The SEC today held an open meeting and voted, 3-2, to approve the issuance of proposed rules to implement the internal pay ratio disclosure requirement in Section 953(b) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”). SEC Chair Mary Jo White and Commissioners Kara Stein and Luis Aguilar voted to propose the rules and Commissioners Daniel Gallagher and Michael Piwowar dissented. Statements made by the Commissioners today regarding the proposal are on the SEC website and available here. The comment period for the SEC’s proposed rules will be 60 days after the proposing release is published in the Federal Register; the proposing release is on the SEC website and available here.
Executive Compensation
NYSE Amends Rule on Matters Requiring Shareholder Approval Under NYSE Rules
The New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) recently amended its rules to eliminate the quorum requirement that previously applied to proposals that require shareholder approval under NYSE rules. This rule change became effective July 11, 2013.
Guidance on Compensation Committees’ Assessment of Adviser Independence
As discussed in our April 26, 2013 posting on the Gibson Dunn Securities Regulation and Corporate Governance Monitor, under recently amended NYSE Rule 303A.05 and NASDAQ Rule 5605(d), board compensation committees cannot select or receive advice from a compensation consultant, legal counsel or other adviser without first taking into consideration that adviser’s independence, including consideration of the factors enumerated in the rules. As compensation committees and their advisers are preparing for the July 1 effective date of these new listing standards, three observations are important:
July 1, 2013 Deadline Approaches for Updates to Compensation Committee Charters
By July 1, 2013, companies listed on the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) and NASDAQ Stock Market (“NASDAQ”) must comply with new listing standards relating to compensation committees and their responsibilities and authority with respect to outside advisers. In view of the upcoming deadline, listed companies should review and update their compensation committee charters to provide the committee with these responsibilities and authority. In addition, compensation committees will need to assess the independence of their advisers in the coming months so they can receive advice from them after July 1.
Court Holds that Nonconvertible Securities with Different Voting Rights Not Matchable under Section 16(b)
Last week, in Gibbons v. Malone, the Second Circuit affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of a shareholder suit brought under Section 16(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 against a former director of Discovery Communications, Inc. Also known as the short swing profit rule, Section 16(b) provides for the disgorgement of any profits earned from the purchase and sale, or sale and purchase, by a corporate insider, of any equity security within a six-month period. In Gibbons, the corporate insider sold Series C common stock, which had no voting rights, and purchased Series A common stock which had voting rights, within a six-month period. The three-judge panel held that absent SEC guidance, the purchase and sale of different types of stock in the same company, where those securities are separately traded, nonconvertible, and come with different voting rights cannot be matched, and therefore do not trigger the short swing profit rule.
ISS Offers Companies Opportunity to Update Peer Group Information; Action Required by December 21, 2012
As part of its 2013 Policy Updates, ISS is revising its methodology for determining the peer group used to perform its quantitative pay-for-performance evaluation. In determining a company’s peer group, ISS’s new methodology will incorporate information from companies’ self-selected pay comparison peer groups, as disclosed in the proxy statement. ISS recognizes that some companies may have modified their peer groups since their most recent disclosure or may intend to do so in the preparation of their 2013 proxy statements.
Glass Lewis Implements Changes to its Voting Analysis Model
GLass Lewis & Co. has announced that, effective for annual meetings taking place after July 1, 2012, it has implemented a number of revisions to its proprietary pay for performance quantitative model. Glass Lewis uses the quantitative model to analyze the degree of alignment between corporate performance and named executive officer compensation. When making voting recommendations to its subscribers on say-on-pay proposals, Glass Lewis analyzes both the quantitative analysis and a qualitative analysis of the company’s named executive officer compensation program.
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Adopts Rules Implementing Dodd-Frank Requirements for Listing Standards Applicable to Compensation Committees
The SEC today adopted rules to implement Section 952 of the Dodd-Frank Act, requiring stock exchanges to adopt listing standards that:
- impose independence requirements on compensation committee members,
- authorize compensation committees to retain independent advisers, and
- require compensation committees to assess the independence of any consultant, legal counsel or other adviser that provides advice to the compensation committee, other than in-house counsel.
Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act Changes the Public and Private Capital Markets Landscape
On March 27, 2012, the House passed the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act (“JOBS Act”), as amended and passed by the Senate on March 22. It is widely anticipated that President Obama will quickly sign the JOBS Act into law.
Survey of Responses to Say-on-Pay Advisory Votes from Recently Filed Proxy Statements
We have been monitoring proxy statement disclosures made by S&P 500 companies pursuant to Item 402(b)(1)(vii) of Regulation S-K. That provision, which was added as part of the SEC’s say-on-pay rules, requires companies to discuss in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis (CD&A), “[w]hether and, if so, how the registrant has considered the results of the most recent shareholder advisory vote on executive compensation . . . in determining compensation policies and decisions and, if so, how that consideration has affected the registrant’s executive compensation decisions and policies.”