and Natalie George is an Associate at Morrison &amp; Foerster LLP. This post is based on a MoFo memorandum by Ms. Gerking, Mr. Folio, Ms. George, Diane R. Hazel, and Haydn Forrest, all at MoFo.</p>
</div></hgroup><p>Amidst growing federal and state scrutiny of proxy advisory firms, the U.S. Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division (the “Division”) recently entered the fray. On August 5, 2026, the Division withdrew its 1987 business review letter (the “Letter”) to proxy advisory firm Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. (ISS), stating that the Letter no longer reflects ISS’s current business practices and citing concerns about concentration among proxy advisors.</p>
<p>The Division’s decision to withdraw the Letter is not an enforcement action or a finding that ISS violated the antitrust laws. In fact, the Division emphasized that proxy advising is not inherently problematic and that voting based on a proxy advisor’s recommendation does not by itself raise competition concerns. However, the Division’s decision signals that proxy advisors like ISS, and perhaps the broader asset management industry, may face increased scrutiny, especially during next year’s proxy season.</p>
<p> <a href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2026/09/08/doj-withdraws-1987-iss-business-review-letter-thereby-signaling-continued-proxy-advisor-scrutiny/#more-183655" class="more-link"><span aria-label="Continue reading DOJ Withdraws 1987 ISS Business Review Letter, Thereby Signaling Continued Proxy-Advisor Scrutiny">(more&hellip;)</span></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2026/09/08/doj-withdraws-1987-iss-business-review-letter-thereby-signaling-continued-proxy-advisor-scrutiny/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
