SEC: No proxy for proxies

6 July 2014

Sarah Wilson

EU regulation

The SEC this week weighed into the proxy advisor debate with Staff Legal Bulletin 20, which provides information on  the proxy voting responsibilities of investment advisers (i.e. professional investors) as well as clarification on the exemptions from federal regulation which apply to proxy advisory firms.

We welcome the focus placed by the SEC on the role and responsibilities of investors in a bulletin which fittingly comes in the same week as the announcement of the Chair and Executive Director for the UK Investor Forum. It has been our consistent message that proxy research firms like Manifest are but the servants of our clients, the investors: we meet their needs and requirements, and we carry out the instructions accordingly. It is therefore helpful to have greater clarity and emphasis on the expectations the SEC places upon investors  in how they approach the retention of research and voting services.

We also welcome the fact that the Bulletin is consistent with "The Best Practice Principles for Shareholder Voting Research 2014", which remain the reference point for clarity and detail on the role and responsibilities of providers of shareholder voting research around the world.

The Bulletin underlines that the cornerstone of investor responsibility is naturally to their clients, and therefore voting should be carried out in those clients' best interests. This demands regular policy and procedure review on the part of the investor. Investors are not required to vote everything, and should approach the definition of any obligation to vote with flexibility based on the "best client interests" notion.

Investors should satisfy themselves of their provider's "capacity" and "competency" to do the job in hand, taking into account personnel, policies and procedures as regards information accuracy and management of any conflicts of interest. Furthermore, the SEC is clear that in the "best client interests"notion also demands that investors have a duty to oversee a proxy advisory firm.

Whilst investors may not be held responsible for the material accuracy of  the facts used by proxy advisors in forming their research and recommendations, it is incumbent upon them to hold their provider(s) to account in the event that an inaccuracy occurs, in order to satisfy themselves that the provider is taking reasonable steps to ensure such an error does not re-occur.

Turning to proxy advisers, the Bulletin clarifies that federal proxy rules do apply where an advisor engages in a "solicitation" which is, in effect, a situation where the advisor seeks to procure voting rights from investors, or provides them with advice as to how to vote. However, the Bulletin clarifies that exemptions from these rules do apply if the proxy adviser:

  1. Is not given unrestrained discretion as to how to vote all shares (even where it may be according to a pre-determined custom policy), "even if the authority was revocable by the client".
  2. Only distributes reports containing recommendations (i.e. without authority to vote shares)
  3. Gives financial advice in the normal course of its business (i.e. if it's already registered as an investment adviser), discloses information about any significant relationship with the target company of the research, is only paid for the research by research user clients and is not commissioned for the research by someone soliciting proxies
  4. Considers, determines and, where relevant, discloses whether a possible conflict of interest exists. Disclosures should be specific and voluntary, rather than boilerplate or available only upon request.

Pockets of the issuer community who may be keen to see wings clipped among proxy advisers may be disappointed to see the SEC limit their comments to the role of investors and proxy adviser disclosure. But if investors are key to engagement with issuers, as the UK's Investment Management Association release reminds us this week , then it is clearly consistent of the SEC to maintain that it should be up to investors to determine the fitness for purpose (or otherwise) of the tools and processes they use to underpin their engagement with portfolio companies.

Latest News

SHareholder meeting

ICCR urges investors to encourage company support against Rule 14a-8 rescission proposal

SHareholder meeting

Fifteen financial institutions push ISSB towards dedicated Nature Standard

SHareholder meeting

NA100 benchmark shows nature commitments progress as investors strengthen engagement efforts

SHareholder meeting

ESMA's Transition and Impact Claims Guidance: Lessons for SFDR II

SHareholder meeting

Tesla’s 2026 AGM sees no shareholder proposals for first time in over a decade

SHareholder meeting

Procter & Gamble shareholder rights proposals draw significant support

Featured Briefings

Minerva Briefing

2026 United States of America Proxy Season Review

Minerva Briefing

US SEC Rule 14a-8 Rescission Proposal

Minerva Briefing

2026 Global Proxy Season Review

Minerva is a global provider of sustainable stewardship solutions with over 30 years of expertise. Minerva empowers investors by providing essential tools, including ESG research and data and expert insights, enabling them to navigate the intricate and ever-evolving landscape of stewardship and proxy voting, whilst ensuring their decisions are well-informed and aligned with sustainable principles.

Related Stories

ICCR and Rule 14a-8 rescission proposal

ICCR urges investors to encourage company support against Rule 14a-8 rescission proposal

October 28, 2026
Read More
US SEC

US SEC warning chills investor stewardship

October 13, 2026
Read More
US State officials raise stewardship concerns over Rule 14a-8 rescission

US State officials raise stewardship concerns over Rule 14a-8 rescission

October 8, 2026
Read More
Minerva Proxy Update

Minerva Proxy Update: Shareholder voting signals continued executive pay, board accountability focus

September 18, 2026
Read More
US SEC moves to rescind Rule 14a-8

US SEC moves to rescind Rule 14a-8, risks damaging shareholder proposal process

September 17, 2026
Read More
FRC

FRC’s new regulatory approach signals a shift from rule-making to market stewardship

September 4, 2026
Read More