Dan Brecher
Counsel
212-286-0747 dbrecher@sh-law.comSign up to get the latest from theScarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!
Author: Dan Brecher|October 16, 2015
In response, companies are facing increasing pressure from public interest groups, shareholders, and regulators to disclose their donations.
Shareholders concerned about corporate campaign donations are turning to resolutions that ask the company to disclose information about lobbying activities and election spending. According to Corporate Reform Coalition, more than 100 U.S. companies faced shareholder resolutions this year.
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) does not currently require public companies to disclose political spending. However, last April, the state treasurers of five states called on the SEC to implement a formal disclosure system. To date, the SEC has not proposed a formal rule-making that could compel more transparency.
In the absence of legal requirements, many companies voluntarily make disclosures. A recent survey of the top 300 companies in the S&P 500 found that 61 percent of companies disclose direct political spending and 43 percent disclose payments made to trade associations that engage in political spending.
For companies that don’t provide information about political and lobbying activities, the public pressure is mounting. In the absence of formal requirements, several public interest groups regularly publish reports on corporate political spending.
Most recently, the Center for Political Accountability, in collaboration with the Zicklin Center at the University of Pennsylvania, scored the corporate political disclosure practices of the entire S&P 500. Three companies tied for a first-place rating of 97.1 points: Becton, Dickinson and Co., CSX Corp. and Noble Energy Inc.
Below are several of the study’s key findings:
While companies may not face legal consequences for failing to fully disclose political spending, they are at risk for shareholder litigation and negative publicity, both of which can still impact their bottom line. To determine the best corporate governance decision for your company, it is best to speak with experienced legal counsel.
Counsel
212-286-0747 dbrecher@sh-law.comSign up to get the latest from theScarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!
In response, companies are facing increasing pressure from public interest groups, shareholders, and regulators to disclose their donations.
Shareholders concerned about corporate campaign donations are turning to resolutions that ask the company to disclose information about lobbying activities and election spending. According to Corporate Reform Coalition, more than 100 U.S. companies faced shareholder resolutions this year.
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) does not currently require public companies to disclose political spending. However, last April, the state treasurers of five states called on the SEC to implement a formal disclosure system. To date, the SEC has not proposed a formal rule-making that could compel more transparency.
In the absence of legal requirements, many companies voluntarily make disclosures. A recent survey of the top 300 companies in the S&P 500 found that 61 percent of companies disclose direct political spending and 43 percent disclose payments made to trade associations that engage in political spending.
For companies that don’t provide information about political and lobbying activities, the public pressure is mounting. In the absence of formal requirements, several public interest groups regularly publish reports on corporate political spending.
Most recently, the Center for Political Accountability, in collaboration with the Zicklin Center at the University of Pennsylvania, scored the corporate political disclosure practices of the entire S&P 500. Three companies tied for a first-place rating of 97.1 points: Becton, Dickinson and Co., CSX Corp. and Noble Energy Inc.
Below are several of the study’s key findings:
While companies may not face legal consequences for failing to fully disclose political spending, they are at risk for shareholder litigation and negative publicity, both of which can still impact their bottom line. To determine the best corporate governance decision for your company, it is best to speak with experienced legal counsel.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.