Shareholder democracy

Last updated

Shareholder democracy is a concept relating to the governance structure of modern corporations. In this structure, shareholders bear ultimate controlling authority over the corporation, as they are the owners and may exercise control within their economic rights. Although shareholders own the corporation, they generally take a passive interest in managing the day-to-day operations of the company. Shareholders who are interested in actively influencing corporate affairs are called activist shareholders.

Contents

In the American system of corporate governance, shareholders typically elect the company's board of directors on an annual basis. These directors bear a fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders and must represent the interests of the shareholders (as opposed to the interests of themselves or any third parties) when making decisions. In turn, the board may select the individual executives and officers who operate the company, and they may also act on behalf of the corporation when establishing company policy for products, services, wages, and labor relations. This structure is akin to the political model of representative democracy, whereby citizens may elect political representatives to serve in public office. Similarly, the directors and shareholders face the principal-agent problem, where the directors may fail to properly represent the interests of the shareholders and may be in violation of their legal fiduciary obligations. Passive shareholders may disengage from the shareholder democracy model, a phenomenon known as shareholder apathy.

Origins

One of the earliest uses of the term shareholder democracy is noted in Volume V of William Meade Fletcher's Cyclopedia of the Law of Private Corporations from 1931. [1] The term was also used multiple times during a 1955 U.S. Senate Hearing on Stock Market Study. [2] Usage of the term has increased tremendously from 1928, when it first came into use. [3]

Perhaps the greatest proponents of shareholder democracy were Lewis and John Gilbert, two of the earliest activist shareholders in modern finance. The Gilbert brothers are credited with two key features of modern shareholder rights: 1) the ability to ratify the appointment of outside auditors and 2) the right to submit shareholder proposals that would be put to a vote at shareholder meetings. [4] These rights came as a result of the brothers' campaign against Transamerica Corporation in 1946, which led to SEC rulings in their favor that were later upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals. [5]

Commenting on the 1947 case SEC v. Transamerica, Lewis Gilbert wrote, "A corporation is run for the benefit of its shareholders and not that of its management." [6] To some extent, Gilbert's conception of the corporation is resembles that of noted economist Milton Friedman, in what has come to be known as the Friedman doctrine or shareholder theory. In 1956, Lewis Gilbert published a book on his experiences and views titled Dividends and Democracy. [7]

Professor of History Colleen Dunlavy writes about the history of corporate governance in an article From Citizens to Plutocrats: Nineteenth-century Shareholder Voting Rights and Theories of the Corporation. [8] Dunlavy notes that corporations were originally governed on the basis of the one-vote-per-shareholder rule, similar to an egalitarian democracy. She identifies a change from this original principle to the modern one-vote-per-share rule, which more closely resembles a plutocracy. Dunlavy claims this transition occurred throughout the mid-19th century and was a distinctly American phenomenon. She notes that as a result of corporations inherently being market institutions, "In theory, a shareholder's voting power is in proportion to her property rights in the corporation; the larger her stake, the greater her influence."

Modern Application

In a 2019 New York Times article titled How Shareholder Democracy Failed the People, Andrew Ross Sorkin writes about how shareholder primacy in company decision-making has led to a general disregard for stakeholders and other important interests. [9]

In November 2021, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) provided new guidelines that made it easier for shareholders to submit proposals on environmental and social issues. [10] The moves were made in accordance with a renewed emphasis on the concept of shareholder democracy by the new Chair Gary Gensler.

On November 17, 2021, the SEC adopted new rules for universal proxy cards in contested director elections. The new rules give shareholders who are voting by proxy the ability to vote for any combination of candidates being nominated to the board, as opposed to having to choose from either the list provided by the company or by proxy solicitations. Commenting on the new rules, SEC Chairman Gary Gensler noted that, "These amendments address concerns that shareholders voting by proxy cannot vote for a mix of dissident and registrant nominees in an election contest, as they could if voted in person. Today's amendments will put these candidates on the same ballot. They will put investors voting in person and by proxy on equal footing. This is an important aspect of shareholder democracy." [11]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Board of directors</span> Type of governing body for an organisation

A board of directors is an executive committee that jointly supervises the activities of an organization, which can be either a for-profit or a nonprofit organization such as a business, nonprofit organization, or a government agency.

A shareholder rights plan, colloquially known as a "poison pill", is a type of defensive tactic used by a corporation's board of directors against a takeover.

Corporate governance is defined, described or delineated in diverse ways, depending on the writer's purpose. Writers focused on a disciplinary interest or context often adopt narrow definitions that appear purpose-specific. Writers concerned with regulatory policy in relation to corporate governance practices often use broader structural descriptions. A broad (meta) definition that encompasses many adopted definitions is "Corporate governance describes the processes, structures, and mechanisms that influence the control and direction of corporations."

An activist shareholder is a shareholder who uses an equity stake in a corporation to put pressure on its management. A fairly small stake may be enough to launch a successful campaign. In comparison, a full takeover bid is a much more costly and difficult undertaking. The goals of activist shareholders range from financial to non-financial. Shareholder activists can address self-dealing by corporate insiders, although large stockholders can also engage in self-dealing to themselves at the expense of smaller minority shareholders.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fiduciary</span> Person who holds a legal or ethical relationship of trust

A fiduciary is a person who holds a legal or ethical relationship of trust with one or more other parties. Typically, a fiduciary prudently takes care of money or other assets for another person. One party, for example, a corporate trust company or the trust department of a bank, acts in a fiduciary capacity to another party, who, for example, has entrusted funds to the fiduciary for safekeeping or investment. Likewise, financial advisers, financial planners, and asset managers, including managers of pension plans, endowments, and other tax-exempt assets, are considered fiduciaries under applicable statutes and laws. In a fiduciary relationship, one person, in a position of vulnerability, justifiably vests confidence, good faith, reliance, and trust in another whose aid, advice, or protection is sought in some matter. In such a relation, good conscience requires the fiduciary to act at all times for the sole benefit and interest of the one who trusts.

A fiduciary is someone who has undertaken to act for and on behalf of another in a particular matter in circumstances which give rise to a relationship of trust and confidence.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Corporate law</span> Body of law that governs businesses

Corporate law is the body of law governing the rights, relations, and conduct of persons, companies, organizations and businesses. The term refers to the legal practice of law relating to corporations, or to the theory of corporations. Corporate law often describes the law relating to matters which derive directly from the life-cycle of a corporation. It thus encompasses the formation, funding, governance, and death of a corporation.

A proxy fight, proxy contest or proxy battle is an unfriendly contest for the control over an organization. The event usually occurs when a corporation's stockholders develop opposition to some aspect of the corporate governance, often focusing on directorial and management positions. Corporate activists may attempt to persuade shareholders to use their proxy votes to install new management for any of a variety of reasons. Shareholders of a public corporation may appoint an agent to attend shareholder meetings and vote on their behalf. That agent is the shareholder's proxy.

A proxy statement is a statement required of a firm when soliciting shareholder votes. This statement is filed in advance of the annual meeting. The firm needs to file a proxy statement, otherwise known as a Form DEF 14A, with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. This statement is useful in assessing how management is paid and potential conflict of interest issues with auditors.

Proxy voting is a form of voting whereby a member of a decision-making body may delegate their voting power to a representative, to enable a vote in absence. The representative may be another member of the same body, or external. A person so designated is called a "proxy" and the person designating them is called a "principal". Proxy appointments can be used to form a voting bloc that can exercise greater influence in deliberations or negotiations. Proxy voting is a particularly important practice with respect to corporations; in the United States, investment advisers often vote proxies on behalf of their client accounts.

With respect to public companies in the United States, a shareholder resolution is a proposal submitted by shareholders for a vote at the company's annual meeting. Typically, resolutions are opposed by the corporation's management, hence the insistence for a vote. "Voting has long been recognized as one of the primary rights of shareholders." For publicly held corporations in the United States, the submission and handling of resolutions is regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

A proxy firm provides services to shareholders to vote their shares at shareholder meetings of, usually, listed companies.

Directors' duties are a series of statutory, common law and equitable obligations owed primarily by members of the board of directors to the corporation that employs them. It is a central part of corporate law and corporate governance. Directors' duties are analogous to duties owed by trustees to beneficiaries, and by agents to principals.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States corporate law</span> Overview of United States corporate law

United States corporate law regulates the governance, finance and power of corporations in US law. Every state and territory has its own basic corporate code, while federal law creates minimum standards for trade in company shares and governance rights, found mostly in the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended by laws like the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002 and the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. The US Constitution was interpreted by the US Supreme Court to allow corporations to incorporate in the state of their choice, regardless of where their headquarters are. Over the 20th century, most major corporations incorporated under the Delaware General Corporation Law, which offered lower corporate taxes, fewer shareholder rights against directors, and developed a specialized court and legal profession. Nevada has attempted to do the same. Twenty-four states follow the Model Business Corporation Act, while New York and California are important due to their size.

A celebrity board director is an officer with significant influence in the company's governance decision-making process and who possesses one or more celebrity traits including credibility, goodwill, rights, image, influence, liability, and standard of value. A director's leadership and decision-making affects the governance and wealth maximization of shareholders’ wealth.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Glass Lewis</span>

Glass, Lewis & Co. is a major American proxy advisory services company. As of spring 2019, Glass Lewis controlled 28% of the proxy advisory market for mutual funds; this makes it the second-largest company in the market behind Institutional Shareholder Services. The primary service Glass Lewis provides is research and recommendations for shareholder votes by institutional investors, including a digital platform for managing these votes and reporting. A large fraction of those investors follow the recommendations of Glass Lewis in lockstep, giving it outsize importance and impact on governance across the corporate sphere.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act</span> Regulatory act implemented by the Obama Administration after the 2008 financial crisis.

The Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, commonly referred to as Dodd–Frank, is a United States federal law that was enacted on July 21, 2010. The law overhauled financial regulation in the aftermath of the Great Recession, and it made changes affecting all federal financial regulatory agencies and almost every part of the nation's financial services industry.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Canadian corporate law</span>

Canadian corporate law concerns the operation of corporations in Canada, which can be established under either federal or provincial authority.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Institutional Shareholder Services</span> Proxy advisory firm

Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. (ISS) is a proxy advisory firm. Hedge funds, mutual funds and similar organizations that own shares of multiple companies pay ISS to advise regarding share holder votes. It is the largest such firm, with over 61 percent of the business.

Council of Institutional Investors is a nonprofit, nonpartisan association of U.S. pension funds and other employee benefit funds, foundations and endowments that "promotes the interests of institutional investors in the United States". It describes its mission as to "educate its members, policymakers and the public about corporate governance, shareholder rights and related investment issues, and to advocate on members' behalf."

Trading of shareholder votes is the practice of exchanging one's shareholder votes in corporate elections for cash or other forms of payment. Trades may involve multiple shareholders with varying interests in corporate matters, but may be of particular value to activist investors or a company's board of directors.

References

  1. ↑ Fletcher, William Meade (1931). Fletcher Cyclopedia of the Law of Corporations. Thomson/West.
  2. ↑ Currency, United States Congress Senate Committee on Banking and (1955). Stock Market Study: Hearings Before the Committee on Banking and Currency, United States Senate, Eighty-fourth Congress, First Session, on Factors Affecting the Buying and Selling of Equity Securities. U.S. Government Printing Office.
  3. ↑ "Google Books Ngram Viewer". books.google.com. Retrieved 2022-05-01.
  4. ↑ "The Original "Shareholder Activists" and the Founders of the Modern Corporate Governance Movement | Optimizer Online". optimizeronline.com. Retrieved 2022-05-01.
  5. ↑ "Securities Exch. Com'n v. Transamerica Corp., 163 F.2d 511 | Casetext Search + Citator". casetext.com. Retrieved 2022-05-01.
  6. ↑ "Comments on S7-16-07". www.sec.gov. Retrieved 2022-05-01.
  7. ↑ Gilbert, Lewis D. (1956). Dividends and Democracy. American Research Council.
  8. ↑ Dunlavy, Colleen A. (2004). Lipartito, Kenneth; Sicilia, David B. (eds.). "From Citizens to Plutocrats: Nineteenth-century Shareholder Voting Rights and Theories of the Corporation". Oxford Scholarship Online. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199251902.001.0001. ISBN   978-0-19-925190-2.
  9. ↑ Sorkin, Andrew Ross (2019-08-20). "How Shareholder Democracy Failed the People". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved 2022-05-01.
  10. ↑ Kiernan, Paul (2021-11-03). "SEC Rescinds Trump-era Policy, Eases Path for Shareholder Proposals on Environmental, Social Issues". Wall Street Journal. ISSN   0099-9660 . Retrieved 2022-05-01.
  11. ↑ "SEC.gov | SEC Adopts New Rules for Universal Proxy Cards in Contested Director Elections". www.sec.gov. Retrieved 2022-05-01.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.