SEC Adopts Final Rules Requiring Universal Proxy Cards

Nov 22, 2021

Reading Time : 6 min

Key Takeaways

  • The new rules allow shareholders to vote by proxy in a contested election of directors in the same manner as if they attended the shareholder meeting in person—they may select a combination of registrant and dissident candidates. This will make it easier for shareholders to cast votes on dissident nominees and could open the door to more board seats being filled by activist investors, who can use the access to the board to advance other objectives, including environmental, social and governance (ESG) goals and changes to management.
  • Dissidents must give notice of their intent to solicit proxies and their nominees’ names to the registrant 60 days before the annual meeting. The registrant must respond with their nominees within 10 days of receiving notice from the dissident.
  • Dissidents must solicit holders of shares representing at least 67 percent of the voting power of shares entitled to vote at the election of directors.
  • The short slate rule, which allowed dissidents to hand-select the registrant nominees they wanted to round out their slate, has been eliminated, although dissidents are still able to nominate less than a full slate under the rule.
  • The new rules are expected to lead to additional shareholder activism in the form of director campaigns and a clearer path for dissident directors to gain seats on public company boards.

The Rules

  • Mandatory use of Universal Proxy Cards. The final rules require mandatory use of universal proxy cards by public companies in all non-exempt director election contests. All proxy cards, whether delivered by the company or a dissident, must include the full slate of director nominees for shareholders to vote on. The mandatory use of universal proxy cards seeks to allow shareholders to elect their preferred candidates through the proxy process in an efficient and effective manner.

The rules permit a universal proxy card to allow a shareholder to grant authority to vote for all nominees of either the dissident or registrant nominees as a group. This may be done as long as the card also provides a similar means by which a shareholder can withhold authority to vote for a group. The number of nominees of the registrant or dissident must be less than the number of directors being elected. Where state law gives effect to votes cast against a nominee, the card must give a “for-all,” “against-all” and “withhold-all” option.

  • Notice from Dissident to Registrant. The dissident must provide the registrant with the names of nominees it intends to solicit proxies for no later than 60 calendar days before the anniversary of the previous year’s annual meeting. If the registrant had no annual meeting the previous year, or if the date of the annual meeting has changed by more than 30 calendar days, the dissident must provide the notice by the later of (i) 60 calendar days prior to the date of the annual meeting or (ii) the 10th calendar day following the day on which the registrant makes a public announcement of when the annual meeting is to be held. The dissident must include in its notice a statement that it intends to solicit the holders of shares representing at least 67 percent of the voting power of shares entitled to the election of directors. However, the rules do not require the dissident to provide the notice if the information was already provided in a preliminary or definitive proxy statement filed by the dissident before the deadline.
  • Notice from Registrant to Dissident. The registrant must notify the dissident of the names of its nominees, unless such names were already provided in a preliminary or definitive proxy statement filed by the registrant, no later than 50 calendar days prior to the anniversary of the prior year’s annual meeting. This deadline gives the registrant 10 days after the dissident’s notice to respond and is intended to provide sufficient time for the registrant to consider the dissident’s notice, finalize its own nominees, and respond.
  • Solicitation Requirement. The rules require dissidents to solicit holders of shares representing 67 percent of the voting power of shares entitled to vote on the election of directors. A dissident additionally must include a statement of its intent to solicit the requisite holders, and it could be subject to liability under rules prohibiting material misstatements in proxy solicitation materials if such statement is false.
  • Deadline. A dissident in a contested director election must file its definitive proxy statement with the SEC by the later of (i) 25 calendar days prior to the meeting or (ii) 5 calendar days after the registrant files its definitive proxy statement.
  • Proxy Statement Cross References. Each party in a contested election will be required to refer shareholders to the other party’s proxy statement for information about the other party’s nominees. The parties should also explain that the other party’s proxy statements can be accessed at no cost on the SEC website. Parties are permitted to refer to information that would be furnished in the other party’s filings to satisfy their disclosure obligation. The new rules also changed the definition of “participant” so that only a party’s own nominees will be considered “participants” in that party’s solicitation.
  • Presentation and Formatting Requirements. In order to comply with the new rules, the proxy cards must: (i) set forth the names of all duly nominated director candidates; (ii) provide a means for shareholders to grant authority to vote for the nominees set forth; (iii) clearly distinguish between registrant, dissident and proxy access nominees; (iv) list nominees within each group in alphabetical order by last name; (v) use the same type, style and size to present all the nominees; (vi) prominently disclose the maximum number of nominees for which authority to vote can be granted; and (vii) prominently disclose the treatment and effect of a proxy executed in a manner that grants authority to vote for more or fewer nominees than the number of directors being elected or in a manner that does not grant authority to vote for any nominees.
  • Short Slate Rule. The short slate rule is eliminated for companies that will be subject to the final rules mandating the use of universal proxy cards. The short slate rule allowed dissidents soliciting in support of a partial slate of nominees making up only a minority of the board to seek authority to vote for some of registrant’s nominees. This rule has been replaced by the universal proxy. An amended short slate rule will still be available for funds in contested elections as they are not subject to the universal proxy rule at this time.
  • Bona Fide Nominee. The amended bona fide nominee determination includes any nominee who consents to being named in any proxy statement for the applicable meeting, allowing such nominee to be named on any side’s proxy card. If a nominee would not consent to serve if elected with other nominees, this material fact should be disclosed prominently on the proxy statement of the party nominating that individual, and if it is the registrant’s nominees, then the registrant should explain how such vacancies would be filled.

Background

The amendments were initially proposed in late 2016 and were adopted as part of the SEC’s efforts to bolster shareholder rights. The SEC stated in the final rules, “the Commission has long understood the limitations that the proxy rules place on a shareholder’s ability to select its preferred mix of registrant and dissident nominees.”

The new rules were adopted by a 4-1 vote, with SEC Chair Gary Gensler stating that the change “is an important aspect of shareholder democracy.” In her dissenting statement, Commissioner Hester M. Peirce expressed concerns that the universal proxy would advance special interests rather than enhance corporate values and noted that “the price of entry onto the company’s proxy card under this rule is low. . . the rule does not condition access to the company’s proxy card on a demonstrated commitment to the company.” Although he voted in favor of the rules, Commissioner Elad L. Roisman expressed similar concerns in his statement, noting he would have “preferred that the rule require those launching a proxy contest to meet certain eligibility criteria, such as thresholds of ownership in the target company or holding periods for the company’s stock,” but saw “no compelling reason to prevent shareholders from mixing and matching their votes.” In further support of the rule, both Commissioners Caroline A. Crenshaw and Allison Herren Lee emphasized in their statements (here and here) the importance of ensuring symmetry between shareholders voting in person and via proxy and fairness in the director election process.

The new rules will be effective for shareholder meetings held after August 31, 2022.

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.