Skip to content

12 July, 2025

  • Saved Articles
  • My Account
  • Subscribe
  • Log In
  • Log Out

Board Agenda

  • Governance
  • Strategy
  • Risk
  • Ethics
  • News
  • Insight
    • Categories

      • View all
      • Governance
      • Strategy
      • Risk
      • Ethics
      • Board Expertise
      • finance
      • Technology
    • EU sustainability

      Omnibus package must not undermine EU sustainability

      Now is the time for Europe to speed up green transition, rather than slow it...

    • high pay

      Pay gap transparency needs to be better

      It’s not unknown for a CEO to earn 500 times as much the median employee,...

    • executive pay

      Executive pay trends in 2025

      Opposition to remuneration reports has grown sharply, according to Georgeson’s analysis of voting outcomes in...

  • Comment
      • View all
    • EU sustainability

      Omnibus package must not undermine EU sustainability

      Now is the time for Europe to speed up green transition, rather than slow it...

    • high pay Pay gap transparency needs to be better

      It’s not unknown for a CEO to earn 500 times as much the median employee,...

    • future-proof governance levers How to future-proof your business

      For boards to bolster resilience and create value in a polycrisis, a combination of hard...

  • Interviews
      • View All Interviews
      • Podcasts
      • Webinars
    • UK Corporate Governance Code Board meetings ‘are not up to scratch’

      Nearly three-quarters of board members believe the board’s performance in meetings needs improvement, an expert...

    • financial sanctions Tariffs chaos drives boardroom focus on resilience

      Business leaders will prioritise the resilience of their organisations in the face of economic upheaval...

    • supply chain oversight Act now on supply chain oversight, boards warned

      Board directors need to critically engage with the business’s supply chain activity, a panel of...

  • Board Careers
  • Resource Centre
      • White Paper Downloads
      • Book Reviews
      • Board Advisory & Corporate Services
    • C-suite barometer: outlook 2025 – UK insights

      Forvis Mazars draws UK insights from its global study and looks at UK executives’ strategic...

    • Talent Management 2025 Mind Gym

      Talent Management in 2025

      From rethinking leadership to wrestling with AI, MindGym's report reveals the trends shaping talent strategies...

    • Korn Ferry CHRO 2025 (Copy)

      On The Highwire: Being a CHRO in 2025

      Korn Ferry surveyed 750 senior HR leaders (including 450 CHROs) to understand their key priorities...

  • Events
  • Search by topic
    • Governance
    • Strategy
    • Risk
    • Ethics
    • Regulation
    • ESG
    • Investor Relations
    • Careers
    • Board Expertise
    • finance
    • Technology

ISS launches lawsuit against the SEC over proxy adviser guidelines

by Gavin Hinks on November 1, 2019

The proxy advisory firm has asked that new regulatory demands be set aside, claiming the watchdog “lacks authority” and its actions are “contrary to law”.

SEC seal

Image: Mark Van Scyoc/ Shutterstock.com

A battle in the US over corporate governance advice provided by proxy advisers has reached a new twist with one of the market’s most prominent players, Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS), launching a lawsuit against the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the country’s most high-profile financial watchdog.

The lawsuit demands that guidance delivered by the SEC in August that would impose tough new regulatory demands on proxies be “set aside” because the watchdog “lacks authority” and its actions are “contrary to law”.

The guidance came at the end of a long-running campaign to bring proxy advisers under closer scrutiny and curtail their influence. Opponents have argued that advisers such as ISS and Glass Lewis are unaccountable for their advice and wield too much power over corporate boards.

The SEC took action in August, publishing the guidance in the Federal Register, the official journal of US government law-making.

According to Gary Retelny, ISS president and chief executive, the new guidance could block proxy advisers from providing their services and stymie their freedom of speech.

“We believe litigation to be necessary to prevent the chill of proxy advisers’ protected speech and to ensure the timeliness and independence of the advice that shareholders rely on to make decisions with regards to the governance of their publicly traded portfolio companies,” Retelny said in a statement.

Conflicts of interest

Shareholders with large portfolios have come to rely on the voting advice of proxies when it comes to annual general meeting season in the US and elsewhere around the world. However, critics claim proxy advisers are not properly regulated and suffer from conflicts of interest—proxies sell voting advice to investors and consultancy services to investee companies.

One frequently cited anonymous source describes the battle over proxies as a “civil war of capitalism that’s playing out behind the scenes”.

The SEC summer guidance, known as the Proxy Adviser Release, said proxies were regulated not only by the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, but the little known Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Applying the Exchange Act would effectively assume “advice” given by proxies was, in effect, “proxy solicitation”—the process of campaigning for voting support on a given issue or objective.

ISS argues the SEC cannot do this. Its lawsuit insists the SEC “exceeds” its authority because advice cannot be solicitation.

“Whereas a proxy adviser offers independent advice and research to its clients about how to vote their shares based on the proxy voting policy guidelines selected by the client, a person who ‘solicits’ proxies urges shareholders to vote a certain way in order to achieve a specific outcomes in a shareholder vote,” the lawsuit says.

Next, ISS argues the SEC simply hasn’t followed the correct procedure for introducing new regulation.

Thirdly, ISS says the SEC contradicts itself. The guidance, “marks a significant change in the regulatory regime” that applies to proxy advice. However, the lawsuit claims the watchdog denies that it has changed its position in any way.

The lawsuit says: “The SEC lacks the authority to regulate proxy advice as though it were a solicitation, and its holding otherwise in the Proxy Adviser Release is contrary to law.”

A larger debate

The SEC has received support for its guidance. In August Tom Quaadman of the US Chamber of Commerce praised the watchdog, saying the reforms would help arrest the decline in the number of companies listing on public markets and boost US competitiveness in the global economy.

“For too long proxy advisory firms have exploited current SEC regulation to overwhelm public companies with voting recommendations that investors have no interest in advancing as part of the annual shareholder voting process,” Quaadman said.

He added: “Proxy advisers have been riddled with conflicts of interest, failed to link advice with economic return, or company specific information, and lack process and transparency.”

Others have also concluded that complaints about proxies cannot be easily dismissed. In a paper written for the American Council for Capital Formation, a think tank, corporate governance lawyer Frank Placenti says policymakers should consider new measures that could ensure “undue reliance” is not placed on proxy advisers; that institutional investors make “fully-formed voting decisions” and have more transparency on how votes are cast on a “default basis”; and that public companies have “reasonable opportunity” to respond to proxy adviser analysis.

The clash over proxies is, however, part of a larger debate in the US over the nature of capitalism and the conduct of companies.

Indeed, candidates for the Democratic nomination for the 2020 US presidential elections have placed governance at the heart of their policies.

Elizabeth Warren has proposed a whole slate of law, the Accountable Capitalism Act, in which she calls for employees on boards and for companies to seek a “federal charter” to operate. Charter companies must pledge to “consider the interests of all corporate stakeholders, including employees, customers, shareholders and the communities in which the company has operations”.

Elsewhere, Bernie Sanders has proposed new legislation that would tie share buybacks to improved pay and benefits for workers.

A new regime in the White House next year might see radical changes to governance in the US. ISS, however, has chosen to take the battle to the courts now. The conflict over US corporate governance is set to continue for some time to come.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • LinkedIn
  • Mail

Related Posts

  • ISS strikes back at ESG critics
    June 15, 2023
    ISS ESG

    The global proxy advisory firm takes to task politicians who would block the use of ESG factors when making investment decisions.

  • Proxy advisers hold less sway over AGM votes than thought
    June 16, 2023
    AGM season 2022

    But shareholder revolts are more likely when both ISS and Glass Lewis make the same voting recommendation, finds FRC research.

  • Regulator to review impact of ESG ratings on firms
    July 11, 2022
    impact of ESG ratings

    The FRC has commissioned a review to investigate how ESG ratings agencies and proxy advisers affect investment decisions.

  • ISS announces 2023 updates to proxy voting guidelines
    December 1, 2022
    ISS proxy guidance

    The ISS policy updates, applicable to shareholder meetings on or after 1 February, increase focus on executive pay and board accountability.

Search


Follow Us

Register Free

Stay in the know! Register to access the latest governance news; plus receive updates about our events and podcasts – Sign up here

 

Most Popular

Featured Resources

wef global risks 2025

The Global Risks Report 2025

The 20th edition of the Global Risks Report reveals an increasingly fractured global...
Supply chain management cover

Strategic Oversight in Supply Chain Management: A Guide for Corporate Boards 2025

Supply chains have become complex, interdependent and opaque and—according to research...
OB-Cyber-Security

Cyber Security: What Boards Need to Know

Maintaining firewalls, protecting servers and filtering malicious emails rarely make...

The IA’S Principles Of Remuneration 2024 2025

This guidance from the Investment Association is aimed at assisting remuneration...
Diligent 2024 leadership tech cover

Leadership, decision-making & the role of technology: Business survey 2024

This research report by Board Agenda and Diligent sheds light on how board directors...

Director Reference Guide: Navigating Conflict in the Boardroom

The 'Director Reference Guide' on navigating conflict in the boardroom provides practical...
Nasdaq 2024 governance report cover

Nasdaq 2024 Global Governance Pulse

This Nasdaq survey gathered data from more than 870 board members, executives, and...

Becoming a non-executive director (4th edition)

Board composition is the subject of much debate, while the role of the non-executive...
art & science brainloop new cover

The Art & Science of Creating an Effective Board

Boards are coming under more scrutiny and pressure than ever before from regulators,...
SAA First time NED guide

First Time Guide for Non-Executive Directors

The role of the non-executive director has never been more vital: to advise, support,...

Register Free

Stay in the know! Register to access the latest governance news; plus receive updates about our events and podcasts. Register


  • Editors & Contributors
  • Editorial Advisory Board
  • Board Advisory & Corporate Services
  • Media Marketing Solutions
  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Board Director Network
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookies
|

Copyright © 2025 Questor Media Group Ltd.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Sitemap