Investment Organizations Letter to Chairman Paul Atkins re Rule 14a-8 Jan 14, 2026

/

Please access the full text here.

January 14, 2026

Dear Chairman Atkins and Mr. Moloney,

Thank you for taking the time to meet with us on December 17, 2025 to discuss ourconcerns regarding recent changes to the Division of Corporation Finance no-actionletter process for shareholder proposals and potential changes by the Commission toRule 14a-8.We appreciate the opportunity for an exchange of perspectives. However, we continue to have concerns.

Specifically, changes to the shareholder proposal process conflict with the Commission's tripartite mission of promoting capital formation, investor protection, and maintenance of fair and orderly capital markets. The ability of shareholders to vote by proxy on proposals made by their fellow shareholders has long been an integral part of the U.S. corporate governance system. We believe that this private ordering processhas helped facilitate capital formation.

In the intervening days since we met, we have seen a number of companies avail themselves of the opportunity to notify proponents of their intent to exclude proposals without the benefit of the Division of Corporation Finance staff’s substantive no-action letter review process. We believe the elimination of the no-action letter process for shareholder proposals will deprive investors of the opportunity to vote on numerous valid proposals. It will also work against the interests of many issuers who are now unable to obtain the Rule 14a-8 guidance that the Division staff have historically provided.

Moreover, the new approach seems inconsistent with Rule 14a-8(k). That provision contemplates that the shareholder proponent may respond in writing to a company’s stated intention to exclude a proposal, the Commission staff will then “consider fully” the proponent’s submission, and the staff will then issue a “response”, presumably that either agrees or disagrees with the company or the proponent.

In addition, we have continuing concerns about the approach outlined by Chairman Atkins to the Division Staff in his October 9th, 2025 speech at the John L. Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance. The right of shareholders under Delaware law to vote on precatory proposals is well-established, long-standing and highly beneficial for both shareholders and issuers. Indeed, a recent study (copy enclosed) concludes that shareholder activism “can positively influence firm value” and can “meaningfully shape long-term firm performance.” See “The Value of Being Heard” at page 40. Moreover, theproposed approach conflicts with the Commission’s longstanding position that “mostproposals that are cast as recommendations or requests that the board of directors takespecified action are proper under state law” as memorialized in Rule 14a-8’s note to paragraph (i)(1).

We urge the Division to engage in a robust effort to collect information from all concerned market participants regarding the shareholder proposal process to guide its consideration in this area. For example, in 2018 the SEC staff held a series of roundtables on the proxy process with investor, issuer and asset manager perspectives. As part of these roundtables, the staff invited interested members of the public to provide written comments that were considered as part of the Commission’s 2019proposed revisions to Rule 14a-8. We believe that a similar information gathering process would be beneficial if further changes to the shareholder proposal process are contemplated.

In the spirit of promoting dialogue and to better inform the Commission about the manybenefits that have resulted from the private ordering process of the shareholder proposal rule, we would like to share the following resources for your consideration:

Thank you for taking our concerns into consideration. As representatives of investors who have submitted or voted upon many successful shareholder proposals at the companies in which we invest, we welcome the opportunity to provide you with further information and perspectives as you evaluate the benefits of the shareholder proposal process.

Respectfully submitted,

Brandon Rees, Deputy Director of Corporations and Capital Markets, AFL-CIO

Steven M.Rothstein, Chief Program Officer, Ceres

Josh Zinner, CEO, Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility

Sanford Lewis, Director and General Counsel,Shareholder Rights Group

Maria Lettini, CEO, US SIF

Danielle Fugere, President and Chief Counsel, As You Sow