From Lynn Jokela at TheCorporateCounsel.net:
John blogged last December about a provision in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 restricting the SEC from finalizing a rule requiring company political spending disclosures. So as much as it could be a while before the SEC could take action relating to company political spending, Congress has shown interest in allowing it to happen.
First, H.R. 1, the For the People Act has not only been introduced in the House, but it also passed. The bill would require additional disclosure of campaign-related fundraising and spending. The Shareholder Protection Act of 2021, which has been introduced in the Senate, takes things a bit further.
The Senate bill, would among other things, require political spending disclosure and prohibit company political spending unless it has been approved by shareholders. Cydney Posner, in this Cooley blog, runs through some of the bill’s other requirements, which include penalties for officers or directors who authorize any political contribution expenditures without shareholder approval.
Members of the Commission have also expressed interest in the topic. Although a lot of commentary about SEC interest in ESG disclosures centers on climate risk, another topic Acting Chair Lee addressed in a speech last week was political spending disclosure. In her speech, Acting Chair Lee said political spending disclosure deserves attention and that it’s “inextricably linked to ESG issues.”
As a potential sign the Commission wants to take action in this area, some may have read commentary that Gary Gensler, the nominee for SEC Chair, and Commissioner Caroline Crenshaw each voiced interest too. Back in early March at his Senate confirmation hearing to serve as SEC Chair, Gary Gensler expressed support for the SEC to consider company political spending disclosures.
It's important to remember that political spending disclosure is NOT about investor protection or informing shareholders. It is pure partisan politics designed by Democrats to defund Republicans and conservatives.
This has been a frequent topic here at PB.com:
Democrats revive effort to force disclosure of corporate political spending
There is no doubt that efforts to force disclosure of corporate political campaign contributions is blatantly partisan. ...
I suggest reading my post Saul Alinsky comes to the annual shareholder meeting: Politicized shareholder activists carrying Democratic water
The politics of political spending disclosure
Why do Senators, particularly Democratic Senators, care so much about this one issue that they would stymie a Democratic President over it? Forget all the bogus arguments about whether corporations are people, or whether money is speech, etc. The basic fact about political spending is this: incumbent politicians want to control it.
Warren Buffett & Berkshire Hathaway oppose shareholder proposal on political spending disclosures
Contrary to the claims of shareholder activists, political spending disclosure can harm companies in a variety of ways. Or so says the sage of Omaha.
Corporate political spending gets even more partisan
Just to drive the point home: "the evidence does not support requiring public companies to disclose political spending."
Wall Street Journal Smashes Arguments for Corporate Political Spending Disclosure
... the WSJ exposes the political agenda behind those who would mandate corporate disclosure of campaign contributions and other political spending and smashes their arguments.
