SEC Proposes Rules for Requiring Universal Proxy Cards in Contested Director Elections

Nov 3, 2016

Reading Time : 7 min

Key Takeaways

  • The proposed rule allows shareholders to vote in a manner that more closely resembles voting in person at a shareholder meeting by allowing them to “pick and choose” individual registrant and dissident nominees.
  • Because dissidents generally must provide advance notice pursuant to registrant bylaws earlier than the 60 days set forth in the proposed rule, in most cases, there will be no additional obligation on dissidents.
  • The universal proxy proposal effectively eliminates the short slate rule, which takes away the ability of the dissident to hand-select registrant nominees that it prefers to roundout its slate of directors. Preferences, however, can still be conveyed in the dissident’s proxy materials. In addition, the proposed rule would allow dissidents to nominate a majority of the directors without having to nominate a full slate.

Current Proxy Rules Do Not Allow Shareholders to Pick and Choose Director Nominees

Under the current proxy rules, shareholders voting by proxy in contested elections are often unable to make selections based solely on their preferences for particular candidates. Instead, such shareholders are effectively required to make a choice between submitting their votes on the registrant’s proxy card or the dissident’s proxy card. This impedes a shareholder’s ability to pick and choose nominees on each card. If a shareholder wants to split his or her vote by voting for a mix of the registrant and dissident nominees, he or she generally must attend the meeting in person and vote.

Proposed Rules to Require Use of Universal Proxy Cards in Contested Elections

To replicate the choices available when voting in person, the proposed proxy rules would require each soliciting party in contested director elections involving nonexempt solicitations to distribute a universal proxy card that includes the names of all candidates for election to the board of directors—both the registrant’s director nominees and the dissident’s director nominees.

Additionally, the SEC is proposing to amend the proxy rules to establish new procedures for the solicitation of proxies, the preparation and use of proxy cards, and the dissemination of information about director nominees in contested elections. Specifically, in addition to requiring universal proxy cards in contested elections, the amendments to the proxy rules would:

  • Require the Dissident to Provide the Registrant with Notice of its Director Nominees. No later than 60 calendar days prior to the anniversary of the previous year’s annual meeting date, the proposed rules would require the dissident in a contested election to provide notice to the registrant of its intent to solicit proxies in support of the dissident’s director nominees. If the registrant did not hold an annual meeting during the previous year or if the annual meeting date has changed by more than 30 calendar days from the previous year, the proposed rule would require the dissident to provide notice by the later of 60 calendar days prior to the annual meeting date or the 10th calendar day following public announcement of the annual meeting date. This requirement would be in addition to a dissident’s obligation to comply with any applicable advance notice provision in the registrant’s governing documents.  As noted above, because dissidents generally must provide advance notice pursuant to registrant bylaws earlier than the 60 days set forth in the proposed rule, in most cases, there will be no additional obligation on dissidents. 
  • Require the Registrant to Provide the Dissident with Notice of its Director Nominees. No later than 50 calendar days prior to the anniversary of the previous year’s annual meeting date, the registrant in a contested election would be required to provide the dissident with notice of the names of the registrant’s nominees. If the registrant did not hold an annual meeting during the previous year or if the annual meeting date has changed by more than 30 calendar days from the previous year, the proposed rule would require the registrant to provide notice no later than 50 calendar days prior to the annual meeting date.
  • Require the Dissident to Solicit Holders of Shares Representing a Majority of Voting Power. The proposed rules would require that, after providing notice to the registrant, the dissident must solicit the holders of shares representing at least a majority of the voting power of shares entitled to vote on the election of directors. This requirement, according to the SEC, helps address the concern that universal proxy cards would allow a dissident to have its nominees included on a registrant’s proxy card without expending any of the dissident’s own resources to engage in meaningful solicitation efforts.
  • Revise the consent required for a “Bona Fide Nominee.” Currently, Exchange Act Rule 14a-4(d)(1), the “bona fide nominee rule,” prevents a party from including a director nominee on its proxy card who has not consented to being named in the proxy statement and serve if elected, except that dissidents may include company nominees on their slate if they are nominating less than a majority of the board (aka, a “short slate”). Accordingly, in an election contest, one party may not include the other party’s nominees on its proxy card, unless the other party’s nominees consent. For a variety of strategic reasons, in a contested election, the nominees for one party often refuse to consent to being included on the opposing party’s card. The proposed rule would change the definition of “bona fide nominee” so that the scope of a nominee’s consent is effectively expanded to include consent to being named in any proxy statement for the applicable meeting. This change would remove a current impediment to a registrant or dissident including the other party’s nominees on its proxy card.
  • Eliminate Short Slate Rule. The short slate rule, which is found in Exchange Act Rule 14a-4(d), allows a dissident seeking to elect a minority of the board to solicit authority to select some of the registrant’s nominees for inclusion on its proxy card. Because the proposed rule requires each party in a contested election to include on its proxy card all candidates that consented to being named on a proxy card for the applicable meeting, the short slate rule would no longer be necessary. While eliminating the short slate rule does take away the ability of a dissident to select the registrant nominees that it prefers to round out its slate of nominees on its proxy card, the dissident still has the ability to include recommendations for its preferred registrant nominees in its proxy materials. Furthermore, it allows dissidents to nominate a majority of the directors without having to nominate a full slate. 
  • Require the Dissident to file a Definitive Proxy Statement with the SEC by the Later of 25 Calendar Days Prior to the Meeting or Five Calendar Days After the Registrant Files its Definitive Proxy Statement. The proposed rule would require a dissident to file its definitive proxy statement with the SEC by the later of 25 calendar days prior to the applicable meeting or five calendar days after the registrant files its definitive proxy statement. According to the SEC, this deadline would ensure that shareholders that receive a universal proxy will have access to information about all nominees for a sufficient amount of time prior to the meeting.  The SEC recognizes that some shareholders may submit their vote on the registrant’s universal proxy before the dissident’s proxy statement is available. However, the SEC believes that the 25-calendar-day deadline would provide these shareholders with sufficient time to review the dissident’s proxy statement and change their votes by submitting a later-dated proxy card if they choose to do so.
  • Impose Specific Presentation and Formatting Requirements for All Director Elections Proposals on Universal Proxy Cards. In order to ensure that the universal proxies will clearly and fairly present information about all director nominees, proposed Rule 14a-19(e) would include the following presentation and formatting requirements for universal proxies in contested elections: (i) the proxy card must clearly distinguish between registrant nominees, dissident nominees and any proxy access nominees; (ii) within each group of nominees, the nominees must be listed in alphabetical order by last name on the proxy card; (iii) the proxy card must use the same font type, style and size to present all nominees on the proxy card; (iv) the maximum number of nominees for which authority to vote can be granted must be prominently disclosed on the proxy card; and (v) the proxy card must prominently disclose the treatment and effect of a proxy card executed so as to grant authority to vote for more nominees than the number of directors being elected or fewer nominees than the number of directors being elected, or not grant authority to vote for any nominees. Additionally, where both parties have proposed a full slate of nominees and there are no proxy access nominees, the SEC is proposing that the proxy card may provide the ability to vote for all dissident nominees as a group and all registrant nominees as a group. The proposed rules would not prohibit registrants and dissidents from continuing the practice of distinguishing their respective proxy cards by distributing them with a distinctive color.
  • Amend Required Disclosure for Director Election Voting Standards and Voting Options. The SEC is proposing to amend Exchange Act Rule 14a-4(b) so that proxy cards for director elections must include an “against” voting option in lieu of a “withhold authority to vote” where there is a legal effect to such a vote. Also, the proposed rule would require that proxy cards provide shareholders with the opportunity to “abstain” (rather than “withhold authority to vote”) in a director election governed by a majority voting standard. Finally, the SEC is proposing amendments to Item 21(b) of Schedule 14A so that proxy statements are expressly required to disclose the effect of a “withhold vote.” These changes are being proposed to address the SEC’s awareness of concerns that the proxy statements of some companies contain ambiguities and inaccuracies about voting standards and director elections.

Request for Public Comment on the Proposed Rule

The SEC will seek public comment on the proposed rules for 60 days.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Deal Diary

June 27, 2024

On June 24, 2024, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) published five new Form 8-K Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations (C&DIs) expanding the agency’s interpretations of cybersecurity incident disclosures pursuant to Item 1.05 of Form 8-K. In July 2023, the SEC adopted final rules with respect to cybersecurity incidents that generally require public companies to disclose (i) material cybersecurity incidents within four business days after determining the incident was material and (ii) material information regarding their cybersecurity risk management, strategy and governance on an annual basis. We wrote about the final cybersecurity disclosure rules here.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

February 12, 2024

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) recently adopted final rules (available here; also see the fact sheet and press release) representing significant changes to  special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs), shell companies and the disclosure of projections. These rules aim to enhance disclosures, protect investors and align the regulatory framework for SPACs with traditional IPOs. The following summarizes the key aspects of these rules.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

October 4, 2023

On September 20, 2023, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a final rule amending the so-called “Names Rule” (found here) that is “designed to modernize and enhance” protections under Rule 35d-1 of the Investment Company Act of 1940. The final rule is part of the SEC’s holistic efforts to regulate environmental, social and governance (ESG) matters, and is the SEC’s latest attempt to curb greenwashing in U.S. capital markets. The amendments require registered investment funds that include ESG factors in their names to place 80% of their assets in investments corresponding to those factors, thereby extending to ESG funds the SEC’s long-standing approach of regulating the names of registered funds to ensure they are marketed to investors truthfully. Fund complexes with more than $1 billion in assets will have two years from the final rule’s effective date (60 days after publication in the Federal Register) to comply, while fund complexes with less than $1 billion in assets will be given a compliance period of 30 months.

Chair Gary Gensler said “[t]he Names Rule reflects a basic idea: A fund’s investment portfolio should match a fund’s advertised investment focus. In essence, if a fund’s name suggests an investment focus, the fund in turn needs to invest shareholders’ dollars in a manner consistent with that investment focus. Otherwise, a fund’s portfolio might be inconsistent with what fund investors desired when selecting a fund based upon its name.” The sole dissenting vote against the rule modification, Commissioner Mark Uyeda, said “[w]ith these amendments, the Commission overemphasizes the importance of a fund’s name, as if to suggest that investors and their financial professionals need not look at the prospectus disclosures.” Commissioner Uyeda also expressed concern that fund investors will bear the increased compliance costs associated with the rule change.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

May 31, 2023

As discussed in our prior publication (found here), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) adopted amendments on December 14, 2022, regarding Rule 10b5-1 insider trading plans and related disclosures. On May 25, 2023, the SEC issued three new compliance and disclosure interpretations (C&DIs) relating to the Rule 10b5-1 amendments.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

May 24, 2023

On May 15, 2023, the Eastern District of California ruled that California Assembly Bill No. 979 (“AB 979”) violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. As enacted, California’s Board Diversity Statute, required public companies with headquarters in the state to include a minimum number of directors from “underrepresented communities” or be subject to fines for violating the statute. AB 979 defines a “director from an underrepresented community” as “an individual who self-identifies as Black, African American, Hispanic, Latino, Asian, Pacific Islander, Native American, Native Hawaiian, or Alaska Native, or who self-identifies as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender.”

...

Read More

Deal Diary

May 9, 2023

Update: On October 31, 2023, the Fifth Circuit granted the US Chamber of Commerce's petition for review of the SEC's share repurchase disclosure rules, holding that the SEC acted arbitrarily and capriciously in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. The court directed the SEC to correct the defects within 30 days of the opinion. On December 1, 2023, the SEC informed the Fifth Circuit that it was unable to correct the rule's defects within 30 days of the opinion. On December 19, 2023, the Fifth Circuit vacated the SEC’s share repurchase disclosure rules.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

April 12, 2023

We have released our 2023 ESG Survey which includes a collection of reports reflecting on significant ESG themes and trends from 2022, as well as what we believe to be key developments for 2023.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

February 6, 2023

As companies begin preparing for the 2023 proxy season, we note that Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. (ISS) and Glass Lewis, the leading providers of corporate governance solutions and proxy advisory services, issued updated benchmark policies (proxy voting guidelines), which can be found here and here, respectively. The updated proxy voting guidelines generally focus on board accountability and oversight considerations and address topics such as climate accountability, board diversity, shareholder rights, corporate governance standards, executive compensation and social issues. What follows is a summary of the proxy voting guidelines published by ISS and Glass Lewis for the 2023 proxy season.

...

Read More

© 2024 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.