On July 22, 2020, the Securities and Exchange Commission adopted final rules and supplemented interpretative guidance that modify the proxy rules as applied to proxy advisory firms and clarify the fiduciary duties of investment advisers when voting proxies. One of our rising stars (Chelsea Lomprey) did the heavy lifting in drafting a client alert on the subject, and such can be found HERE.
Just a quick update that on April 8, 2020, Institutional Shareholder Services ("ISS") published policy guidance reflecting certain adjustments due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The guidance addresses how ISS's benchmark and voting policies may be applied in this new area of uncertainty. In many cases, the guidance merely reiterates that ISS will respond to corporate actions on a case-by-case basis. To address the topic, we published a client alert entitled "ISS Issues COVID-19 Guidance on Benchmark and Voting Policies."
On a separate note, two of my partners (Steven Haas
As we head into a new proxy season, we would like to invite you to attend our annual FREE webinar entitled "Upcoming Proxy Season: Compensatory Thoughts from ISS," which will be held on Thursday, January 17, 2019 from 10:00 am to 11:00 am Central. As always, continuation education credits are available.
For your convenience, our remaining 2019 monthly webinar program is as follows:
Just a quick note that late last week ISS made available for public comment nine discreet voting policies for potential application in 2019. Only one of the draft voting policies addresses compensation, and it addresses the Financial Performance Assessment Methodology under the Pay-for-Performance Model.
On September 13, 2018, the SEC withdrew two no-action letters issued in 2004 to two proxy advisory firms. Some folks (like me!) are hopeful that the withdrawal of these no-action letters is a first step (albeit a small step) towards proxy advisory firm reform. If you would like to learn more about this topic, please see our Firm's client alert entitled "Proxy Advisory Firm Guidance Withdrawn by the SEC," which our Firm published this morning.
The purpose of this post is to explain why the Board of Directors (the "Board") of a publicly-traded corporation should consider having the issuer’s stockholders approve all or a portion of the compensation paid to its non-employee directors.
Search
Recent Posts
Categories
Tags
- 10b5-1 Trading Plans
- 83(b) Election
- Accounting
- Blackout Period
- Business Judgement Rule
- Change-in-Control Pay
- Compensation Committee
- Compensation Design
- Compensation Governance
- D&I Initiatives
- Deferred Compensation
- Director Compensation
- Diversity and Inclusion
- Emerging Growth Company
- Employee Stock Purchase Plans
- Employer Stock
- Employment Conditions
- ESPP
- Executive Contracts
- Form S-8
- Incentivize and Retain
- IPO
- IRS Guidance
- ISOs
- ISS
- Limited Liability Company
- loan
- Net Withholding
- Partnership
- Pay Ratio
- Performance-Based Compensation
- Placemats
- Plaintiff Actions
- Proxy Advisory Firms
- Proxy Season
- recourse
- Rule 701
- SEC registration
- SEC Rules
- Section 16
- Section 162(m)
- Shareholder Value
- Stockholder Ratification
- Tally Sheets
- Tax Tips
- Tender offer
- Tip of the Week
- Total Shareholder Return
- Webinar