Archive for the ‘Regulatory reform & SEC issues’ Category

More scary Washington stuff

June 10, 2009

Harvey Pitt, who was chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission early in the Bush Administration, said Tuesday on a panel at the National Investor Relations Institute 2009 Annual Conference in South Florida:

Sarbanes Oxley was just the tip of the iceberg. We are federalizing the law of corporations. Companies that don’t get that are going to be left behind.

Pitt, now CEO of Kalorama Partners (a Washington-based consulting firm on business and government issues), said Congress and the SEC under the Obama Administration are dramatically changing the regulatory landscape for companies.

For example, shareholder proxy rights and board of director relationships to companies have traditionally been governed by state corporation laws but Congress now is likely to pass new laws on both, Pitt said. The “emotional and moral outrage” on extravagant compensation by companies getting federal aid also will lead to legislation – and it won’t be limited to bailout beneficiaries – he said.

Unfortunately, Congress when it legislates tends to wait for a thalidomide case – and we clearly qualify for that now [with the financial crisis] – and then tends to over-legislate.

Pitt’s advice: Public companies and boards should proactively address executive pay policy to bar large packages when companies are failing, “shareholder democracy” issues such as access to make proxy proposals, and other governance matters.

DC to IR: “Here we come”

June 8, 2009

NIRI09 advocacy panelPublic companies will face tougher laws and increasing regulatory scrutiny from Washington in the coming year, warns Jeff Morgan, president and CEO of the National Investor Relations Institute (NIRI).

In a panel on advocacy at the NIRI 2009 Annual Conference today, Morgan said the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is pursuing three priorities for 2009:

  1. Enforcement of existing rules such as Regulation FD
  2. Investor protection & corporate governance
  3. Transparency of financial markets & products

“The landscape is changing and will continue to change … It’s a whole new world,” Morgan said. With the change agenda of the Obama Administration influencing all areas of regulation, companies should evaluate their IR practices with care – and join in advocating for balanced, sensible policies - he said.

From the SEC, Morgan said, we can expect to see enforcement cases in the next year centered on Regulation FD issues of selective vs. broad disclosure.

“We’ve been in an environment where we’ve never seen a lot of Reg FD cases come against companies,” Morgan said. The rapid growth of social media poses a challenge to traditional controls on corporate disclosures, he noted. “If we start to see [Reg FD enforcement actions], I think it’s going to cause all of us in a corporate environment to be asking how do we manage that better.”

Change is coming in the proxy area, too. Both the SEC “proxy access” proposal and elimination of broker voting for passive shares are likely to give more power to activist shareholders and pose challenges for companies, he said.

Morgan said the SEC also is looking at requiring enhanced disclosures on board of directors’ leadership approach, board nominations, compensation philosophy and practices, and perhaps nonfinancial factors such as climate-change impacts.

Transparency has been a theme for President Obama from the start. As the idea takes shape in legislation and new regulations, it may benefit IR people looking for more insight into hedge funds and less-regulated areas of the investment markets, but it will mean more demands on public companies, too, Morgan said.

“Corporate transparency is big on Congress’s agenda,” the NIRI president said.

So DC is saying to IR, “Here we come!” And I would add, “Watch out!”

Gag rule for bankers

April 10, 2009

Well, so much for transparency and all that. Now it seems the Federal Reserve is telling 19 of the nation’s largest banks not to disclose how they’ve done on the Obama administration’s vaunted “stress tests” (read AP story or Bloomberg).

With earnings season and conference calls upon us, bank CEOs and CFOs might face questions from investors: Does the government think you’re going to survive – or not? Does a rigorous look by regulators show the bank is healthy, or heading back to the Bailout Window?

Mum’s the word, the Fed decrees. Only the government is allowed to disclose the outcome of the stress tests – which it is supposed to do by the end of April.

As AP tells it, the Fed is protecting weak banks against panic if executives of the healthy institutions let the cat out of the bag:

The order was the latest in a series of government moves designed to keep good news about strong banks from dooming others to a downward spiral of falling share prices and financial weakness. If banks receiving the highest marks trumpet their results, the fear is investors might push down share prices of those companies that make no such announcements.

After Wells Fargo surprised investors with good earnings on Thursday, CFO Howard Atkins declined to talk about the government’s tests. “We haven’t commented on regulatory matters and we won’t start now,” Atkins said [to Bloomberg]. “We don’t comment on the process.”

The gag rule seems a little Orwellian coming from folks who champion “transparency.” For those of us brought up on efficient markets, open disclosure and so on, it’s an ethical imperative to tell investors about material information in a timely way.

But, then, if the government is going to control the big banks, the big banks are going to be – well, controlled by the government. Sssshhhhhh!

Get ready for new regulation

April 6, 2009

Wondering what new wave of regulation is coming our way? Chairman Mary Schapiro of the Securities and Exchange Commission today offered an outline in a speech to the Council of Institutional Investors.

Schapiro’s agenda for the SEC in 2009 includes proposals for new disclosure requirements, proxy and compensation changes, and other ideas that investor relations teams will want to watch closely.

The initiatives will focus on strengthening the hand of shareholders in electing boards of directors and holding them accountable:

  • In May, the SEC will consider a proxy access regulation to ensure that shareholders “have a meaningful opportunity to nominate directors.” Details to come, but one option was considered before. As MarketWatch reports: “A similar approach was introduced by ex-SEC Chairman William Donaldson in 2003, however it was never approved. Labor-backed investors and activist hedge funds have pushed for the authority; however corporations have opposed it arguing that investors with special interests such as labor unions would push their agenda at the expense of the company’s effort to improve share-value.”
  • The SEC will consider requiring more disclosure on board nominees – data on a candidate’s experience, qualifications and skills, beyond the current brief description of recent experience.
  • The Commission may require boards to disclose reasons for using a particular leadership structure — such as an independent chair, non-independent chair, or combined CEO and chairmanship.
  • Schapiro will seek more compensation disclosure, such as how executive pay drives management’s behavior, including risk-taking. She also wants companies to explain their overall comp approach, beyond highest-paid officers, and reveal consultants’ conflicts of interest.
  • In risk management, the chairman has asked the staff to develop a proposal “that looks to providing investors, and the market, with better insight into how each company and each board addresses these vital tasks.”

In addition, the SEC tomorrow will consider alternatives for limiting short selling – a thorn in the financial side for some companies and IR teams.

The devil is always in the details, and regulatory expansions can be especially devilish when they spring from political outcry. The media are describing the public’s current attitude, especially in Washington, as a “rage” brought on by bear-market investor losses and corporate scandals.

No doubt, securities lawyers will continue to have plenty of work ahead. IR practitioners should keep an eye on the SEC to prepare for what’s coming.

Monday, Monday …

March 30, 2009

I guess we learned a couple of things in Monday’s market:

  • Rallies don’t go on forever, especially amid negative business fundamentals (say, two of the Big Three teetering on the brink).
  • Attention CEOs: President Obama is an activist shareholder, and if you take the government’s money you should know who’s in charge.
  • Economic and industrial policy is unhinged from philosophical principles (this happened in the last administration), and global policy actions seem likely to continue in ad hoc reactive mode.

Those of us laboring in the investor relations trenches can continue to expect, shall we say, a fluid market environment. Stability and comfort aren’t in the macro picture  for the foreseeable future.

Regulation Redux – a risk for 2009

January 26, 2009

As Congress and the new President grapple with the economic crisis, one outcome seems certain: re-regulation of US businesses.

Regulation Redux is at hand, and investor relations people need to think about how to discuss changing regulatory risks with shareholders. No doubt, upcoming 10-Ks should address the surge in regulatory activism. CEOs should be prepared to speak plainly about the evolving environment.

With the economic cycle causing pain on a massive scale – what folks in Washington call “market failure” – politicians are in full fix-it mode. At his inauguration, President Obama voiced confidence in steering government and skepticism about leaving business to its own devices:

The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works … Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched, but this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control …

I think it’s fair to say the opposite of out of control is under control. The administration and Congress are looking at many sectors to bring under control. Some examples:

  • Banking. Many of America’s banks have a new shareholder in Uncle Sam. And just as Carl Icahn may have a few ideas for management when he buys into your company, it’s a cinch that Barney Franks, Tim Geithner and others are going to start writing new rules for banks. Attacking executive pay and cutting dividends to a cent is just the start.
  • Autos. Different bailout, same basic deal. Accepting the big bucks means making adjustments to satisfy the folks who sign the checks. Today’s announcement that Obama’s EPA may encourage stricter limits on greenhouse gases from cars and trucks points the way. My guess is the auto bailout will usher in policies that perpetuate the US industry’s uneconomical cost structure and subsidize politically correct cars.
  • Healthcare. Reform, a popular campaign promise in ’08, will be very expensive if it means universal coverage. Amid many fiscal demands, the low-hanging fruit of healthcare reform in ’09 may be regulations aimed at cutting costs to consumers. We might expect, say, tougher federal negotiation on drug prices and genericization of biotech drugs. Or maybe new rules to assure “fairness” in health insurance.
  • Securities markets. Amid the rush for bailouts, giant investment banks have accepted a tighter regulatory regime by converting to commercial banks. Next on the agenda is an effort to fix what many see as the SEC’s failure to prevent the meltdown of 401(k)s, implosion of Wall Street and notorious frauds exposed by the bear market. Even the Republicans last year proposed a major expansion of regulatory powers, revamping the SEC and perhaps the CFTC and Federal Reserve. A couple of likely regulatory targets: derivatives and hedge funds.
  • Labor. The Employee Free Choice Act, endorsed by Obama, would change the rules for achieving union representation. If the law is enacted, labor will be able to organize workers by soliciting signatures on cards rather than submitting to secret-ballot elections. The likelihood poses a risk to companies in healthcare, manufacturing, retailing and other services.
  • Energy and environment. Companies that are heavy energy users or impact the environment are accustomed to disclosure of risks on those issues. Legislative and regulatory changes will be on the watch list.
  • Taxes. A weak economy puts tax increases on the back burner and tax cuts, even for business, front and center. But there is tension between a desire for stimulus and an impulse to take away business “breaks.” Risks remain, amid soaring deficits, that efforts to capture more revenue may come at the expense of investors or unpopular industries.

Obviously, I’m no expert in policy challenges for specific industries. But I do know IR people need to talk to our companies’ experts about Washington and what may be coming our way.

Feel free to offer your own comments on regulatory risks and how we should discuss them with investors. (Comments can be anonymous.)

© Copyright 2009 Johnson Strategic Communications Inc.

Is the CEO’s health fair game?

January 22, 2009

A report today that the Securities and Exchange Commission is investigating whether Apple Inc. disclosed ample information on the health of its CEO, Steve Jobs, leaves me feeling a little uneasy.

Is a chief executive’s health private? Public? A matter to be probed and exposed to unseemly scrutiny by investors and the press?

I guess we already know the reality: People will talk. As The Wall Street Journal noted in its Page 1 story today:

Questions about the health of the 53-year-old Mr. Jobs have hung over Apple for the past year since he began exhibiting noticeable weight loss, but the company and CEO have been reluctant to provide information and have said Mr. Jobs’s health is a private matter. Some investors and analysts have criticized the disclosures as inadequate, saying among other things that Mr. Jobs’s reference to a “hormone imbalance” was too general.

The news that Jobs would take a six-month leave for health reasons led to a 7% drop in after-hours trading, though AAPL bounced big-time today (did we mention sales and earnings were up?).

Certainly shareholders care. The CEO’s ability to continue managing has to be considered material - especially for a rock star whose personal brand is synonymous with the company’s success. One pundit said, “He is Apple.”

Reluctantly, I come down on the side of disclosing health problems that interrupt a CEO’s active engagement in managing. But the market doesn’t need medical details – only the facts of his involvement in the business.

Now, can we leave the man alone to get treatment and – we hope – conquer his health issues?

Coming our way from Washington

November 18, 2008

Broc Romanek, editor of TheCorporateCounsel.net and a platoon of specialized blogs, websites and print newsletters, shared rapid-fire ideas on what’s coming our way from Washington, and the new media, today at a joint meeting of the Kansas City chapters of NIRI and the Society of Corporate Secretaries and Governance Professionals.

I won’t try to capture it all, but here are a few ideas Broc offered the corporate legal beagles and investor relations folks in Kansas City:

  • The direction of the SEC could shift dramatically when President-elect Obama names a new chairman to the regulatory agency – perhaps a shareholder advocate rather than a Wall Street titan.
  • The “say on pay” bill, which Obama supported last year in the Senate and the House passed, will likely be enacted in 2009 … “a 98% chance.”
  • Public companies (and lawyers) need to get on board with new media technologies because investors and other people are getting their information online. The SEC guidance on website use for disclosure, though vague, gives momentum to more IR communication via the Web.
  • In 2008-09, we’re in a time of experimentation with wildly diverse interactive technologies. Many companies are trying new things: blogs, video annubroc-romanek-11-18-08-niri-kcal reports, Twitter, e-forums, e-proxy. My take is that the value of various tactics will only be known cumulatively, over time. But that’s a reason to think strategically, not bury our heads in the sand.
  • We need to deploy new metrics to evaluate how Investor Relations is performing – e.g., search engine optimization and website analytics to see if we’re reaching our audiences. “Websites are every bit as important as your physical place of business,” says Broc.
  • Shareholder activists and critics are adopting new media to great effect. Being able to respond rapidly and effectively, let’s say in a proxy fight waged online, will depend on IR and Legal being up to speed and engaged in the online communication scene.

Just a sample. Broc was provocative, entertaining and challenging to the conventional ways of thinking about investor communication. Thanks for coming to KC, Broc.

When the boss is called to testify

October 27, 2008

If you’re doing investor relations for a Wall Street firm, oil company or some other used-to-be-obscenely-profitable-but-now-seeking-a-bailout enterprise, your CEO may be called before a congressional committee.

Pass him a link to “Six Traps for a Designated Villain in Washington,” Oct. 27 in The New York Times’ DealBook. It won’t help, but it’s a good chuckle, at least for the public-humiliation genre.

Citing the performance by Lehman Brothers CEO Dick Fuld earlier this month, who “did a particularly good job of playing the baddie,” PR professional Paul Pendergrass suggests six traps to be avoided in the congressional hearing room. For example:

Say one thing; ooze another. Hire seasoned corporate speechwriters to articulate the appropriate personal feelings. Stare down into the page, and read your opening statement as if you’ve having to translate it from the original high German.

Maybe it’s not fair to pick on Fuld. Few corporate leaders survive with either their dignity or their reputation intact after being dragged into an Inquisition. One more trap is confirming you’re out of touch by “trying to prove what a regular guy you are”:

Tell stories that are meant to demonstrate your personal hardship, bootstrapping or connection with Main Street, but that instead reveal that you no longer have hundreds of millions, but only dozens of millions.

CEOs can’t win this game, obviously. When the subpoena arrives, it’s too late. Rather than wait for such a disaster, corporate staffers should try – now – to stop the managerial behavior and/or financial slide that could land the company in the headlines. And good luck.

Bailout idea: Regulate Washington compensation

September 25, 2008

I’m all for taking action to add liquidity to markets that seize up – not to mention rescuing venerable financial firms if that’s the best way to keep the economy from going utterly in the tank for the rest of us.

But I’d like to offer an amendment, adding to the tweaks coming from Congress: How about a proviso that members of the Senate and House … as well as occupants of the White House, SEC and Federal Reserve chairmen, past or present … draw their pay or pensions in the form of mortgage-backed securities for the next few years ?

This might give the officials in Washington some incentive to deliver on that wishful thought, voiced by some, that taxpayers actually could come out ahead – rather than losing $700 billion – in the Treasury Department’s proposed big investment in illiquid assets.

(OK, this has nothing to do with investor relations. Good luck to all.)


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.