Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 412

Worries over the planned proxy rule changes in Australia

The Australian Treasury recently issued a consultation paper on changes to proxy advice that mirror some of the proposals issued under the US Trump administration. To us, the new rules are founded on a misguided notion that the proxy voting sector lacks transparency.

We believe that the rule changes would, if anything, undermine the rights of asset owners to vote as they wish and give companies undue influence on proxy recommendations and outcomes.  

We recently made a submission to the Treasury consultation outlining our concerns as to why this is not in the best interests of our clients or the market more broadly. We outline the key points of our submission below.

Proxy voting is a core element of our active ownership approach

We have long believed that it is our job as fiduciaries to make a stand where we see an issue which could detract from good governance, sustainability, and investor outcomes. Annual General Meeting (AGM) season (typically October to December in Australia) is a critical time to re-emphasise our stance regarding a board’s progress on ESG matters through engagement and the voting of proxies.

In order to vote proxies for our clients, we do our own internal assessments of boards and management with a comprehensive investment process which includes our actions taken in relation to voting for AGMs and shareholder resolutions. We supplement this with the input of external providers to provide additional insight to company financial accounts, AGM resolutions and assessment of directors who are up for re-election.

Unlike what is being suggested by the Treasury rules, we do not agree with the premise that institutional investors that use proxy advisors are overly influenced by the research provided by them.

The reality is that we frequently disagree with the views of our proxy advisors. In 2020, we voted differently to the proxy advice provided in 12% of resolutions. And where we did agree, it was often for different reasons than those stated in the proxy advisor report. Ultimately, our voting is undertaken based on an assessment in the best interests of our clients.

Sharing recommendations with companies in advance may compromise independence 

The Treasury has suggested a number of changes, one is that proxy advisors should provide their report containing the research and voting recommendations to the relevant company before investors.

We do not agree with this approach.

Directing the distribution of independent research recommendations to issuers in advance of its release compromises the expectation that this research will be independent of the issuer. 

We also do not want to see undue costs and time delays added to the process of proxy advisors. Independent researchers should be able to rely on a company’s public documents and meetings with company executives, without any requirement to provide them with draft research in advance. 

Increased costs from additional regulation will impact returns for investors. Given the Government and regulator focus on affordable, low-cost superannuation, we are concerned about the increased costs of proxy regulation.

The ASX is already established as a forum to enable issuers to provide continuous disclosure to an informed equity market. A company can make an announcement on its website or via the ASX and does not require the proxy adviser to do so.

Proxy advisors are already well regulated

Proxy advisors are in a competitive industry. Our preferred advisors engage regularly with ASX-listed companies and include the issuer’s views on AGM proposals. We also value the fact that our Australian proxy advisor has an Australian Financial Services licence (AFSL) as it relates to providing credible insights regarding the company’s financial accounts and AGM resolutions.

What we expect is for ASIC to continue to regulate the proxy advisors such that if a proxy advisor is found to not show professional conduct or independent research, then in a manner similar to other regulated entities, the license to operate is reviewed and remediation actions are taken.

To require additional licensing would be regulatory overkill. The best analysis is driven by excellent financial research and each analysis of resolutions at AGMs or EGMs always contains opinion about the company’s historical or forward-looking financials.

We also note that the ASIC review of proxy adviser engagement practices in June 2018 was extensive, and concluded that:

“voting allows shareholders to express their views on important issues as well as hold the Board to account for the company’s performance”.

This is central to why we have our own investment team and access to multiple proxy advisors who can add valuable and independent insight.

Inertia and increased influence of company directors on proxy recommendations

Finally, one of our key issues with this consultation paper is that it is focussed on the wrong issues.

The extremely low 4-7% ‘Vote Against Management’ average by shareholders for ASX company resolutions[1] highlights that inertia, exacerbated by the shift to passive investment management, is a bigger issue than a so-called lack of transparency from proxy advisors.

Our challenge as an institutional investor is to hold boards and management to account. This can only be done via independent research and good financial accounting insight. In 2020, we voted against management in 12% of resolutions[2], well above the ASX historical average. Our team also conducts over 1,000 meetings with company management each year, and our long history of constructive engagement between our investors and management teams places us in a strong position to be proactive and effect change.

Our biggest concern is that the implementation of the Australian Treasury’s change could instead exacerbate influence of company directors on proxy recommendations, the reverse of the consultation paper’s objectives.

We do not want to see any change that increases the ability of company directors to prevent independent scrutiny of their governance practices and behaviours.

 

Will Baylis is a Portfolio Manager at Martin Currie Australia. Martin Currie is the manager for the Legg Mason Martin Equity Income Fund, also available as an Active ETF (Managed Fund) ASX:EINC. Martin Currie is a Franklin Templeton specialist investment manager, and Franklin Templeton is a sponsor of Firstlinks. This article is general information and does not consider the circumstances of any individual. Past performance is not a guide to future returns.

For more articles and papers from Franklin Templeton and specialist investment managers, please click here.

 

[1] Source: Martin Currie Australia, ASIC; as of 31 December 2020. Average against vote by resolution type by ASX 200 company shareholder, simple average of each type. 5% in 2016, 4% in 2017, 7% in 2018 (based on Figure 6 in ASIC REP 609 Annual general meeting season 2018.)

[2] Source: Martin Currie Australia. In 2020, for the 972 resolutions for stock holdings in portfolios managed by the Martin Currie Australia team, we voted against management in 116 resolutions.

 

RELATED ARTICLES

Why investment stewardship matters for long-term investors

Voting your shares: it’s worth the effort

Investor downside when management controls access to the board

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Is it better to rent or own a home under the age pension?

With 62% of Australians aged 65 and over relying at least partially on the age pension, are they better off owning their home or renting? There is an extra pension asset allowance for those not owning a home.

Too many retirees miss out on this valuable super fund benefit

With 700 Australians retiring every day, retirement income solutions are more important than ever. Why do millions of retirees eligible for a more tax-efficient pension account hold money in accumulation?

Reece Birtles on selecting stocks for income in retirement

Equity investing comes with volatility that makes many retirees uncomfortable. A focus on income which is less volatile than share prices, and quality companies delivering robust earnings, offers more reassurance.

Is the fossil fuel narrative simply too convenient?

A fund manager argues it is immoral to deny poor countries access to relatively cheap energy from fossil fuels. Wealthy countries must recognise the transition is a multi-decade challenge and continue to invest.

Superannuation: a 30+ year journey but now stop fiddling

Few people have been closer to superannuation policy over the years than Noel Whittaker, especially when he established his eponymous financial planning business. He takes us on a quick guided tour.

Anton in 2006 v 2022, it's deja vu (all over again)

What was bothering markets in 2006? Try the end of cheap money, bond yields rising, high energy prices and record high commodity prices feeding inflation. Who says these are 'unprecedented' times? It's 2006 v 2022.

Latest Updates

Retirement

How to enjoy your retirement

Amid thousands of comments, tips include developing interests to keep occupied, planning in advance to have enough money, staying connected with friends and communities ... should you defer retirement or just do it?

Retirement

Results from our retirement experiences survey

Retirement is a good experience if you plan for it and manage your time, but freedom from money worries is key. Many retirees enjoy managing their money but SMSFs are not for everyone. Each retirement is different.

Interviews

Why short-termism is both a travesty and an opportunity

On any given day, whether the stockmarket rises or falls is a coin toss, but stay invested for 10 years and the odds are excellent. It's at times of market selloffs that opportunities present for long-term investors.

Investment strategies

Fear is good if you are not part of the herd

If you feel fear when the market loses its head, you become part of the herd. Develop habits to embrace the fear. Identify the cause, decide if you need to take action and own the result without looking back. 

No excuses: Plan now for recession

The signs of a coming recession are building, especially in the US. In personal and business decisions, it's time to be more conservative and engage in risk management until some of the uncertainty is resolved. 

Strategy

The fall of Volt Bank removes another bank competitor

The startup banks were supposed to challenge the lazy, oligopolistic major banks, but 86 400, Xinja and now Volt have gone. Why did Volt disappear so quickly when it had gained deposit support and name recognition?

Strategy

Three main challenges to online ads and ‘surveillance capitalism’

Surveillance capitalism refers to the collection and use of consumer data to further profits. Will a renewed focus on privacy change the online-ad business model, or is it too entrenched?

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2022 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. Any general advice or ‘regulated financial advice’ under New Zealand law has been prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide (AU) and Financial Advice Provider Disclosure Statement (NZ). You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.

Website Development by Master Publisher.