Issuers should disclose consulting contracts with proxy advisors

9 October 2009

Sarah Wilson

Latest News

Australia narrows climate reporting scope mid‑rollout

Minerva Proxy Update

Follow This challenges Shell days before key vote

SRD III is Europe’s chance to fix proxy plumbing

SEC Steps Closer to Unwinding Climate Disclosure Rules

Minerva Proxy Update

Featured Briefings

Australia Proxy Season Review 2025

2026 Proxy Season Preview

Diversity Divergence: Shareholders Steadfast Amid Pervasive Political Posturing

Leading US mutual fund manager Oppenheimer Funds has written to the SEC supporting improved disclosure of commercial relationships which might create a conflict of interest.

In a Sept.24 letter to the Securities and Exchange Commission commenting on the SEC’s proposed new rules entitled “Proxy Disclosure and Solicitation Enhancements,” OppenheimerFunds said it supports the Commission’s efforts to “enhance transparency to investors around the use of compensation consultants by publicly-held corporate issuers” and calls for greater disclosure of compensation-related consulting by proxy advisory firms. The investment advisor notes that, in its release, the Commission discusses a number of potential conflicts-of-interest that can occur if compensation consultants provide ancillary services to corporations. “We feel that there may be a potential conflict-of-interest if a proxy advisory service that provides analyses and voting recommendations to institutional investors on executive and director compensation proposals as well as the re-election of board members serving on an issuer’s compensation committee also provides consulting services to that same issuer on compensation or other corporate governance matters,” OppenheimerFunds says.

Noting that various rules being proposed by the SEC “could result in closer votes on director elections or contentious proposals,” OppenheimerFunds states that the SEC “should require corporate issuers to publicly disclose in sufficient detail any consulting services they received from a proxy advisory service under the Compensation Discussion and Analysis section of their proxy statements” and that such a transparency and disclosure approach is preferable to an outright ban on proxy advisory firms providing consulting services to issuers. 

For more information about this story please Scott Fenn at ProxyGovernance Inc +1 703 245 5800

Links

Proposed SEC Rule Amendment >>

SEC Letter >>

Related Stories

SEC Steps Closer to Unwinding Climate Disclosure Rules

May 13, 2026
Read More
fiduciary squeeze

The fiduciary squeeze is timed for when trustees can’t look up

April 23, 2026
Read More

Proposal Exclusion Escalation: BP Issued “Legal Ultimatum” Over Rejected Resolution

March 27, 2026
Read More

Disney Defeat: Anti-ESG Proposal Pair Perform Poorly at 2026 AGM

March 27, 2026
Read More

Your Vote, Their Permission: Why Shareholder Proposal Rights in the US Are Under Existential Threat

March 20, 2026
Read More

Coca-Cola Caution: No ‘No Action’ Requests Filed for First Time Since 2020

March 18, 2026
Read More