Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherBrowse by ChannelAbout the NetworkJoin the NetworkProductsSub-MenuProducts OverviewBlog ProBlog PlusBlog PremierMicrositeSyndication PortalsAbout UsContactSubscribeSupport
Book a Demo
Search
Close

SEC Says No to Shareholder Proposal, But Climate Disclosure Disputes Are Here to Stay

By Caitlin M. Ajax & Jane E. Montgomery on April 24, 2019
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Planet earth with cloudy sky

Earlier this month, the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance issued a no-action letter saying that ExxonMobil could exclude a shareholder proposal that called for the disclosure of specific greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions targets – specifically, targets that correspond with goals outlined in the Paris Climate Agreement.

The letter stated that there was “some basis” for Exxon’s view that the proposal could be excluded from the company’s proxy materials under the rule 14a-8(i)(7) exception for ordinary business operations. The letter also said that the request would “micromanage” the company by “seeking to impose specific methods for implementing complex policies in place of the ongoing judgments of management as overseen by its board of directors.”

A no-action letter is an agency response to a company’s request for clarity on whether the company’s decision to omit a shareholder proposal from its proxy materials would violate federal securities laws. If the Division of Corporation Finance grants a no-action request, it means the staff of the SEC will not recommend that the SEC take any enforcement action against the requesting company, based on the facts and representations in the company’s request. Conversely, a denial means that the company is more vulnerable to an enforcement action.

This particular proposal was preceded by the company’s 2019 Energy and Carbon Summary, in which Exxon said it supported the Paris Agreement, but failed to mention the series of climate lawsuits the company continues to face over failure to disclose risks to business posed by climate change, among other things. In its proposal, the shareholder proponents asked for more specific short-, medium-, and long-term GHG targets.

The SEC staff has recently granted similar relief to other companies, allowing them to exclude proposals seeking climate-specific information from their proxy materials. Just last month, the staff reached similar conclusions on shareholder proposals received by Devon Energy Corp. and Chevron Corp. also asking for information about GHG reduction targets. A trend seems to be emerging. If a proposal asks for information about specifics regarding a company’s policy on climate change, the SEC staff is more likely to find that it amounts to corporate “micromanagement.”

However, given the increasing concern about business costs associated with climate change and related catastrophic events, this is not likely the last time Exxon (or any other energy company) will see such a shareholder proposal. For years, energy companies have seen an uptick in shareholder requests for information on company actions related to climate change, such as carbon footprints, GHG reduction goals, and plans for achieving a zero carbon future. Also, many of these proposals are backed by investors with large assets. For example, the Exxon proposal discussed above was backed by investors with $9.5 trillion under management.

Companies should be aware that shareholders can still take advantage of the proxy season to demand that companies provide more information on how the company intends to comply with changing conditions and policies regarding climate change – albeit without as much specificity as shareholders would like perhaps.

Photo of Jane E. Montgomery Jane E. Montgomery

Jane brings an in-depth understanding of the dynamic legal landscape governing the use of air, water, and land. She has extensive experience representing energy companies, developers, lenders, and manufacturing companies in a broad range of environmental matters, and regularly counsels clients on day-to-day…

Jane brings an in-depth understanding of the dynamic legal landscape governing the use of air, water, and land. She has extensive experience representing energy companies, developers, lenders, and manufacturing companies in a broad range of environmental matters, and regularly counsels clients on day-to-day compliance issues.

Read more about Jane E. MontgomeryEmailJane's Linkedin Profile
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Energy, Environmental
  • Blog:
    Energy & Environmental Law Adviser
  • Organization:
    ArentFox Schiff LLP

LexBlog, Inc. logo
Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
Real Lawyers
99 Park Row
  • About LexBlog
  • Careers
  • Press
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Privacy Policy
  • Editorial Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Service
  • RSS Terms of Service
  • Products
  • Blog Pro
  • Blog Plus
  • Blog Premier
  • Microsite
  • Syndication Portals
  • LexBlog Community
  • Resource Center
  • 1-800-913-0988
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
  • Resource Center
  • Blogging 101

New to the Network

  • Tennessee Insurance Litigation Blog
  • Claims & Sustains
  • New Jersey Restraining Order Lawyers
  • New Jersey Gun Lawyers
  • Blog of Reason
Copyright © 2025, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo