Trends in Executive Compensation, Employment Law and Compensation Committee Practices

by Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

On February 5, 2019, Skadden hosted the webinar “Key Trends in Executive Compensation, Employment Law and Compensation Committee Practices.” The panelists were David Schwartz, Skadden’s global head of Labor and Employment Law; Thomas Asmar, Executive Compensation and Benefits counsel; Michael Bergmann, Executive Compensation and Benefits counsel; and Anne Villanueva, Labor and Employment Law associate. Regina Olshan, the firm’s global head of Executive Compensation and Benefits, moderated the discussion.

Tax Reform’s Impact on Pay Practices and Preparing for Proxy Season

Impact of Tax Legislation on Pay Practices

Mr. Asmar began with a discussion of how the 2017 federal tax legislation (the so-called “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” (TCJA)) amended Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code. Notably, the TCJA eliminated Section 162(m)’s qualified performance-based compensation exception, so that all compensation paid to covered employees in excess of $1 million annually is not deductible, unless it is grandfathered under the TCJA’s transition rule. The legislation also expanded the definition of a “covered employee” to include anyone who served as the CEO or CFO at any time during the taxable year, as well as the three other most highly compensated officers other than the CEO and CFO for that year. The TCJA also made covered employee status attach for all future taxable years, which means companies should keep a running list of their covered employees. Additionally, the TCJA expanded Section 162(m)’s reach to companies with publicly traded debt and foreign private issuers. These changes took effect for taxable years after December 31, 2017 (i.e., for 2018), for calendar year companies.

Next, Mr. Asmar reviewed the transition rule, explaining that the changes to Section 162(m) do not apply to compensation payable under written binding contracts in effect as of November 2, 2017, so long as the contracts are not materially modified thereafter. Mr. Asmar cautioned companies to consult with advisers prior to making any changes to these contracts to avoid inadvertent material modifications, because amounts paid after a material modification would become subject to the amended Section 162(m).

Mr. Asmar also discussed IRS Notice 2018-68, which provided guidance on certain of the changes to Section 162(m). One important takeaway from Notice 2018-68 is that awards are not grandfathered if companies are permitted to exercise negative discretion to reduce or eliminate the award amount, regardless of whether that discretion is exercised, unless the employee is in all events entitled to the amount under applicable state law. Mr. Asmar noted that many incentive plans have been designed to feature negative discretion, and payments under those plans are not eligible for grandfathering unless the state law exception applies. Moreover, the availability of the state law exception depends on each compensation arrangement’s facts and circumstances. Mr. Asmar also reviewed IRS Notice 2018-68’s guidance about material modifications. An increase in the amount of compensation payable, acceleration of payments and further deferrals of payments generally are material modifications, subject to exceptions.

In practice, companies are taking inventory of their performance-based compensation arrangements that were in effect on the transition date to determine which ones may be eligible for grandfathered treatment and treading carefully when amending them to avoid inadvertent material modifications. Mr. Bergmann emphasized that companies should do a fundamental review of all of their compensation arrangements to determine whether they may be grandfathered, because the changes to Section 162(m) extend beyond the elimination of the qualified performance-based compensation exception. Mr. Asmar observed that the changes to Section 162(m) may provide companies with flexibility to design new executive compensation programs that address pay for performance without having to conform to the prior performance-based compensation exception rules. For example, performance goals no longer need to be established within 90 days of performance periods, companies may exercise discretion to increase or decrease payouts, and shareholder approval is no longer required every five years. However, Mr. Asmar cautioned that, to the extent a company has grandfathered awards, these provisions should remain in place in compensation plans that govern them.

Mr. Asmar concluded the discussion about tax reform’s impact on pay practices by highlighting certain planning considerations. Companies may consider spreading compensation payments over multiple years to fit within the former $1 million performance-based compensation threshold, and may provide for severance bonus payouts at target rather than actual performance. However, Mr. Asmar noted that performance-based compensation remains integral to incentivizing executives and responding to shareholder and proxy adviser firm demands, and companies have not been dramatically changing their compensation plans in practice. Mr. Bergmann agreed that performance-based pay will remain important to investors. He observed that the rationale for pay-for-performance has always extended beyond Section 162(m) considerations.

Key Considerations for 2019 Proxy Season

Mr. Bergmann began by noting that Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) and Glass Lewis provide guidance each year about their approach to the upcoming proxy season. He reviewed important updates from ISS, including the following:

  • ISS now considers a shift away from performance-based compensation to discretionary or fixed pay elements to be a problematic pay practice; and
  • ISS added to its list of problematic pay practices (a) excessive termination payments generally exceeding three times base pay and annual bonus, including in situations beyond a change-in-control triggering severance obligations; and that (b) a “good reason” termination definition that presents windfall risks (i.e., severance is triggered by potential performance failures, such as company bankruptcy or delisting).

Additionally, ISS expressly addressed front-loaded awards for the first time and made clear that ISS is unlikely to support grants covering more than four years and that they expect a firm commitment from a company not to grant additional awards for that same performance period. Glass Lewis similarly scrutinizes front-loaded awards and expects a company to make a firm commitment to refrain from granting additional awards.

Regarding ISS’ pay-for-performance screens, there were no changes to ISS’ quantitative screen this year, but ISS made clear that it is continuing to explore potential use of an economic value added (EVA) measure and that it will start to display EVA measures in its research reports. Companies should therefore understand their EVA scores and anticipate that they will be on display. Moreover, ISS’ qualitative screen features a new measure: the emphasis of objective and transparent metrics. Mr. Bergmann underscored that ISS stated it does not endorse or prefer the use of any particular metric, including total shareholder return. Finally, ISS made clear that pay ratio will not impact its vote recommendations at this time, but it will continue to display pay ratio results in its reports.

Mr. Bergmann then briefly covered updates to ISS’ Equity Plan Scorecard that it uses to evaluate shareholder proposals on U.S. equity compensation plans. Notable changes to the EPSC include:

  • Companies may earn full credit for a change-in-control provision by providing clear disclosure of the treatment upon a change-in-control. However, Mr. Bergmann anticipates that change-in-control provisions will nevertheless continue to feature double-trigger treatment and that ISS would view a departure from that negatively.
  • ISS added excessive equity dilution as an overriding factor. An overriding factor is one that might cause ISS to issue a negative vote recommendation on an equity plan even if it has a passing score.
  • ISS is giving additional weight to the plan duration factor, even though the EPSC passing scores remain the same. Mr. Bergmann explained that ISS aims to encourage companies to frequently seek shareholder approval of their equity plans, especially in light of the amendments to Section 162(m), which removed an incentive to seek shareholder approval every five years.

Next, Mr. Bergmann highlighted updates from Glass Lewis. Glass Lewis provided guidance that excessive sign-on awards, multiyear guaranteed bonuses and severance provisions exceeding the upper limit of market practice may contribute to a negative vote recommendation. Like ISS, Glass Lewis views excise tax gross-ups unfavorably, particularly where a company previously committed not to add any. Glass Lewis also made clear that it plans to scrutinize clawback policies and noted that clawback policies should extend beyond Sarbanes-Oxley Act requirements. Glass Lewis indicated that they do not have an inherent concern with nonformula bonus plans but that they do expect a meaningful discussion of the rationale for having a nonformula plan and the board’s rationale in determining the bonuses under it for any particular year.

Mr. Bergmann then covered key pay ratio considerations. Companies should understand where their pay ratio stands relative to their peers. Moreover, companies should carefully consider whether to use the same or a different median employee, which requires determining whether during the preceding year there were any changes to employee demographics or pay practices that may cause the company to believe that its pay ratio could be significantly impacted. Mr. Bergmann expects some companies to make voluntary disclosures regarding pay ratio matters (i.e., beyond those required by the rule), in part in response to institutional investor requirements for additional information disclosure.

The SEC’s New Hedging Policy Disclosure Rule

Mr. Asmar noted that in 2015 the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) included a proposal to implement rules from the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act regarding hedging disclosures in proxy statements. Three years later, the hedging rule was finalized in the form of Item 407(i) of Regulation S-K. Under Item 407(i), companies will be required to disclose policies or practices that allow employees or directors to hedge or offset any decrease in the market value of equity securities that are granted as compensation to, or held directly or indirectly by, an employee or a director.

Mr. Asmar observed that the rule applies not only to executives but also to other employees and directors. Also, the rule does not define the term “hedging” and broadly refers to transactions that have the economic effect to hedge or offset any decrease in the market value of equity securities. The term “equity securities” encompasses equity securities of the company along with equity securities of the company’s parent and subsidiaries, and the parent’s subsidiaries. Companies should recognize that the disclosure requirement is focused on whether the company permits hedging transactions pursuant to its written or unwritten policies and practices. If a company does not have hedging policies or practices, it should disclose that hedging transactions are generally permitted. Mr. Asmar then discussed the level of detail that will be necessary to satisfy Item 407(i). Companies can comply with Item 407(i) by (a) disclosing the practices or policies in their entirety or (b) providing a summary of them, including the categories of people affected and types of hedging transactions that are specifically permitted or forbidden.

Companies will be required to comply with the new disclosure requirements for proxy statements and information statements for shareholder meetings at which directors will be elected for fiscal years beginning on or after July 1, 2019. This means calendar year companies do not need to make Item 407(i) disclosures in proxy statements filed this year. Smaller Reporting Companies and Emerging Growth Companies will first be required to make Item 407(i) disclosures for fiscal years beginning on or after July 1, 2020.

Mr. Asmar shared insights about where to place the Item 407(i) disclosure in the proxy statement. The rule permits placement of the Item 407(i) disclosure outside the Compensation, Discussion and Analysis section of the proxy statement (CD&A), without any cross-reference or direct inclusion of the Item 407(i) disclosure in the CD&A, which would result in the Item 407(i) disclosure not being subject to the say-on-pay vote applicable to executive compensation. If, however, the CD&A does include the Item 407(i) disclosure or a cross-reference to it, then the Item 407(i) disclosure may be picked up in the say-on-pay vote. Mr. Asmar noted that what happens in practice with respect to these disclosures remains to be seen. In the meantime, companies should prepare for Item 407(i) by considering whether to adopt or change their hedging policies or practices.

Recent Trends in Executive and Director Compensation

The SEC Cracks Down on Inadequate Perquisite Disclosures

Mr. Asmar noted that the SEC has recently pursued several high-profile enforcement actions against companies for failing to disclose executive perquisites in their proxy statements. For example, the SEC announced that a company agreed to settle charges relating to inadequate disclosure of perquisites by paying a $1.75 million civil penalty, and the company was required to hire an independent consultant for one year to review and evaluate its procedures and controls. In another recent case about failure to disclose perquisites in a proxy statement, the SEC entered into a settlement agreement with a former CEO that included a $180,000 fine and a five-year ban on serving as a corporate officer of a public company. The SEC’s rules generally provide that an item is not a perquisite or personal benefit if it is integrally and directly related to the performance of the executive’s duties. Otherwise, an item is a perquisite or personal benefit if it confers a direct or indirect benefit that has a personal aspect regardless of whether it is provided for a business reason, unless it is generally available on a nondiscriminatory basis to all employees. Mr. Asmar encouraged companies to review their executive perquisite policies and procedures in connection with upcoming proxy statements and to consider their internal policies, procedures and questionnaires in place.

The #MeToo Movement’s Influence on Compensation

Mr. Asmar then shared updates about another important topic: the effect of the #MeToo movement on executive compensation. Companies have been taking an increasingly active role in preventing and responding to sexual misconduct in the workplace. In addition to taking a fresh look at their codes of conduct and similar policies and procedures, some companies have been weighing whether to include specific terms in their executive compensation plans or agreements to address the consequences of sexual misconduct in the workplace and deter such behavior. Mr. Asmar explained that some companies have revised their definition of “cause” to include sexual misconduct, expressly permitting them to terminate an executive who engaged in sexual misconduct without providing severance. Some companies also have considered updating their compensation recovery policies to provide for clawback of compensation if an executive engages in sexual misconduct in the workplace. Some companies also have been asking newly hired executives to make affirmative representations or warranties that they have not been subject to any sexual misconduct claims or otherwise engaged in such behavior. Similar representations are beginning to appear in corporate transaction documents, such as merger agreements. Some companies have been proactive about channeling the #MeToo movement’s momentum to update their executive compensation practices, and it remains to be seen how the #MeToo movement will continue to influence executive compensation.

Director Compensation Updates

Mr. Bergmann observed that the Delaware Supreme Court’s decision in In re Investors Bancorp is sustaining the trend of increased scrutiny of director compensation. Prior to Bancorp, the more deferential business judgment standard, as opposed to an entire fairness standard, applied if a director compensation decision or plan was ratified by shareholders and had meaningful limits on the amount that could be paid to directors. In Bancorp, the Delaware Supreme Court found that the shareholder ratification path to the business judgment standard of review is unavailable and entire fairness applies, even where shareholders have approved an equity or other compensation plan, if the plan gives directors discretion to grant themselves awards only within general parameters (e.g., subject to a limit). However, business judgment review is available where shareholders approve specific director awards or a plan with a specific formula.

Mr. Bergmann advised companies on reducing their risk of director compensation litigation. Retaining existing limits in plans will not make business judgment review available, but it still can be a favorable factor if a court is conducting an entire fairness review. Companies should also determine whether their compensation is in fact reasonable compensation for directors, in part by benchmarking against their peers. Moreover, it can be helpful for companies to separate employee and nonemployee director compensation decisions, but Mr. Bergmann cautioned that such separation alone will not ensure rigorous compensation decisions. Companies also should carefully document the process they use to determine director compensation and provide a transparent description in their proxy statement so that investors can understand the compensation decisions. Mr. Bergmann noted that it is uncommon in practice for companies to request shareholder approval of specific director awards or specific plan formulas.

Next, Mr. Bergmann reviewed the ISS response to increased scrutiny of director compensation. ISS first developed an evaluation methodology for nonemployee director pay in December 2017. At that time, ISS stated that a finding of excessive nonemployee director pay over two or more consecutive years without a compelling rationale or mitigating factors could result in an adverse vote recommendation starting in 2019. Late last year, ISS announced that it would reevaluate its existing nonemployee director pay methodology and that the first possible adverse vote recommendations would be in 2020.

ISS has since finalized its nonemployee director pay evaluation policy:

  • Pay outliers will be nonemployee directors with pay in the top 2-3 percent of comparable directors, whereas under the earlier proposed policy it targeted those in the top 5 percent. Nonemployee directors will be compared against a peer group identified by ISS. Nonexecutive chairmen and lead independent directors will be compared against their counterparts on other boards
  • If ISS determines that nonemployee director pay is a quantitative outlier, it will conduct a qualitative evaluation to determine whether those concerns are mitigated. Circumstances that could mitigate concerns are special onboarding grants, pay that is linked to a specific transaction, or scientific expertise. However, payments that are justified only as rewarding general performance will not be treated as a mitigating factor.

Mr. Bergmann concluded by noting that nonemployee director pay is expected to be a continuing source of investor concern. Companies should pay careful attention to director compensation amounts and how director compensation decisions are made.

#MeToo and the Renewed Focus on Gender Pay Equity

Ms. Villanueva began by noting that equal pay audits and gender pay gap disclosure issues have become especially relevant in our current sociopolitical climate. For example, the #MeToo Movement has put a spotlight on women’s issues in the workplace following ongoing revelations about sexual harassment and has resulted in a renewed emphasis on workplace equality by large companies that have decided to publicly discuss pay analyses.

Ms. Villanueva discussed varying initiatives such as the White House Equal Pay Pledge and a recent Senate bill reintroduced on January 30, 2019, to close loopholes in the Equal Pay Act of 1963.

Recent Pay Equity Developments

Ms. Villanueva explained that in addition to the Senate bill noted above, there are various initiatives aimed at minimizing pay inequity at the state level. In particular, Ms. Villanueva explained:

  • California S.B. 826 requires all NYSE- and Nasdaq-listed public companies with principal executive offices in California to have one female board member by December 31, 2019. This law applies regardless of the state of incorporation and imposes fines of $100,000 for the first violation and $300,000 for any subsequent violation.
  • Forty-seven states have equal pay acts. Some, such as California, New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts, have more expansive protections, including new forums, longer statutes of limitation, different standards for equity, higher burdens for employers and increased damages.
  • A growing number of state and local governments have passed legislation designed to prohibit inquiries into salary history with the goal of breaking the cycle of potential prior wage discrimination. This legislation exists in states such as California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Oregon and Vermont, as well as Puerto Rico.

Pay Audits and Disclosures: Best Practices

Next, Mr. Schwartz explained that managing pay equity can have many positive consequences. More and more companies are undertaking pay audits, and some of those companies have committed to publishing their results. Either way, said Mr. Schwartz, there are a number of factors to consider when undertaking either endeavor. Some potential benefits of performing pay audits and publishing results are positive reputational effects, avoidance of future pay inequity issues and shareholder activism. Some potential drawbacks are that pay audits can be expensive and time-consuming and publishing results may give ammunition to plaintiffs and critics.

Mr. Schwartz discussed best practices with respect to performing pay audits, including clearly establishing goals and objectives and protecting the attorney-client privilege. Mr. Schwartz highlighted the importance of retaining outside counsel, as some courts have explained that advice from outside counsel enhances the privilege and creates a presumption that a company is obtaining protected legal advice. In addition, Mr. Schwartz said that organizations should minimize communications to nonlawyers, consultants and third parties, who should all sign nondisclosure agreements to maintain confidentiality.

Mr. Schwartz further discussed best practices with respect to disclosing the results of pay audits, including carefully considering how to communicate the results and tailoring organization-wide messaging.

Performing Pay Audits and Disclosures: Next Steps

Mr. Schwartz recommended next steps, including, among other things: updating handbooks and policies to eliminate references to reliance on prior salary or prohibitions on discussing compensation, developing a formal policy about setting starting salaries, implementing training for employees who will be making compensation decisions and preparing for shareholder activism.

Download pdf

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.

© Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP 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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide

JD Supra Privacy Policy

Updated: May 25, 2018:

JD Supra is a legal publishing service that connects experts and their content with broader audiences of professionals, journalists and associations.

This Privacy Policy describes how JD Supra, LLC ("JD Supra" or "we," "us," or "our") collects, uses and shares personal data collected from visitors to our website (located at (our "Website") who view only publicly-available content as well as subscribers to our services (such as our email digests or author tools)(our "Services"). By using our Website and registering for one of our Services, you are agreeing to the terms of this Privacy Policy.

Please note that if you subscribe to one of our Services, you can make choices about how we collect, use and share your information through our Privacy Center under the "My Account" dashboard (available if you are logged into your JD Supra account).

Collection of Information

Registration Information. When you register with JD Supra for our Website and Services, either as an author or as a subscriber, you will be asked to provide identifying information to create your JD Supra account ("Registration Data"), such as your:

  • Email
  • First Name
  • Last Name
  • Company Name
  • Company Industry
  • Title
  • Country

Other Information: We also collect other information you may voluntarily provide. This may include content you provide for publication. We may also receive your communications with others through our Website and Services (such as contacting an author through our Website) or communications directly with us (such as through email, feedback or other forms or social media). If you are a subscribed user, we will also collect your user preferences, such as the types of articles you would like to read.

Information from third parties (such as, from your employer or LinkedIn): We may also receive information about you from third party sources. For example, your employer may provide your information to us, such as in connection with an article submitted by your employer for publication. If you choose to use LinkedIn to subscribe to our Website and Services, we also collect information related to your LinkedIn account and profile.

Your interactions with our Website and Services: As is true of most websites, we gather certain information automatically. This information includes IP addresses, browser type, Internet service provider (ISP), referring/exit pages, operating system, date/time stamp and clickstream data. We use this information to analyze trends, to administer the Website and our Services, to improve the content and performance of our Website and Services, and to track users' movements around the site. We may also link this automatically-collected data to personal information, for example, to inform authors about who has read their articles. Some of this data is collected through information sent by your web browser. We also use cookies and other tracking technologies to collect this information. To learn more about cookies and other tracking technologies that JD Supra may use on our Website and Services please see our "Cookies Guide" page.

How do we use this information?

We use the information and data we collect principally in order to provide our Website and Services. More specifically, we may use your personal information to:

  • Operate our Website and Services and publish content;
  • Distribute content to you in accordance with your preferences as well as to provide other notifications to you (for example, updates about our policies and terms);
  • Measure readership and usage of the Website and Services;
  • Communicate with you regarding your questions and requests;
  • Authenticate users and to provide for the safety and security of our Website and Services;
  • Conduct research and similar activities to improve our Website and Services; and
  • Comply with our legal and regulatory responsibilities and to enforce our rights.

How is your information shared?

  • Content and other public information (such as an author profile) is shared on our Website and Services, including via email digests and social media feeds, and is accessible to the general public.
  • If you choose to use our Website and Services to communicate directly with a company or individual, such communication may be shared accordingly.
  • Readership information is provided to publishing law firms and authors of content to give them insight into their readership and to help them to improve their content.
  • Our Website may offer you the opportunity to share information through our Website, such as through Facebook's "Like" or Twitter's "Tweet" button. We offer this functionality to help generate interest in our Website and content and to permit you to recommend content to your contacts. You should be aware that sharing through such functionality may result in information being collected by the applicable social media network and possibly being made publicly available (for example, through a search engine). Any such information collection would be subject to such third party social media network's privacy policy.
  • Your information may also be shared to parties who support our business, such as professional advisors as well as web-hosting providers, analytics providers and other information technology providers.
  • Any court, governmental authority, law enforcement agency or other third party where we believe disclosure is necessary to comply with a legal or regulatory obligation, or otherwise to protect our rights, the rights of any third party or individuals' personal safety, or to detect, prevent, or otherwise address fraud, security or safety issues.
  • To our affiliated entities and in connection with the sale, assignment or other transfer of our company or our business.

How We Protect Your Information

JD Supra takes reasonable and appropriate precautions to insure that user information is protected from loss, misuse and unauthorized access, disclosure, alteration and destruction. 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. You should keep in mind that no Internet transmission is ever 100% secure or error-free. Where you use log-in credentials (usernames, passwords) on our Website, please remember that it is your responsibility to safeguard them. If you believe that your log-in credentials have been compromised, please contact us at

Children's Information

Our Website and Services are not directed at children under the age of 16 and we do not knowingly collect personal information from children under the age of 16 through our Website and/or Services. If you have reason to believe that a child under the age of 16 has provided personal information to us, please contact us, and we will endeavor to delete that information from our databases.

Links to Other Websites

Our Website and Services may contain links to other websites. The operators of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using our Website or Services and click a link to another site, you will leave our 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 are not responsible for the data collection and use practices of such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of our Website and Services and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Information for EU and Swiss Residents

JD Supra's principal place of business is in the United States. By subscribing to our website, you expressly consent to your information being processed in the United States.

  • Our Legal Basis for Processing: Generally, we rely on our legitimate interests in order to process your personal information. For example, we rely on this legal ground if we use your personal information to manage your Registration Data and administer our relationship with you; to deliver our Website and Services; understand and improve our Website and Services; report reader analytics to our authors; to personalize your experience on our Website and Services; and where necessary to protect or defend our or another's rights or property, or to detect, prevent, or otherwise address fraud, security, safety or privacy issues. Please see Article 6(1)(f) of the E.U. General Data Protection Regulation ("GDPR") In addition, there may be other situations where other grounds for processing may exist, such as where processing is a result of legal requirements (GDPR Article 6(1)(c)) or for reasons of public interest (GDPR Article 6(1)(e)). Please see the "Your Rights" section of this Privacy Policy immediately below for more information about how you may request that we limit or refrain from processing your personal information.
  • Your Rights
    • Right of Access/Portability: You can ask to review details about the information we hold about you and how that information has been used and disclosed. Note that we may request to verify your identification before fulfilling your request. You can also request that your personal information is provided to you in a commonly used electronic format so that you can share it with other organizations.
    • Right to Correct Information: You may ask that we make corrections to any information we hold, if you believe such correction to be necessary.
    • Right to Restrict Our Processing or Erasure of Information: You also have the right in certain circumstances to ask us to restrict processing of your personal information or to erase your personal information. Where you have consented to our use of your personal information, you can withdraw your consent at any time.

You can make a request to exercise any of these rights by emailing us at or by writing to us at:

Privacy Officer
JD Supra, LLC
10 Liberty Ship Way, Suite 300
Sausalito, California 94965

You can also manage your profile and subscriptions through our Privacy Center under the "My Account" dashboard.

We will make all practical efforts to respect your wishes. There may be times, however, where we are not able to fulfill your request, for example, if applicable law prohibits our compliance. Please note that JD Supra does not use "automatic decision making" or "profiling" as those terms are defined in the GDPR.

  • Timeframe for retaining your personal information: We will retain your personal information in a form that identifies you only for as long as it serves the purpose(s) for which it was initially collected as stated in this Privacy Policy, or subsequently authorized. We may continue processing your personal information for longer periods, but only for the time and to the extent such processing reasonably serves the purposes of archiving in the public interest, journalism, literature and art, scientific or historical research and statistical analysis, and subject to the protection of this Privacy Policy. For example, if you are an author, your personal information may continue to be published in connection with your article indefinitely. When we have no ongoing legitimate business need to process your personal information, we will either delete or anonymize it, or, if this is not possible (for example, because your personal information has been stored in backup archives), then we will securely store your personal information and isolate it from any further processing until deletion is possible.
  • Onward Transfer to Third Parties: As noted in the "How We Share Your Data" Section above, JD Supra may share your information with third parties. When JD Supra discloses your personal information to third parties, we have ensured that such third parties have either certified under the EU-U.S. or Swiss Privacy Shield Framework and will process all personal data received from EU member states/Switzerland in reliance on the applicable Privacy Shield Framework or that they have been subjected to strict contractual provisions in their contract with us to guarantee an adequate level of data protection for your data.

California Privacy Rights

Pursuant to Section 1798.83 of the California Civil Code, our customers who are California residents have the right to request certain information regarding our disclosure of personal information to third parties for their direct marketing purposes.

You can make a request for this information by emailing us at or by writing to us at:

Privacy Officer
JD Supra, LLC
10 Liberty Ship Way, Suite 300
Sausalito, California 94965

Some browsers have incorporated a Do Not Track (DNT) feature. These features, when turned on, send a signal that you prefer that the website you are visiting not collect and use data regarding your online searching and browsing activities. As there is not yet a common understanding on how to interpret the DNT signal, we currently do not respond to DNT signals on our site.

Access/Correct/Update/Delete Personal Information

For non-EU/Swiss residents, if you would like to know what personal information we have about you, you can send an e-mail to We will be in contact with you (by mail or otherwise) to verify your identity and provide you the information you request. We will respond within 30 days to your request for access to your personal information. In some cases, we may not be able to remove your personal information, in which case we will let you know if we are unable to do so and why. If you would like to correct or update your personal information, you can manage your profile and subscriptions through our Privacy Center under the "My Account" dashboard. If you would like to delete your account or remove your information from our Website and Services, send an e-mail to

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Privacy 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 our Website and Services following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this Privacy Policy, the practices of this site, your dealings with our Website or Services, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at:

JD Supra Cookie Guide

As with many websites, JD Supra's website (located at (our "Website") and our services (such as our email article digests)(our "Services") use a standard technology called a "cookie" and other similar technologies (such as, pixels and web beacons), which are small data files that are transferred to your computer when you use our Website and Services. These technologies automatically identify your browser whenever you interact with our Website and Services.

How We Use Cookies and Other Tracking Technologies

We use cookies and other tracking technologies to:

  1. Improve the user experience on our Website and Services;
  2. Store the authorization token that users receive when they login to the private areas of our Website. This token is specific to a user's login session and requires a valid username and password to obtain. It is required to access the user's profile information, subscriptions, and analytics;
  3. Track anonymous site usage; and
  4. Permit connectivity with social media networks to permit content sharing.

There are different types of cookies and other technologies used our Website, notably:

  • "Session cookies" - These cookies only last as long as your online session, and disappear from your computer or device when you close your browser (like Internet Explorer, Google Chrome or Safari).
  • "Persistent cookies" - These cookies stay on your computer or device after your browser has been closed and last for a time specified in the cookie. We use persistent cookies when we need to know who you are for more than one browsing session. For example, we use them to remember your preferences for the next time you visit.
  • "Web Beacons/Pixels" - Some of our web pages and emails may also contain small electronic images known as web beacons, clear GIFs or single-pixel GIFs. These images are placed on a web page or email and typically work in conjunction with cookies to collect data. We use these images to identify our users and user behavior, such as counting the number of users who have visited a web page or acted upon one of our email digests.

JD Supra Cookies. We place our own cookies on your computer to track certain information about you while you are using our Website and Services. For example, we place a session cookie on your computer each time you visit our Website. We use these cookies to allow you to log-in to your subscriber account. In addition, through these cookies we are able to collect information about how you use the Website, including what browser you may be using, your IP address, and the URL address you came from upon visiting our Website and the URL you next visit (even if those URLs are not on our Website). We also utilize email web beacons to monitor whether our emails are being delivered and read. We also use these tools to help deliver reader analytics to our authors to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

Analytics/Performance Cookies. JD Supra also uses the following analytic tools to help us analyze the performance of our Website and Services as well as how visitors use our Website and Services:

  • HubSpot - For more information about HubSpot cookies, please visit
  • New Relic - For more information on New Relic cookies, please visit
  • Google Analytics - For more information on Google Analytics cookies, visit To opt-out of being tracked by Google Analytics across all websites visit This will allow you to download and install a Google Analytics cookie-free web browser.

Facebook, Twitter and other Social Network Cookies. Our content pages allow you to share content appearing on our Website and Services to your social media accounts through the "Like," "Tweet," or similar buttons displayed on such pages. To accomplish this Service, we embed code that such third party social networks provide and that we do not control. These buttons know that you are logged in to your social network account and therefore such social networks could also know that you are viewing the JD Supra Website.

Controlling and Deleting Cookies

If you would like to change how a browser uses cookies, including blocking or deleting cookies from the JD Supra Website and Services you can do so by changing the settings in your web browser. To control cookies, most browsers allow you to either accept or reject all cookies, only accept certain types of cookies, or prompt you every time a site wishes to save a cookie. It's also easy to delete cookies that are already saved on your device by a browser.

The processes for controlling and deleting cookies vary depending on which browser you use. To find out how to do so with a particular browser, you can use your browser's "Help" function or alternatively, you can visit which explains, step-by-step, how to control and delete cookies in most browsers.

Updates to This Policy

We may update this cookie policy and our Privacy Policy from time-to-time, particularly as technology changes. You can always check this page for the latest version. We may also notify you of changes to our privacy policy by email.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about how we use cookies and other tracking technologies, please contact us at:

- hide

This website uses cookies to improve user experience, track anonymous site usage, store authorization tokens and permit sharing on social media networks. By continuing to browse this website you accept the use of cookies. Click here to read more about how we use cookies.