Skip to main content
Find a Lawyer

SEC Adopts Final Rules Relating to Director Nomination Process and Shareholder Communications with Directors

This article was edited and reviewed by FindLaw Attorney Writers | Last reviewed March 26, 2008

This article has been written and reviewed for legal accuracy, clarity, and style by FindLaw’s team of legal writers and attorneys and in accordance with our editorial standards.

The last updated date refers to the last time this article was reviewed by FindLaw or one of our contributing authors. We make every effort to keep our articles updated. For information regarding a specific legal issue affecting you, please contact an attorney in your area.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (Commission) recently adopted final rules requiring expanded disclosure of companies' director nomination processes and specific disclosure of procedures by which shareholders may communicate with directors.[1] At the open meeting at which the new rules were approved, Commission Chairman William Donaldson noted that the rules regarding disclosure of director nomination processes are "a significant step in making the director nomination process more accessible to [shareholders] by enhancing the transparency of that process." He stated that the rules regarding disclosure of shareholder communication processes "allow investors to more effectively use existing procedures" and "access those procedures in connection with their evaluation of the management and oversight" of the companies in which they invest.

The new rules require very specific disclosures in proxy statements for meetings at which directors will be elected. The Commission stated that these specific, detailed disclosure requirements are "necessary and appropriate to assure that investors are provided with disclosure that presents the desired degree of clarity and transparency" and that it believes that, in the absence of these specific disclosure requirements, "disclosure could be at a level of generality that would not be sufficiently useful to [shareholders]."

These new rules were proposed[2] soon after the July 15, 2003 release of a Division of Corporation Finance (Division) report recommending a number of rule changes, including recommendations about these rules and another set of proposed rules that would provide, under certain circumstances, direct shareholder access to the company's proxy materials in connection with the nomination of directors.[3] The proposed shareholder access rules are still pending.[4]

Significant Revisions from Proposed Rules

The Commission adopted the rules substantially as originally proposed, but the following significant differences were highlighted at the open meeting and in the adopting release:

  • The Commission increased from three percent to five percent the threshold percentage of voting securities that must be owned by a nominating shareholder (or group) for purposes of determining when a company must disclose that it has received a director nomination recommended by that shareholder or group.[5]

  • Where a company has received a nomination recommended by a more than five percent shareholder or group, the company would be required to disclose the name of the nominee (in addition to the name of the nominating shareholder or group, as originally proposed), but only if both the nominee and the nominating shareholder provide their consent at the time of recommendation, but would not, as had been proposed, be required to disclose the specific reasons for not nominating the candidate if the candidate was not approved by the committee.

  • A company will not be required to disclose the name of the source of a candidate that it includes as a nominee, but rather the category or categories of persons or entities making the recommendation (e.g., shareholder, non-management director, chief executive officer, other executive officer, third-party search firm or other specified source).

  • Companies will not be required, as had been proposed, to disclose any specific standards for the overall structure and composition of the board.

  • Companies will be required to affirmatively state whether nominating committee members are "independent" under applicable NYSE and Nasdaq listing standards, but will not be required to disclose, as had been originally proposed, whether there was any instance during the prior fiscal year in which any member of the nominating committee did not satisfy such standards of independence.

  • If a company's nominating committee has a written charter, that charter must be made publicly available either through publication on the company's Website or through filings with the Commission (rather than describing the charter in the proxy statement, as had been proposed).

  • Companies will be required to disclose in their next Form 10-Q or 10-QSB or Form 10-K or 10-KSB any changes in the procedures by which its shareholders may recommend nominees from those described in the proxy statement.

  • Companies will be required to describe their policy, if any, with regard to board members' attendance at annual meetings and disclose the number of board members who attended the prior year's annual meeting.

  • Companies will not be required, as had been originally proposed, to disclose material actions taken by the board as a result of shareholder communications during the preceding fiscal year.

Required Disclosures Regarding Nominating Process

Item 7(d) of Schedule 14A currently requires proxy statements for meetings at which directors will be elected to state whether the company has a nominating or similar committee and, if it does, state "whether the committee will consider nominees recommended by [shareholders] and, if so, describe the procedures to be followed by [shareholders] in submitting such recommendations."[6] The Commission has significantly expanded these disclosure requirements in order "to make more transparent to [shareholders] the operation of the boards of directors of the companies in which they invest." The new disclosure requirements include specific disclosures about the nominating process, the nominating committee's charter, and the independence of nominating committee members.

What new disclosures are required about a company's nominating process?

The final rules require the following additional disclosures about a company's nominating process (the first of which arguably just rephrases the existing requirements of Item 7(d)(2) of Schedule 14A):

  • If the nominating committee has a policy with regard to the consideration of any director candidates recommended by shareholders, a description of the material elements of that policy, which must include, but need not be limited to, a statement as to whether the committee will consider candidates recommended by shareholders;

  • If the nominating committee does not have a policy with regard to the consideration of any director candidates recommended by shareholders, disclosure of that fact and the basis for the view of the board of directors that it is appropriate for the company not to have such a policy;

  • If the nominating committee will consider candidates recommended by shareholders, a description of the procedures to be followed by shareholders in submitting such recommendations and, if material changes are made to such procedures, a description of such changes in the company's next Form 10-Q or 10-QSB or Form 10-K or 10-KSB;[7]

  • A description of any specific, minimum qualifications that the nominating committee believes must be met by a nominating committee-recommended nominee and any specific qualities or skills that the nominating committee believes are necessary for one or more of the directors to possess;[8]

  • A description of the committee's process for identifying and evaluating nominees for director, including nominees recommended by shareholders, and any differences in the manner in which the nominating committee evaluates nominees based on whether the nominee is recommended by a shareholder;

  • Disclosure of the category or categories of persons or entities (shareholder, non-management director, chief executive officer, other executive officer, third-party search firm or other specific source[9]) who recommended each nominee approved by the nominating committee for inclusion on the company's proxy card, except when the nominee is an executive officer or a director standing for reelection;[10]

  • If the company pays a fee to any third party to identify or evaluate or assist the company in identifying or evaluating potential nominees, disclosure of the function performed by the third party;

  • If the nominating committee receives, not later than the 120th calendar day before the date of the company's proxy statement released to shareholders in connection with the previous year's annual meeting,[11] a nominee recommendation from a shareholder or group of shareholders that has beneficially owned more than five percent of the company's voting common stock for at least one year as of the date of the recommendation, the company is required to disclose (a) the name or names of the shareholder(s) who recommended the candidate and the name of the candidate, and (b) whether the nominating committee chose to nominate the candidate; provided the company receives the written consent of both the shareholder nominating group and the candidate prior to making such disclosure.[12]

Do the final rules require a nominating committee to consider candidates recommended by a company's shareholders?

No. As stated by the Commission, the rules require disclosure "but do not mandate any particular action by a company or its board of directors." Under the rules, a company is only required to disclose whether it has a policy with respect to the consideration of candidates recommended by shareholders and whether the nominating committee will consider such candidates. If the nominating committee does not have a policy with regard to the consideration of any director candidates recommended by shareholders, the company must disclose that fact and state the basis for the view of its board of directors that it is appropriate for the company not to have such a policy. The Commission did not include in the final rules the portion of the proposed rule that would have required disclosure of the specific reasons for not including a candidate proposed by a large shareholder or group of shareholders, which if adopted may have implied that the nominating committee would have been required to undertake some level of consideration of the candidate.

Is the nominating committee required to have a written charter?

Not under the Commission's rules, but there are other possible sources of a charter requirement that companies should consider. For example, the NYSE listing requirements require that NYSE-listed companies have a written nominating committee charter, while the Nasdaq listing requirements require that Nasdaq-listed companies have either a written nominating committee charter or a board resolution addressing the nominating process.

Must the nominating committee charter be publicly disclosed?

Yes, but companies have some flexibility in how that disclosure is accomplished. The Commission's rules require companies to disclose whether a copy of the written charter is available to shareholders on the company's Website and, if it is, to provide the company's Website address. If the nominating committee has a charter and a current copy of it is not available on the company's Website, then the company is required to include the charter as an appendix to the company's proxy statement at least once every three fiscal years, and, if not included in the current proxy statement, to identify the prior fiscal year in which it was so included.

What disclosures are required about the directors serving on the nominating committee?

The company is required to disclose whether the members of the nominating committee are independent as defined in the listing standards applicable to the company. As with existing disclosures regarding the independence of audit committee members, a non-listed company must assess the independence of nominating committee members under any listing standard chosen by the company (but the company is required to use the same listing standard that it uses to assess the independence of its audit committee members).

What about companies that do not have separate nominating committees?

A company without a nominating committee or a committee performing similar functions does not escape any of the new requirements. If a company does not have a nominating committee (or committee serving similar functions), the company is required to disclose that fact in its proxy statement and state the basis for the view of the board of directors that it is appropriate for the company not to have such a committee. The new rules also require a company to disclose the names of those directors who participate in the consideration of director nominees in lieu of a nominating committee. In addition, an instruction to the new rules states that the disclosures described in response to the preceding questions must be provided with respect to any committee performing a function similar to a nominating committee, or for groups of directors fulfilling the role of a nominating committee, including the entire board, where applicable.

How do the new disclosure requirements relate to the previously existing and recently adopted NYSE and Nasdaq listing standards?

The NYSE and Nasdaq have adopted revised listing standards that, among other requirements, require listed companies to have independent nominating committees.[13] These listing standard changes do not require nominating committees to consider shareholder nominees or companies to make the disclosures required by the new rules. The Commission's new rules, on the other hand, require disclosure of information to shareholders regarding the nomination process, the manner of evaluating nominees, and the extent to which the boards of directors of the companies in which they invest have a process for considering, and do in fact consider, shareholder recommendations. Accordingly, the Commission stated that it believes that its new disclosure requirements will operate in conjunction with and as a complement to the revised listing standards regarding nominating committees.

How do the new rules interrelate with companies' bylaw provisions relating to shareholder nominations?

The new rules only require disclosure regarding how a company's nominating committee deals with shareholder recommendations of candidates to the committee. The rules are not structured to directly correlate with state law and bylaw provisions that govern shareholder nominations of persons for election to the board of directors, such as bylaw provisions requiring advance notice of a director nomination. As a result of these new rules, companies will need to reexamine their bylaw provisions and other policies relating not only to nominating committee review of recommendations by shareholders, but also to the method by which the company handles director nominations and the election of directors generally.

Disclosures Regarding Shareholder Communications with Board Members

The Commission stated that it has become increasingly aware of investors' desire for a means to communicate with boards of directors and that it believes that providing shareholders with disclosure about the process for communicating with board members will improve the transparency of board operations, as well as shareholder understanding of the companies in which they invest. To address those concerns, the Commission has created a number of new disclosure requirements relating to the manner in which shareholders may communicate directly with directors.

What new disclosures are required?

The Commission's new rules require the following new disclosures about the manner in which shareholders may communicate directly with directors:[14]

  • Whether a company's board of directors provides a process for shareholders to send communications to the board of directors and, if the company does not have such a process for shareholders to send communications to the board of directors, the basis for the view of the board of directors that it is appropriate for the company not to have such a process;

  • If a company has a process for shareholders to send communications to the board of directors:

    • a description of the manner in which shareholders can send communications to the board and, if applicable, to specified individual directors; and

    • if all shareholder communications are not sent directly to board members, a description of the company's process for determining which communications will be relayed to board members;[15] and

  • A description of a company's policy, if any, with regard to board members' attendance at annual meetings and the number of board members who attended the prior year's annual meeting.[16]

Do the rules require companies to institute any procedures to facilitate shareholder communications with directors?

No. The rules only require disclosure of whether the company provides a process by which shareholders may communicate directly with directors and, if not, why the board believes it is appropriate not to have such a process. However, as with many Commission disclosure requirements, the disclosure requirement will most likely have the effect of encouraging companies to adopt procedures in order to avoid potentially embarrassing disclosures.

Do the rules apply to communications governed by Exchange Act Rule 14a-8?

No. The Commission stated that the current disclosure requirements with regard to shareholder proposals contemplated by Exchange Act Rule 14a-8 are adequate to inform shareholders of how they may communicate with boards via that mechanism, and accordingly, it expressly excluded shareholder proposals submitted pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 14a-8, and communications made in connection with such proposals, from the new disclosure rules.

What about communications from employees and others who also happen to be shareholders?

The Commission acknowledged that not all communications from officers, directors, employees and agents of the company are the types of communications that the new disclosure standards are intended to capture. The Commission added an instruction to Item 7 clarifying that:

  • Communications from an officer or director of the company will not be viewed as shareholder communications for purposes of the disclosure requirement; and

  • Communications from an employee or agent of the company will be viewed as shareholder communications for purposes of the disclosure requirement only if those communications are made solely in the employee's or agent's capacity as a shareholder.

Are there any comparable disclosure requirements under previously existing or recently adopted NYSE and Nasdaq listing standards?

Yes, for NYSE-listed companies, but not for Nasdaq-listed companies. The NYSE recently adopted a new listing standard that will require a company to disclose a method for interested parties to communicate directly with the "presiding director" of the non-management directors or with the non-management directors as a group.[17] Nasdaq has not adopted any similar requirement.

Scope of Disclosure Requirements

Do the new disclosures apply to companies that are not subject to the proxy rules?

No. The rules requiring disclosure of both the nomination process and shareholder communication with the board amend only Schedule 14A.[18] Therefore, the disclosure requirements do not apply to any company that is not subject to the requirements of Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act, including, for example, foreign private issuers and companies that file Exchange Act reports pursuant to either Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act or an indenture covenant.

Do the new disclosures apply to investment companies?

Yes. Under the rules, both the director nominating process and the director communication proposals are applicable to investment companies with slight modifications.

Effectiveness and Implementation

When are the new disclosure requirements applicable?

The rules are effective on January 1, 2004 and companies must comply with the rules with respect to proxy or information statements that are first sent or given to shareholders on or after January 1, 2004 and in Forms 10-Q, 10-QSB, 10-K, 10-KSB and N-CSR for the first reporting period ending after January 1, 2004. Companies are permitted to comply with the new rules before their effective date.

What should companies do now?

Since the new rules will be effective for the next annual meeting season, companies that are subject to these new disclosure requirements should consider taking the following actions as quickly as possible.

With respect to the director nomination process:

  • If the company does not have an independent nominating committee, it should consider forming one.

  • If the company has a nominating committee, it should confirm the independence of committee members in light of the recently adopted NYSE and Nasdaq listing standards.

  • If the nominating committee does not have a charter, or if the charter does not address many aspects of the new rules, the company should consider amending its existing charter or adopting a new charter. In addition, the company should consider posting the charter on its Website to avoid having to attach the charter to its proxy statement.

  • If the company has not previously disclosed a method by which shareholders can submit recommendations for nominees, it should consider identifying a method (perhaps nothing more than directing shareholders to submit recommendations in writing to the Corporate Secretary at a specified address, but perhaps also specifying any related personal information about the nominee and/or recommending shareholder(s) that the company believes should be required).

  • Boards should consider whether they have (or want to adopt) any specific, minimum qualifications (including independence) or skill requirements for director nominees and whether they have (or want to adopt) any policies with respect to the consideration of nominees, whether submitted by shareholders or others.

  • Companies should also reassess existing bylaw advance notification requirements for direct nominations by shareholders (as contrasted with the types of shareholder recommendations contemplated by the new rules).

With respect to shareholder communications with directors:

  • If companies do not yet have a process by which shareholders can communicate directly with directors, they should consider adopting one. Such a process will be mandatory for NYSE-listed companies, in any event.

  • Companies should consider whether they want such a process to involve only paper mail, or will include e-mail and/or Website methods of communication.

  • Companies should consider whether to adopt any filtering or screening process for such communications. If they do adopt a filtering or screening process, companies are encouraged to consider having that process approved by a majority of independent directors, in order to avoid having to describe that process on their Website or in their proxy statement.

  • Companies should consider whether they have (or want to adopt) a policy regarding director attendance at annual meetings.

-----------------

FOOTNOTES

[1] Final Rule: Disclosure Regarding Nominating Committee Functions and Communications between Security Holders and Boards of Directors, Securities Act Rel. No. 33-8340, Exchange Act Rel. No. 34-48825, Investment Co. Act Rel. No. IC-26262, http://www.sec.gov/rules/final/33-8340.htm (Nov. 24, 2003). This advisory supersedes our earlier Special Alert regarding the adoption of these rules. See Alston & Bird LLP Securities Law Advisory-Special Alert, "SEC Adopts New Disclosure Rules Relating to Director Nomination Process and Shareholder Communications with Directors," http://www.alston.com/articles/Special%20Alert%2011-19-03.pdf (Nov. 19, 2003).

[2] Proposed Rule: Disclosure Regarding Nominating Committee Functions and Communications between Security Holders and Boards of Directors, Exchange Act Rel. No. 34-48301, Investment Co. Act Rel. No. IC-26145, http://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/34-48301.htm (Aug. 8, 2003). See also Alston & Bird LLP Securities Law Advisory, "SEC Proposes New Rules Relating to Director Nomination Process and Shareholder Communications with Directors," http://www.alston.com/articles/Director%20Nomination%20Process.pdf (Aug. 13, 2003).

[3] The Commission's news release announcing the publication of the Division's report can be found at http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2003-83.htm (Jul. 15, 2003). The Division's report and related summary of comments can be found at http://www.sec.gov/news/studies/proxyrpt.htm (Jul. 15, 2003). See also Alston & Bird LLP Securities Law Advisory-Special Alert, "SEC Releases Staff Report on Proxy Review Process," http://www.alston.com/articles/Special%20Alert%207-15-03.pdf (Jul. 15, 2003).

[4] Proposed Rule: Security Holder Director Nominations, Exchange Act Rel. No. 34-48626, Investment Co. Act Rel. No. IC-26206, http://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/34-48626.htm (Oct. 14, 2003). See also Alston & Bird LLP Securities Law Advisory, "SEC Issues Proposed Rules Mandating Shareholder Access to Proxies," http://www.alston.com/articles/Shareholder%20Access%20to%20Proxies.pdf (Oct. 24, 2003). The comment period for these proposed rules ends on December 22, 2003.

[5] The Commission stated that because a recommending shareholder with a more than five percent ownership interest would be subject to the beneficial ownership reporting requirements of Regulation 13D under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act), the process by which a determination is made that the recommending shareholder satisfies the ownership threshold to trigger the additional disclosure requirement will be simplified and, where a shareholder or group has reported its beneficial ownership prior to making a recommendation, such disclosure will help to ensure that the company and its shareholders have basic information about the recommending shareholder.

[6] Item 22(b)(14) of Schedule 14A requires substantially similar disclosures in investment company proxy statements.

[7] A new instruction to Item 401 states that adoption of procedures by which shareholders may recommend nominees to a company's board of directors, where the company previously disclosed that it did not have in place such procedures, constitutes a material change and is required to be disclosed in the company's next Form 10-Q or 10-QSB or Form 10-K or 10-KSB.

[8] The final rules do not require, as had been proposed, that the company disclose any specific standards for the overall structure and composition of the board. Beyond the requirements of the rules of the Commission and the NYSE and Nasdaq regarding director and committee member qualification, it is difficult to determine what the Commission would expect to be described in response to this disclosure requirement, particularly since nomination decisions are usually made on a case-by-case basis by companies without regard to any easily-defined "minimum qualifications."

[9] In the case of investment companies, the required categories are security holder, director, chief executive officer, other executive officer, or employee of the investment company's investment adviser, principal underwriter, or any affiliated person of the investment adviser or principal underwriter.

[10] The proposed rules would have required the source, rather than the category of the source, of nominees other than executive officers and directors standing for reelection. The Commission stated that, in providing the required disclosure, companies should consider what category of person initially recommended, or otherwise brought to the attention of the nominating committee, each candidate and that in disclosing the category of persons or entities that initially recommended a candidate to the nominating committee, companies should ensure that they identify also any person or entity that caused a particular candidate to be recommended. For example, if the chief executive officer asks a third party to evaluate a potential candidate, and that third party ultimately recommends the candidate to the nominating committee, both the chief executive officer and the third party should be identified as recommending parties in the company's disclosure.

[11] The Commission added an instruction clarifying that, where a company has changed its meeting date by more than 30 days from the date of the previous year's meeting, a shareholder must make its recommendation by a date that is a reasonable time before the company begins to print and mail its proxy statement in order to trigger the additional disclosure requirements.

[12] An instruction to Item 7 states that a company will be required to provide these disclosures only if, at the time of the recommendation, the shareholder or group provides the written consent of each party to be identified and, where the shareholder or group members are not registered holders, proof of ownership of sufficient shares to trigger this disclosure requirement. As a result, a company is not required to affirmatively seek such consent or proof of ownership in order to meet its disclosure obligations.

[13] In the case of Nasdaq, companies alternatively may provide that the nomination of directors be determined by a majority of the independent directors. NASD and NYSE Rulemaking: Relating to Corporate Governance, Exchange Act Rel. No. 34-48745, http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/34-48745.htm (Nov. 4, 2003).

[14] These disclosures (other than the disclosures in the first bullet point) may be provided on the company's Website in lieu of including them in the proxy statement, in which case disclosure to that effect, including the company's Website address, must be provided in the proxy statement.

[15] The final rules do not require, as had been originally proposed, the disclosure of the department or group within the company that makes decisions about which communications are relayed to board members. In addition, the Commission added an instruction to clarify that a company's process for collecting and organizing shareholder communications, as well as similar or related activities, need not be disclosed, provided that the company's process is approved by a majority of the independent directors.

[16] The Commission stated that this requirement, which was not included in the proposed rules, was adopted to give shareholders a more complete picture of a company's policies related to opportunities for communicating with directors.

[17] NASD and NYSE Rulemaking: Relating to Corporate Governance, Exchange Act Rel. No. 34-48745, http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/34-48745.htm (Nov. 4, 2003).

[18] The rules also amend Item 401 of Regulation S-K to require disclosure of changes in methods shareholders may use to submit nomination recommendations, but only where such disclosure was first required to be included in an annual meeting proxy statement under Schedule 14A.

Was this helpful?

Copied to clipboard