– Tensions are escalating between BP and investors ahead of its April AGM, as disputes grow over shareholder rights and climate disclosure demands.
According to The Wall Street Journal (paywall), the oil company has urged investors to vote against a shareholder resolution calling for more detailed disclosures about how it evaluates investment decisions and manages project costs and value creation. BP argues that the proposal duplicates existing reporting and could complicate its efforts to streamline disclosures as it seeks to rebuild investor confidence after pivoting back toward oil and gas investment.
At the same time, Reuters (paywall) reports that activist investor group Follow This has vowed to fight BP after the company refused to include a climate-related resolution in its AGM materials. The proposal, backed by investors managing roughly €1 tn in assets, asked BP to outline strategies for maintaining shareholder value if oil and gas demand declines.
The Financial Times (paywall) reports that Follow This and supporting investors have threatened legal action, arguing the rejection is an unprecedented challenge to shareholder rights in the UK. BP says it excluded the proposal after taking legal advice that it did not meet filing requirements, setting up a high-profile clash over climate governance and investor influence.
– The Trump administration has launched a legal challenge against California’s vehicle emissions policies, with the US Department of Justice and the US Department of Transportation filing a lawsuit aimed at blocking the state’s electric-vehicle mandate.
In a joint announcement, Attorney General Pamela Bondi and Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said the lawsuit targets California rules that effectively require automakers to sell increasing numbers of zero-emission vehicles, resulting in a ban on new gas-powered car sales by 2035. Federal officials argue the regulations amount to state-specific fuel-economy standards, which they say are banned under federal law and fall under the authority of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
The administration claims California’s policy would force manufacturers to overhaul production nationwide and raise vehicle prices for consumers.
California officials have strongly criticized the lawsuit and pledged to defend the state’s clean-vehicle rules, arguing they are essential for reducing emissions and protecting public health.
– A shareholder has filed a lawsuit against Intel, accusing the chipmaker’s board of improperly granting the US government a 10 percent equity stake in the company in response to political pressure from the Trump administration.
The complaint, filed in Delaware by investor Richard Paisner, alleges that Intel directors breached their fiduciary duty by approving a transaction that transferred shares worth roughly $11 bn to the US government without adequate compensation. According to The Financial Times, the arrangement converted government support under the CHIPS and Science Act into equity, effectively making Washington a major shareholder.
The suit claims Intel’s leadership agreed to the deal partly to ease political pressure after Trump publicly called for the resignation of chief executive Lip‑Bu Tan over concerns about his past investments in Chinese companies.
After Tan later met with Trump at the White House, the president softened his criticism and the government subsequently took an ownership stake in the company. The shareholder now seeks damages and governance remedies, arguing the move prioritized political considerations over investor interests.
– Exxon Mobil plans to move its legal domicile from New Jersey to Texas, ending more than a century of incorporation in the state and aligning its legal home with its operational base. According to The Wall Street Journal, the company’s board has recommended the change to shareholders, who will vote on the proposal at its upcoming AGM.
Chief executive Darren Woods said the move reflects Texas’ increasingly business-friendly legal and regulatory environment and would better match the company’s legal base with where most of its leadership and operations are already located. Exxon has been headquartered in the Houston suburb of Spring since the late 1980s.
The company has also argued the shift could help protect it from what Woods described as ‘shareholder abuse,’ including a rise in litigation and activist campaigns targeting the oil industry.
If approved, Exxon would join companies such as Tesla, SpaceX and Coinbase that have relocated their corporate registrations to Texas in search of a more favorable legal environment.
– Proxy advisory firms are warning that Starbucks may be underestimating the risks posed by its ongoing labor disputes, raising concerns ahead of its AGM. As reported by Reuters, ISS and Glass Lewis said the company could be exposing itself to financial and reputational damage by failing to adequately oversee escalating tensions with unionized workers.
The warnings follow Starbucks’ decision to dissolve its Environmental, Partner and Community Impact Committee, which previously oversaw labor relations. Glass Lewis said the move weakens board oversight of a critical risk area and recommended shareholders vote against the re-election of one director responsible for governance oversight.
Starbucks said labor issues will instead be handled by the full board and other committees, arguing the change streamlines governance. The company maintains it offers competitive benefits and wages for employees working more than 20 hours per week.
However, the company continues to face strikes and stalled contract negotiations with the union representing workers at roughly 6 percent of US stores, while investors including the New York State Comptroller have urged stronger oversight of labor risks.
– SEC chairman Paul Atkins has defended the agency’s controversial overhaul of the shareholder-proposal review process (Regulation 14a-8), saying it had ‘no alternative’ after operational pressures forced a shift in priorities.
Speaking at the Council of Institutional Investors’ spring conference, Atkins said the SEC had been forced to change its handling of no-action requests, which companies traditionally used to seek staff approval to exclude shareholder proposals from proxy ballots, because of a surge in workload and limited staff resources.
As reported by FTI Communications, The regulator faced a backlog of time-sensitive filings, including registration statements for prospective listings, partly caused by the government shutdown that disrupted agency operations. As a result, the SEC shifted away from routinely issuing staff opinions on whether companies could omit shareholder proposals.
Atkins acknowledged the change has increased legal uncertainty and litigation risk, as companies excluding proposals no longer have the protection of a formal SEC determination.