On September 16, 2026, the SEC proposed a package of amendments intended to modernize the federal proxy solicitation rules. The proposal targets several paper-era or otherwise outdated requirements whose original rationale has largely been displaced by EDGAR, electronic communication and other changes in market practice, and would simplify annual meeting and proxy production and create flexibility in transaction and meeting calendars. As Commissioner Mark Uyeda stated, “Eliminating duplicative or outdated requirements reduces unnecessary compliance costs for issuers and intermediaries.”
Continue Reading SEC Proposes to Modernize Proxy Solicitation Rules
SEC Proposes to Rescind Rule 14a-8 and Amend Rule 14a-4: What This Means for Issuers
On September 16, 2026, the SEC issued its much-anticipated proposal to rescind Rule 14a-8 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act), the shareholder proposal rule, in its entirety. If adopted, the proposal would eliminate the federal framework governing when an issuer must include a shareholder proposal in its proxy materials. Instead, state law and, where permitted by state law, an issuer’s governing documents would determine whether and when shareholder proposals must be included.
Continue Reading SEC Proposes to Rescind Rule 14a-8 and Amend Rule 14a-4: What This Means for IssuersSEC Further Modifies Its Rule 14a-8 Response Process
On August 14, 2026, the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance updated its statement on how it handles Rule 14a-8 shareholder proposals. The Division will now stop responding to shareholder proposal related no-action requests of any kind, and it will no longer issue “no-objection” letters in response to a company’s representation that it has a reasonable basis to exclude. The change is effective immediately and extends the modified process the Division rolled out last November, which we covered here.
Continue Reading SEC Further Modifies Its Rule 14a-8 Response ProcessInsights from the 2026 ISS STOXX Governance Annual Global Survey
On July 21, 2026, ISS STOXX Governance (ISS) opened its Annual Global Benchmark Policy Survey (the Survey), which it uses to inform its annual policy development process. This year, the Survey covers a wide range of topics under the headings of board elections, shareholder rights, compensation, audit & auditors, and environmental & social topics. The Survey closed last Friday and we expect the results will be published in the next month or so. Below are a few notable questions and themes for U.S. companies in the Survey, which give us a glimpse into potential changes to ISS’s voting guidelines for the 2027 proxy season.
Continue Reading Insights from the 2026 ISS STOXX Governance Annual Global SurveySEC Proposes E-Delivery as the New Default for Proxy Materials and Other Disclosures
On July 16, 2026, the SEC proposed Regulation E-Delivery, which would allow companies to make electronic delivery the default option on a go-forward basis for satisfying delivery obligations under the federal securities laws, including for proxy materials, so long as the recipient has provided an electronic address. Today the presumption runs the other way: delivery is on paper unless the recipient opts in to e-delivery. The proposal would flip that presumption, subject to conditions, while preserving each recipient’s right to opt out and receive paper for free.
Continue Reading SEC Proposes E-Delivery as the New Default for Proxy Materials and Other DisclosuresSEC Proposes to Rescind Its Climate Disclosure Rules
On May 29, 2026, the SEC formally proposed to rescind its 2024 climate disclosure rules in full. The Commission adopted those rules on March 6, 2024, and they would have reached nearly every public company, mandating detailed disclosure about greenhouse gas emissions, the management of climate-related risks, and the financial statement effects of severe weather events. But the rules never took effect. Soon after the SEC adopted them, legal challenges arose that have put them on hold ever since.
Continue Reading SEC Proposes to Rescind Its Climate Disclosure RulesSEC Officer Definitions: A Quick Reference
Federal securities law does not use a single, uniform definition of “officer.” Instead, several overlapping definitions determine who qualifies as an officer for different regulatory purposes, each carrying its own set of individual-specific disclosure consequences. For public companies and their counsel, correctly classifying officers across these frameworks is essential to ensuring compliance with SEC filing requirements. Additionally, for prospective officers themselves, understanding how these definitions apply is critical to appreciating the scope of personal information that will become publicly available upon assuming their roles.
Continue Reading SEC Officer Definitions: A Quick ReferenceRule 14a-8 Litigation Update: District Courts Weigh in on Shareholder Proposal Exclusions
Three federal district courts have issued the first substantive Rule 14a-8 rulings of the season with mixed results: two courts denied shareholder requests for injunctive relief, and one granted relief subject to a $20,000 bond. As a practical matter, two companies will file their 2026 proxies without the challenged proposals, while the third will include the proposal. None of the three, however, is a final merits decision; each reflects a court’s likelihood-of-success forecast, not a definitive ruling on excludability. Notably, all three decisions turned on Rule 14a-8(i)(7), the “ordinary business” basis, described by one court as a “perplexing” issue and by two courts as the “most perplexing” substantive exclusion ground. This alert walks through what the courts said, what they did not say, and what the rulings suggest for issuers still navigating exclusion decisions.
Continue Reading Rule 14a-8 Litigation Update: District Courts Weigh in on Shareholder Proposal ExclusionsSEC No-Action Relief Offers a Roadmap for Foreign-Incorporated Companies Caught Between Home-Country Law and U.S. Proxy Rules
On April 8, 2026, the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance issued a no-action letter addressing a structural conflict that arises for companies incorporated in the Netherlands, listed on a U.S. exchange, but without foreign private issuer (FPI) status, leaving them fully subject to U.S. domestic proxy rules under Regulation 14A. The conflict stems from a timing mismatch: Dutch law fixes the record date at 28 days before a shareholder meeting, while Rule 14a-16(a) requires distributing the Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials at least 40 calendar days out. A company could technically satisfy U.S. proxy rules by abandoning notice and access and instead mailing full printed sets of proxy materials, but for a company with a large, dispersed shareholder base, that approach is far more expensive and impractical. The Division of Corporation Finance granted relief so long as the company (i) files its definitive proxy statement and annual report with the SEC and posts them on its website at least 40 days before the meeting; (ii) issues a press release announcing the availability of materials, the planned notice distribution date, and how shareholders can request paper copies; and (iii) distributes notice cards within five business days after the record date. This framework for conditioned relief mirrors the framework that the Division of Corporation Finance applied in a substantially similar no-action letter to another Dutch-incorporated, U.S.-listed company without FPI status in April 2025. These letters continue a pattern of Division relief addressing home-country/U.S. proxy rule conflicts. In a January 2014 no-action letter, the Division of Corporation Finance granted no-action relief to a Curaçao-incorporated, U.S.-listed company without FPI status that permitted the company to bypass the preliminary proxy filing requirement under Rule 14a-6(a) for routine shareholder votes that Curaçao law mandated.
Continue Reading SEC No-Action Relief Offers a Roadmap for Foreign-Incorporated Companies Caught Between Home-Country Law and U.S. Proxy RulesCybersecurity in the Age of Cyber Warfare: Governance Reminders for Public Company Boards
Just a few days ago, a state-linked hacking group claimed responsibility for a disruptive cyberattack on a Fortune 500 medical technology company with no ransom demand and no negotiation, calling it retaliation for a U.S. military strike. The risk of this type of politically-motivated cyberattack may increase given the increasingly volatile geopolitical environment. To combat this, the President recently signed an executive order targeting cybercrime carried out by transnational criminal organizations, aimed at improving federal coordination in combatting cybercrime. Now is an important time for boards and management teams to focus on crisis and risk management, including durable operational resilience planning. This alert provides perspectives about current best practices on incident preparedness in the face of such threats, explains how this preparedness can be supplemented by an operational resilience framework, discusses the practical implications of the executive order, and lays out a governance hygiene checklist to guide your next cybersecurity oversight discussion.
Continue Reading Cybersecurity in the Age of Cyber Warfare: Governance Reminders for Public Company Boards