The Accounting Policy & Practice Report ® provides financial accounting policy makers, advisors, and practitioners with the latest news, expert insights, and guidance on emerging, evolving,...
July 1 — A divided Securities and Exchange Commission July 1 proposed a rule requiring public companies to claw back executives’ incentive-based compensation that was improperly awarded.
The proposal would require companies to make policies for recovering compensation paid out that exceeds what should have been paid under an accounting restatement, if the restatement is required because of “material noncompliance” with securities laws.
“Executive officers should not be permitted to retain incentive-based compensation that they should not have received in the first instance but did receive because of material errors in their companies’ publicly reported financial statements,” Chairman Mary Jo White said. “The proposed rules should increase accountability and bring greater focus to the quality of financial reporting.”
The clawback would apply to the three fiscal years prior to when the company is required to file a restatement.
It would apply to “executive officers,” which it defines as the president, chief financial officer, chief accounting officer, any vice president in charge of a business unit and anyone who crafts company policy.
That definition is broader than in the Sarbanes-Oxley Act’s clawback provisions. SOX also reaches back only one year.
Under the proposal, companies would be required to create and disclose their own clawback policies or face delisting from national securities exchanges.
Compensation would be clawed back regardless of the executive officer’s culpability for misconduct or responsibility for the financial statements, and companies would be forbidden from indemnifying officers from any clawbacks.
“This is a fairly prescriptive regime and there are a lot of unanswered questions,” Andrew Liazos, a partner and leader of the executive compensation group at McDermott Will & Emery LLP in Boston, told Bloomberg BNA. “It would be a pretty dramatic change from the clawback rules we see now,” he added.
According to SEC staff analysis, nearly two-thirds of S&P 500 issuers and roughly half of S&P 1500 issuers have their own clawback policy.
If the rule is adopted as proposed, however, “virtually every existing clawback policy will need to be rewritten,” Liazos said.
Before the vote, Mark Flannery, head of the SEC's Division of Economic and Risk Analysis, said the rule would likely prod companies into better financial reporting, but it could also lead to executives demanding that incentive-based compensation make up a smaller portion of their overall pay.
The 3-2 vote included dissents from Republican Commissioners Daniel Gallagher and Michael Piwowar. Democratic Commissioners Luis Aguilar and Kara Stein voted with White to propose the rule.
“The broad approach of today’s proposal is likely to impose a substantial commitment of shareholder resources and, unintentionally, result in a further increase in executive compensation,” Piwowar said.
He also criticized the agency's internal process for drafting the rule and ripped “repeated instances of substantial eleventh-hour modifications by the chair’s office,” which he said stifled discussion and undermined collaborative support. “This happened in pay versus performance, credit ratings and nationally-recognized statistical rating organizations, and swap data repositories and security-based swap data reporting.”
Gallagher called the proposal “tortured and nightmarish.”
The rule is required by Section 954 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Members of the public will have 60 days to comment on the proposal once it is published in the Federal Register.
It is the last rule to be proposed among the law’s provisions dealing with executive compensation.
In April, the agency proposed rules on pay versus performance.
To contact the reporter on this story: Rob Tricchinelli in Washington at email@example.com
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Phyllis Diamond at firstname.lastname@example.org
For the proposal, visit https://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/2015/33-9861.pdf
All Bloomberg BNA treatises are available on standing order, which ensures you will always receive the most current edition of the book or supplement of the title you have ordered from Bloomberg BNA’s book division. As soon as a new supplement or edition is published (usually annually) for a title you’ve previously purchased and requested to be placed on standing order, we’ll ship it to you to review for 30 days without any obligation. During this period, you can either (a) honor the invoice and receive a 5% discount (in addition to any other discounts you may qualify for) off the then-current price of the update, plus shipping and handling or (b) return the book(s), in which case, your invoice will be cancelled upon receipt of the book(s). Call us for a prepaid UPS label for your return. It’s as simple and easy as that. Most importantly, standing orders mean you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you’re relying on. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.960.1220 or by sending an email to email@example.com.
Put me on standing order at a 5% discount off list price of all future updates, in addition to any other discounts I may quality for. (Returnable within 30 days.)
Notify me when updates are available (No standing order will be created).
This Bloomberg BNA report is available on standing order, which ensures you will all receive the latest edition. This report is updated annually and we will send you the latest edition once it has been published. By signing up for standing order you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you need. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.372.1033, option 5, or by sending us an email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Put me on standing order
Notify me when new releases are available (no standing order will be created)