Advertisement

June 19, 2013

Concept Release: Proxy Distribution System

Over the past few years, there have been dramatic changes in the corporate governance issues that have made obtaining shareholder approval of even mundane resolutions more difficult and more expensive. Contributing to this has been the gradual shift of retail share ownership into street name. This movement directly correlates with the decline in retail shareholder voting over the past decade. The votes of retail shareholders, who tend to support management, may be essential to passing a critical proposal. Unfortunately, the archaic and opaque street voting process in existence today has proven to be a barrier for many companies trying to stimulate retail shareholder voting. No effective means exists for issuers or retail beneficial holders to audit the street name voting process, so the risk of disenfranchisement of retail beneficial shareholders is high. The importance of issuers gaining responsive access to beneficial retail shareholders has increased with the heightened awareness of investors on issues such as compensation, option plans and director accountability. This is further exacerbated with the issuance of the "proxy access" regulations giving shareholder(s) continually owning 3% or more of the company’s stock for three years access to the ballot. 

In anticipation of the growing need to fix the current proxy system, the SEC issued the proxy Concept Release(opens in a new window) asking for input on potential changes to this system. Comments from issuers are critical in the SEC decision-making process.

We are urging all issuers to focus on the Concept Release and submit comments to the SEC. Please feel free to contact your attorney if you need assistance in formulating responses to areas of the Concept Release of potential concern to issuers.

© 2013 Bracewell & Giuliani LLP

About the Author

Partner

Gary Orloff has experience in domestic and foreign transactions, with specific emphasis on the legal and business implications of business plans and strategies, particularly in the areas of corporate and project finance. An experienced securities lawyer, Mr. Orloff is equally knowledgeable regarding mergers, acquisitions and divestitures, including management and leveraged buy-outs. He advises corporate clients, master limited partnerships and other entities on governance, fiduciary duties and change of control.

Mr. Orloff represents committees of...

713.221.1306

About the Author

Partner

Daniel Witschey counsels and represents issuers and underwriters, companies, their boards of directors, and special committees in corporate finance, disclosure and other securities law matters; in mergers, divestitures, acquisitions and contests for corporate control; and in fiduciary duty issues, stock and asset transactions, joint venture arrangements and stockholder rights plans.

Mr. Witschey advises business clients on public offerings, private placements, exchange offers, Rule 144A transactions and Regulation S offerings of debt, common and preferred equity,...

713.221.1322

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.