ICEV: One share, one vote – the bedrock of good corporate governance
Railpen regularly works with or develops collaborative engagements where increased action is necessary to drive positive beneficiary outcomes. In 2022 we launched a collective initiative – the Investor Coalition for Equal Votes (ICEV) – with the Council of Institutional Investors and several US pension funds; its mission being to challenge unequal voting rights in the US and UK.
Railpen manages investments on members’ behalf and has a duty to engage and collaborate in a meaningful way to drive positive financial outcomes for them. One of the ways we do this is by speaking with the companies we invest in about their corporate governance (how well the company is managed). We believe it’s essential that all shareholders are given a fair and proportionate voice through their voting rights. Being able to vote for, or against, a company at its Annual General Meeting (AGM) helps us positively influence a company’s behaviour and provides a safety net to hold company management to account, where necessary.
So, in 2022, Railpen, the Council of Institutional Investors and several US pension funds joined together to set up a collaborative engagement initiative called the Investor Coalition for Equal Votes (ICEV). Its mission is clear – to promote the adoption of capital structures to ensure that equity positions with substantially similar economic rights provide identical voting power on a share-for-share basis (Equal Voting Rights).
Today, ICEV is made up of a group of US and UK pension funds with approximately $2tn of assets under management – all of whom share the same concern, namely the long-term effects of misalignment between invested capital and shareholder voting rights, and the consequences for long-term financial performance and good member outcomes.
Why are we concerned about unequal voting rights?
Some companies operate with multiple classes of shares where the owners of certain share classes, typically founders or insiders, benefit from superior voting rights at a level disproportionate to their equity shareholding. This is most commonly seen with founder-led companies that publicly list with a capital structure with higher voting rights per share for the founder relative to other public equity investors.
We believe strongly that when a company taps the capital markets to raise money from public investors, those investors – as owners of the company – should have a right to vote in proportion to the size of their holdings (and in proportion to the economic risks that they bear as owners).
A single class of common stock with equal voting rights provides the voting mechanisms to ensure the board of directors remain accountable to the majority of the shareholders. This accountability is vital to ensuring that the board – and by extension the management of the company – remains aligned with the interests of the shareholders.
Boards cannot carry out their fundamental oversight purpose if capital structures are designed specifically to render founders, their favoured board members, and their favoured managers, unaccountable to the holders of a majority of outstanding shares.
ICEV’s concerns are supported by a body of empirical research that shows that any benefits of a capital structure with unequal voting rights decline after a period of public listing. The research shows that over time, on average, firms with unequal voting rights are undervalued relative to their peers with a ‘one share, one vote’ structure at the time of going public, and relative to those with time-based sunset provisions.
How does the ICEV pursue its mission?
ICEV encourages companies entering the public markets to consider adopting a ‘one share, one vote’ capital structure, or at the least to incorporate time-based sunset provisions of seven years or less into their governing documents at the time of going public. We do this by:
Who are members of ICEV?
ICEV membership is available to long-term institutional investors, including asset owners and asset managers, as well as investor-governed, non-profit organisations that support the mission of ICEV and commit to actively participating in ICEV’s pursuit of its mission. There are no regional or jurisdictional limitations on membership eligibility. ICEV members currently include the following:
- Railpen (Chair)
- Council of Institutional Investors (Vice-Chair)
- Florida State Board of Administration
- Fulcrum Asset Management
- Los Angeles County Employees Retirement Association (LACERA)
- Minnesota State Board of Investment
- New York State Common Retirement Fund
- Office of the New York City Comptroller
- Ohio Public Employees Retirement System
- Washington State Investment Board
- Wespath Institutional Investments
Becoming a member
To join the coalition or find out more about membership, please contact Caroline Escott, Railpen, at email@example.com and / or Glenn Davis, Council of Institutional Investors, at firstname.lastname@example.org
In line with ICEV’s Antitrust policy, the responsibility lies with each of the individual ICEV members to understand and adhere to all laws and regulations applicable to them. This includes, but is not limited to, relevant antitrust and competition laws.
ICEV members explicitly avoid coordinating on company-specific investment decisions, meeting-specific proxy voting decisions or any other business-related decisions. ICEV’s members are responsible for their own investment, voting and business decisions and must always act completely independently to set their own strategies, policies and practices based on their own best interests.
ICEV facilitates the exchange of public information, but members must avoid the exchange (including one-way disclosure) of non-public, competitively sensitive information, including with other members and participants in engagements.
- Railpen news: $1tn global investor group launches equal voting rights campaign
- ICEV response to FCA Consultation CP23/10: Primary Markets Effectiveness Review
- ICEV response to FCA consultation DP22/2: Primary Markets Effectiveness Review
- Railpen response to the Hill UK Listings Review (2021)
- Council of Institutional Investors’ video explaining Dual Class Stock (2m:56s)
- Council of Institutional Investors’ webpage on Dual Class Stock
- European Corporate Governance Institute webpage on Dual Class Firms