SEC Issues Additional Guidance Related to Shareholder Proposals

by BakerHostetler

On Nov. 1, 2017, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued Staff Legal Bulletin (SLB) No.14I to provide additional guidance related to shareholder proposals and Exchange Act Rule 14a-8. Specifically, the SLB provides that:

  • A company’s no-action request under the ordinary business exception should include a detailed discussion that reflects the board’s analysis of the particular policy issue raised and its significance to the company’s business operations, in order to help the Division determine whether a proposal that addresses ordinary business matters nonetheless focuses on a policy issue that is sufficiently significant to be appropriate for a shareholder vote.
  • A company’s no-action request under the rarely used economic relevance exception should include a detailed discussion that reflects the board’s analysis of the particular policy issue raised and its significance to the company.
  • Proposals by proxy must include documentation identifying the proponent, the person serving as proxy, the company and the proposal, and be signed and dated by the proponent.
  • Exclusion under the 500-word proposal limitation is appropriate only if the total number of words in a proposal, including words in the graphics, exceeds 500.
Ordinary Business Exception (Rule 14a-8(i)(7))

Rule 14a-8(i)(7), the “ordinary business” exception, permits a company to exclude a proposal that “deals with a matter relating to the company’s ordinary business operations.” The purpose of the exception is “to confine the resolution of ordinary business problems to management and the board of directors, since it is impracticable for shareholders to decide how to solve such problems at an annual shareholders meeting.”[1] For the 2017 proxy season, the ordinary business exception was the most common basis for denial as well as success of a no-action request.

The SEC has stated that the policy underlying the ordinary business exception rests on two central considerations. The first relates to the proposal’s subject matter; the second (which the SLB does not address), the degree to which the proposal “micromanages” the company. Under the first consideration, proposals that raise matters that are “so fundamental to management’s ability to run a company on a day-to-day basis that they could not, as a practical matter, be subject to direct shareholder oversight” may be excluded, unless such a proposal focuses on policy issues that are sufficiently significant to transcend ordinary business and would be appropriate for a shareholder vote.[2]

Whether the significant policy exception applies depends in part on the connection between the policy issue and the company’s business operations. These determinations often raise difficult judgment calls that the Division believes are, in the first instance, matters that the board of directors, acting as steward with fiduciary duties to a company’s shareholders, is generally in a better position to determine. A board acting in this capacity and with the knowledge of the company’s business and the implications of a particular proposal for that company’s business is well-situated to analyze, determine and explain whether a particular issue is sufficiently significant to transcend ordinary business and be appropriate for a shareholder vote.

Accordingly, the Division expects a company’s no-action request to include a discussion that reflects the board’s analysis of the particular policy issue raised and its significance to the company’s business operations. In addition, the Division noted that the explanation would be most helpful if it detailed the specific processes employed by the board to ensure that its conclusions are well-informed and well-reasoned.

Although it is unclear what the “specific processes employed by the board to ensure that its conclusions are well-informed and well-reasoned” may encompass, we expect that a board may reasonably rely upon the long line of SEC no-action precedents with respect to similar proposals – which is entirely consistent with its fiduciary duties – and those precedents will help shape the specifics of the board’s deliberative process. In addition, we further expect that, under certain circumstances, a company may be able to argue that proposals related to certain executive compensation or environmental topics, for example, may be excludable as ordinary business matters rather than constituting social policy issues, based upon company-specific factors and a well-informed and well-reasoned board analysis.

Economic Relevance Exception (Rule 14a-8(i)(5))

Rule 14a-8(i)(5), the “economic relevance” exception, is one of the substantive bases for exclusion of a shareholder proposal in Rule 14a-8. It permits a company to exclude a proposal that “relates to operations which account for less than 5 percent of the company’s total assets at the end of its most recent fiscal year, and for less than 5 percent of its net earnings and gross sales for its most recent fiscal year, and is not otherwise significantly related to the company’s business.” Over the years, the Division has rarely allowed this exclusion. Under its historical application, the Division simply considered whether a company conducted any amount of business related to the issue in the proposal and whether that issue was of broad social or ethical concern.

The Division now believes its application of Rule 14a-8(i)(5) has unduly limited the exclusion’s availability because it has not fully considered the second prong of the rule as amended in 1982 – the question of whether the proposal “deals with a matter that is not significantly related to the issuer’s business” and is therefore excludable. Accordingly, going forward, the Division’s analysis will focus on a proposal’s significance to the company’s business when it otherwise relates to operations that account for less than 5 percent of total assets, net earnings and gross sales. Under this framework, proposals that raise issues of social or ethical significance may be included or excluded, notwithstanding their importance in the abstract, based on the application and analysis of each of the factors of Rule 14a-8(i)(5) in determining the proposal’s relevance to the company’s business.

When a proposal’s significance to a company’s business is not apparent on its face, a proposal may be excludable unless the proponent demonstrates that it is “otherwise significantly related to the company’s business.”[3] For example, the proponent can provide information demonstrating that the proposal “may have a significant impact on other segments of the issuer’s business or subject the issuer to significant contingent liabilities.”[4] The proponent could continue to raise social or ethical issues in its arguments, but it would need to tie those to a significant effect on the company’s business. The mere possibility of reputational or economic harm will not preclude no-action relief. In evaluating significance, the Division will consider the proposal in light of the “total mix” of information about the company.

As with the ordinary business exception, determining whether a proposal is otherwise significantly related to the company’s business can raise difficult judgment calls. Accordingly, the Division expects a company’s Rule 14a-8(i)(5) no-action request to include a discussion that reflects the board’s analysis of the proposal’s significance to the company. Similarly, that explanation would be most helpful if it detailed the specific processes employed by the board to ensure that its conclusions are well-informed and well-reasoned.

The Division also noted that it will no longer look to its ordinary business exception analysis under Rule 14a-8(i)(7) when evaluating arguments under Rule 14a-8(i)(5).

Proposals Submitted on Behalf of Shareholders

While Rule 14a-8 does not address shareholders’ ability to submit proposals through a representative, shareholders frequently elect to do so, a practice commonly referred to as “proposal by proxy.” The Division has been, and continues to be, of the view that a shareholder’s submission by proxy is consistent with Rule 14a-8.

The Division is nevertheless mindful of challenges that proposals by proxy may present. For example, there may be questions about whether the eligibility requirements of Rule 14a-8(b) have been satisfied or even whether shareholders know that proposals are being submitted on their behalf. As a result, the Division will look to whether the shareholders who submit a proposal by proxy provide documentation describing the shareholder’s delegation of authority to the proxy. In general, this documentation should:

  • Identify the shareholder-proponent and the person or entity selected as proxy.
  • Identify the company to which the proposal is directed.
  • Identify the annual or special meeting for which the proposal is submitted.
  • Identify the specific proposal to be submitted.
  • Be signed and dated by the shareholder.

The Division also notes that when this information is not provided, there may be a basis to exclude the proposal under Rule 14a-8(b) (i.e., because the shareholder has not complied with an eligibility or procedural requirement). Please note that this guidance applies only to proposals submitted by proxy after Nov. 1, 2017 – the date on which the SLB was published. However, companies that intend to seek exclusion under Rule 14a-8(b) based on a shareholder’s failure to provide some or all of this information must notify the proponent of the specific defect within 14 calendar days after receiving the proposal so that the proponent has an opportunity to cure the defect.[5]

500-Word Proposal Limitation (Rule 14a-8(d))

Rule 14a-8(d) is one of the procedural bases for exclusion of a shareholder proposal; it provides that a “proposal, including any accompanying supporting statement, may not exceed 500 words.”

In two recent no-action decisions, the Division expressed the view that the use of “500 words” and absence of express reference to graphics or images in Rule 14a-8(d) does not prohibit the inclusion of graphs and/or images in proposals. The Division recognizes the potential for abuse in this area, but that these potential abuses are better addressed through other provisions of Rule 14a-8. For example, exclusion of graphs and/or images would be appropriate under Rule 14a-8(i)(3) when they make the proposal materially false or misleading; render the proposal inherently vague or indefinite; directly or indirectly impugn character, integrity or personal reputation without factual foundation; or are irrelevant to a consideration of the subject matter of the proposal, such that there is a strong likelihood that a reasonable shareholder would be uncertain as to the matter on which he or she is being asked to vote. In addition, exclusion would also be appropriate under Rule 14a-8(d) if the total number of words in a proposal, including words in the graphics, exceeds 500.

[1] SEC Release No. 34-40018 (May 21, 1998).
[2] Id.
[3] Proponents bear the burden of demonstrating that a proposal is “otherwise significantly related to the company’s business.” See Release No. 34-39093 (Sep. 18, 1997), citing Release No. 34-19135.
[4] SEC Release No. 34-19135 (Oct. 14, 1982).
[5] See Rule 14a-8(f)(1).


DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© BakerHostetler | Attorney Advertising

Written by:


BakerHostetler on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.


JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at:

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.