Tag Archives: NRLPA:OCOG

Tesla to seek shareholder approval for stock split

March 28 (Reuters) – Tesla Inc (TSLA.O) will seek investor approval to increase its number of shares to enable a stock split in the form of a dividend, the electric-car maker said on Monday, sending its shares up about 5%.

The proposal has been approved by its board and the shareholders will vote on it at the annual meeting. The stock split, if approved, would be the latest after a five-for-one split in August 2020 that made Tesla shares cheaper for its employees and investors.

Following a pandemic-induced rally in the technology shares, Alphabet Inc (GOOGL.O), Amazon.com Inc (AMZN.O) and Apple Inc (AAPL.O) too have in the recent past split their shares to make them more affordable.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

Tesla shares soar after stock split in 2020 Tesla shares soar after stock split in 2020

“This (stock split) could further fuel the bubble in Tesla’s stock that has been brewing over the past two years,” said David Trainer, Chief Executive of investment research firm New Constructs.

Tesla has delivered nearly a million electric cars annually, while ramping up production by setting up new factories in the Austin and Berlin amid increasing competition from legacy automakers and startup companies.

“We think Berlin ramping, and both the MiniCar and India are on the horizon, we would agree with the timing,” Roth Capital analyst Craig Irwin said, hinting that companies usually execute stock splits when a good news is ahead.

Meanwhile, Tesla on Monday notified its suppliers and workers that its Shanghai factory in China will be closed for four days as the financial hub said it would lock down in two stages to carry out mass COVID-19 testing. read more

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

Reporting by Nivedita Balu and Akash Sriram in Bengaluru; Editing by Maju Samuel and Arun Koyyur

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here

U.S. SEC proposes companies disclose range of climate risks, emissions data

WASHINGTON, March 21 (Reuters) – The U.S. securities regulator on Monday proposed requiring U.S.-listed companies to disclose a range of climate-related risks and greenhouse gas emissions, part of President Joe Biden’s push to join global efforts to avert climate-related catastrophes.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) unveiled its long-anticipated draft rule under which companies would disclose their own direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions, known as Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions. It would also require companies to disclose emissions generated by their suppliers and partners, known as Scope 3 emissions, if they are material.

SEC chair Gary Gensler said the agency was responding to investor demand for consistent information on how climate change will affect financial performance of companies they invest in. But prominent Republicans accused the regulator of overstepping its legal authority, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce vowed to fight parts of the rule.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

The draft proposal, subject to public feedback and likely to be finalized later this year, should help investors get the information they are seeking while also increasing the reporting burden for Corporate America.

It would also require companiesto disclose the “actual or likely material impacts” that climate-related risks will have on their business, strategy and outlook, including physical risks as well as possible new regulations such as a carbon tax.

Companies that have set emissions goals or announced other plans to transition away from fossil fuels would have to provide details on how and when they expect to do so. read more

“Companies and investors alike would benefit from the clear rules of the road,” Gensler said.

Senator Patrick Toomey, the Senate Banking Committee’s top Republican, blasted the rule, saying it “extends far beyond the SEC’s mission and expertise.”

Progressives and activist investors have pushed for the SEC to require Scope 3 emissions disclosure to hold companies accountable for all the carbon dioxide and methane they help generate. Corporations have been pushing for a narrower rule that will not boost compliance costs too sharply.

“This proposal will be the light in a pathway toward addressing President Biden’s priority of disclosing climate risk to investors and all areas of our society,” said Tracey Lewis, a policy counsel at Washington-based advocacy group Public Citizen. “There will be a lot of critics,” she added.

The SEC said the Scope 3 requirement would include carve-outs based on a company’s size, and that all the emissions disclosures would be phased in between 2023 and 2026.

It was not immediately clear how many companies would have to make Scope 3 disclosures, given they would have largely have the discretion to decide what counts as ‘material.’

The Chamber of Commerce, the country’s biggest business lobby, called the proposal too prescriptive and complained it would force companies to disclose information that was largely immaterial at the expense of more meaningful data.

“The Supreme Court has been clear that any required disclosures under securities laws must meet the test of materiality, and we will advocate against provisions of this proposal that deviate from that standard,” Tom Quaadman, an executive vice president with the group, said in a statement.

The Investment Company Institute, which represents global investors, broadly welcomed the rule.

“The enhanced disclosure that the proposal calls for will provide investors with comparable, consistent, qualitative, and quantitative information.”

LEGAL CHALLENGES

The SEC spent the past week shoring up the draft against potential legal challenges, six sources told Reuters.

Corporate groups have argued there is no agreed methodology for calculating Scope 3 emissions, saying it can lead to double-counting, and that providing so much detail would be burdensome and would expose companies to litigation if third-party data ends up being wrong.

The SEC tried to address that concern by proposing Scope 3 disclosures would be protected by a legal safe harbor that already exists for companies’ forward-looking statements.

Any legal challenges to the rule will likely argue that the SEC lacks the authority to require Scope 3 emissions data, something the agency’s lone Republican Commissioner Hester Peirce said on Monday in voting against the proposal.

Some experts said the SEC’s authority in this area was clear, noting investors poured more than $649 billion into environmental, social and governance-focused funds worldwide last year and were calling for better data.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

Reporting by Katanga Johnson in Washington
Editing by Michelle Price, David Gregorio and Matthew Lewis

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Katanga Johnson

Washington-based reporter covering U.S. regulation at the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, previously e3xperience in Ecuador, alumnus of Morehouse College and Northwestern University’s Medill School of Journalism.

Read original article here

Elon Musk, Tesla attack SEC for ‘unrelenting’ harassment

NEW YORK, Feb 17 (Reuters) – Tesla Inc (TSLA.O) and its Chief Executive Elon Musk on Thursday accused the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) of harassing them with an “endless” and “unrelenting” investigation to punish Musk for being an outspoken critic of the government.

The accusation came in a letter to U.S. District Judge Alison Nathan in Manhattan, who presided over a 2018 SEC settlement stemming from Musk’s tweet about a potential buyout of Tesla.

“Mr. Musk and Tesla respectfully seek a course correction,” wrote Alex Spiro, a lawyer for Musk and Tesla. “Enough is enough.”

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

The SEC declined to comment. In a one-sentence order, Nathan directed the regulator to respond by Feb. 24.

Thursday’s letter escalates Musk’s battle with regulators as they scrutinize his social media posts and Tesla’s treatment of workers, including accusations of discrimination.

It followed Tesla’s disclosure on Feb. 7 that it had received a subpoena from the SEC about its compliance with the 2018 settlement. read more

The SEC sued Musk in August 2018 after he tweeted he had “funding secured” to potentially take his electric car company private at $420 per share. In reality, a buyout was not close.

Tesla and Musk settled by agreeing to each pay $20 million in civil fines, and to let Tesla lawyers vet some of Musk’s communications in advance, including tweets that could affect Tesla’s stock price. Musk also gave up Tesla’s chairmanship.

The latest subpoena was issued on Nov. 16, 10 days after Musk polled his Twitter followers on whether he should sell 10% of his Tesla stake, triggering a sell-off.

CHILLING SPEECH

In Thursday’s letter, Spiro accused the SEC of ignoring its commitment to distribute to shareholders the $40 million in fines, while instead “devoting its formidable resources to endless, unfounded investigations” into Musk and Tesla.

“Worst of all, the SEC seems to be targeting Mr. Musk and Tesla for unrelenting investigation largely because Mr. Musk remains an outspoken critic of the government; the SEC’s outsized efforts seem calculated to chill his exercise of First Amendment rights,” Spiro wrote.

Spiro asked Nathan to schedule a conference to find out why the SEC is “issuing subpoenas unilaterally” without court approval, and why the money isn’t being distributed.

If the SEC found that Musk violated the settlement, it could ask Nathan to throw it out and reopen the case, or pursue new charges.

The letter was filed eight days after California’s Department of Fair Employment and Housing sued Tesla over allegations by Black workers that it tolerated racial discrimination at its Fremont, California, plant. read more

Tesla called that lawsuit misguided. It is also trying to reduce or throw out an approximately $137 million jury award to a Black former elevator operator for subjecting him to a hostile work environment at the Fremont plant.

Separately on Thursday, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) opened a formal probe into 416,000 Tesla Model 3 and Model Y vehicles after receiving complaints about unexpected braking tied to its Autopilot system. read more

Tesla has issued 10 recalls since October, including some under pressure from the NHTSA.

Shares of Tesla closed $47.04, or 5.1%, lower on Thursday to $876.35 on Nasdaq.

The cases are SEC v Musk, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 18-08865; and SEC v Tesla Inc in the same court, No. 18-08947.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

Reporting by Jody Godoy and Jonathan Stempel in New York, and David Shepardson in Washington; Editing by Toby Chopra, Mark Porter and Sandra Maler

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here

Apple’s Tim Cook earned over 1,400 times the average worker in 2021

Apple CEO Tim Cook attends the premiere for season two of the television series “Ted Lasso” at Pacific Design Center in West Hollywood, California, U.S. July 15, 2021. REUTERS/Mario Anzuoni

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

Jan 7 (Reuters) – Apple Inc (AAPL.O) boss Tim Cook’s pay in 2021 was 1,447 times that of the average employee at the tech giant, a filing on Thursday showed, fueled by stock awards that helped him earn a total of nearly $100 million.

In 2021, the median pay for employees was $68,254, Apple said, adding it had selected a new median employee for comparison due to changes in hiring and compensation.

The median pay in 2020 was $57,783 and the pay ratio was 256 times Cook’s salary.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

The iPhone maker has benefited from strong demand for its products and services over the past two years as consumers working from home shell out on upgrades. Apple revenue rose over 30% to $365.82 billion for its fiscal 2021, that boosted its shares to briefly cross $3 trillion in market capitalization this year.

Cook, whose salary remained at $3 million, received $82.3 million in stock awards, $12 million for hitting Apple’s targets and $1.4 million for air travel, 401(k) plan, insurance premiums and others.

In total, he received $98.7 million compared with $14.8 million in 2020.

Cook took charge in August 2011 after the company’s founder Steve Jobs stepped down months before his demise. Apple’s stock has surged over 1,000% since then.

In September, Cook received 333,987 restricted stock units, in his first stock grant since 2011 as part of a new long-term equity plan. He will be eligible to receive additional units based on performance in 2023.

For Corporate America, CEOs were paid 351 times as much as a typical worker in 2020, a report by the Economic Policy Institute showed.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

Reporting by Nivedita Balu in Bengaluru; Editing by Krishna Chandra Eluri

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here

Tesla’s Musk exercises all of his stock options expiring next year

Tesla CEO Elon Musk attends the Tesla Shanghai Gigafactory groundbreaking ceremony in Shanghai, China January 7, 2019. REUTERS/Aly Song

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

San Francisco, Dec 28 (Reuters) – Tesla Inc (TSLA.O) Chief Executive Elon Musk has exercised all of his options expiring next year, signaling an end to his stock sales that triggered a fall in the share price of the world’s most valuable carmaker.

Musk said last week that he would reach his target of selling about 10% of his stake in Tesla “when the 10b preprogrammed sales complete,” likely referring to his options-related stock sales. read more

Since early November, he has exercised options expiring next year and sold a portion of Tesla stock to pay tax under a “rule 10b5-1” trading plan set up in September.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

With the option exercise on 1.6 million shares on Tuesday, he has exercised all of the options on 22.8 million shares, which are due to expire in August. He also sold 934,090 shares for $1.02 billion to pay for taxes, the filings showed.

“This rule 10b5-1 trading plan was completed on December 28, 2021,” Tesla said in filings on Tuesday.

Tesla shares lost about a quarter of their value after Musk in November asked his followers on Twitter if he should sell 10% of his holdings. They have rebounded to $1,088.47, but are still below the record closing high of $1,229.91 in November.

CLOSE TO 10% TARGET

Musk has so far offloaded 15.7 million shares in Tesla, coming close to the 10% stake the billionaire has pledged to sell.

Out of the 15.7 million shares, 10.3 million were related to the options exercise. Musk sold an additional 5.4 million, cashing in on Tesla’s strong rally.

He has offloaded $16.4 billion worth of shares since early November when he said he would sell 10% of his Tesla stocks if Twitter users agreed.

The Twitter poll came two days after Tesla shares hit a record high following a rally sparked by an order for Tesla cars from rental company Hertz.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Register

Reporting by Hyunjoo Jin;
Editing by Stephen Coates

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here

Exclusive: SEC probes Tesla over whistleblower claims on solar panel defects

SAN FRANCISCO, Dec 6 (Reuters) – The U.S. securities regulator has opened an investigation into Tesla Inc (TSLA.O) over a whistleblower complaint that the company failed to properly notify its shareholders and the public of fire risks associated with solar panel system defects over several years, according to a letter from the agency.

The probe raises regulatory pressure on the world’s most valuable automaker, which already faces a federal safety probe into accidents involving its driver assistant systems. Concerns about fires from Tesla solar systems have been published previously, but this is the first report of investigation by the securities regulator.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission disclosed the Tesla probe in response to a Freedom of Information Act request by Steven Henkes, a former Tesla field quality manager, who filed a whistleblower complaint on the solar systems in 2019 and asked the agency for information about the report.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to reuters.com

Register

“We have confirmed with Division of Enforcement staff that the investigation from which you seek records is still active and ongoing,” the SEC said in a Sept. 24 response to Henkes, declining his request to provide its records. The SEC official said the letter should not be taken as an indication by the agency that violations of law had occurred. Reuters independently confirmed the SEC letter was legitimate.

Henkes, a former Toyota Motor quality division manager, was fired from Tesla in August 2020 and he sued Tesla claiming the dismissal was in retaliation for raising safety concerns. Tesla did not respond to Reuters’ emailed questions, while the SEC declined to comment.

In the SEC complaint, Henkes said Tesla and SolarCity, which it acquired in 2016, did not disclose its “liability and exposure to property damage, risk of injury of users, fire etc to shareholders” prior and after the acquisition.

Tesla also failed to notify its customers that defective electrical connectors could lead to fires, according to the complaint.

Tesla told consumers that it needed to conduct maintenance on the solar panel system to avoid a failure that could shut down the system. It did not warn of fire risks, offer temporary shutdown to mitigate risk, or report the problems to regulators, Henkes said.

Tesla shares fell 5.5% at $960.25 on Monday after the Reuters report.

EX-TOYOTA QUALITY MANAGER BLOWS THE WHISTLE

More than 60,000 residential customers in the U.S. and 500 government and commercial accounts were affected by the issue, according to his lawsuit filed in November last year against Tesla Energy over wrongful termination.

It is not clear how many of those remain after Tesla’s remediation program.

Henkes, a longtime manager at Toyota’s North American quality division, moved to SolarCity as a quality engineer in 2016, months before Tesla acquired SolarCity. After the acquisition, his duties changed and he became aware of the widespread problem, he told Reuters.

Henkes, in the SEC complaint, said he told Tesla management that Tesla needs to shut down the fire-prone solar systems, report to safety regulators and notify consumers. When his calls were ignored, he proceeded to file complaints with regulators.

“The top lawyer cautioned any communication of this issue to the public as a detriment to the Tesla reputation. For me this is criminal,” he said in the SEC complaint.

Litigation and concerns over faulty connectors and Tesla solar system issues stretch back several years. Walmart in a 2019 lawsuit against Tesla said the latter’s roof solar system led to seven store fires. Tesla denied the allegations and the two settled.

Business Insider reported Tesla’s program to replace defective solar panel parts in 2019.

Several residential customers or their insurers have sued Tesla and parts supplier Amphenol (APH.N) over fires related to their solar systems, according to documents provided by legal transparency group PlainSite.

Henkes also filed a complaint with he U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, which CNBC reported this year was investigating the case. CPSC and Amphenol didn’t respond to request for comment.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to reuters.com

Register

Reporting by Hyunjoo Jin; Additional reporting by Chris Prentice in Washington and Shreyashi Sanyal in Bangalore; Editing by Peter Henderson and Nick Zieminski

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here

Shareholders may pursue 737 MAX claims against Boeing board, court rules

WASHINGTON, Sept 7 (Reuters) – A Delaware judge ruled on Tuesday that Boeing’s (BA.N) board of directors must face a lawsuit from shareholders over two fatal 737 MAX crashes that killed 346 people in less than six months.

Vice Chancellor Morgan Zurn ruled Boeing stockholders may pursue some claims against the board, but dismissed others.

Zurn’s ruling in the Court of Chancery said the first of the two fatal 737 MAX crashes was a “red flag” about a key safety system known as MCAS “that the board should have heeded but instead ignored.”

Boeing said late Tuesday it was “disappointed in the court’s decision to allow the plaintiffs’ case to proceed past this preliminary stage of litigation. We will review the opinion closely over the coming days as we consider next steps.”

The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration lifted a flight ban on the 737 MAX in November after a 20-month review following the fatal crashes in 2018 and 2019. In January, Boeing was charged by the Justice Department with 737 MAX fraud conspiracy and agreed to a deferred prosecution agreement and settlement worth more than $2.5 billion.

Zurn’s ruling found some evidence submitted by Boeing supported the shareholders’ allegations. “That the board knowingly fell short is also evident in the board’s public crowing about taking specific actions to monitor safety that it did not actually perform,” the ruling said.

In a lengthy summary of the shareholder’s case, Zurn said the board “publicly lied about if and how it monitored the 737 MAX’s safety.”

The opinion also cited comments by Dave Calhoun, then lead Boeing director, who became Boeing chief executive in January 2020 after the board ousted CEO Dennis Muilenburg.

It cited Calhoun’s comments that “the board had been ‘notified immediately, as a board broadly,’ after the Lion Air crash and met ‘very, very quickly’ thereafter.”

It added that after the second crash of an Ethiopian Airlines 737 MAX in March 2019, Calhoun represented that the board met within 24 hours of the crash to discuss potentially grounding the 737 MAX.

“Each of Calhoun’s representations was false,” Zurn’s ruling said.

The crashes have cost Boeing some $20 billion.

Brian Quinn, a professor at Boston College Law School, said the ruling clears the way for additional discovery and potentially a trial, although he considered that very unlikely.

“Right now everything is lining up where the board of directors are telling their attorneys I don’t want to go to trial. You need to pay them whatever it costs and I cannot as a director admit liability,” he said.

In that scenario, the directors’ insurance would likely pay any settlement, he said.

Reporting by David Shepardson in Washington, Tom Hals in Wilmington, Delaware and Jonathan Stempel in New York; editing by Richard Pullin

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here

AMC board names CEO Adam Aron as chairman

July 21 (Reuters) – Theater operator AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc (AMC.N) on Wednesday named Chief Executive Officer Adam Aron as chairman, at a time when investors are pushing companies to separate the two roles to keep a check on management.

Aron has served as CEO, president and member of AMC’s board since 2016, having led the company to become the largest cinema operator in the world and maintain its liquidity when the pandemic hammered its business.

One of so-called ‘meme stocks’, AMC soared in a Reddit-driven retail short squeeze in the beginning of the year. The company’s shares were down 2.8% in premarket trading on Wednesday.

Last month, Microsoft made a similar move, naming CEO Satya Nadella as chairman of its board. read more

Many large firms have a legacy structure where the CEO and chairperson roles are held by a single person, usually the founder, but only in rare instances do corporations choose to go back to such a structure.

According to data from shareholder advisory firm Institutional Shareholder Services Inc (ISS) ESG, 59% of S&P companies have a separate chairman and CEO as of 2021, compared with 37% just ten years ago.

AMC said Ambassador Philip Lader will serve as lead director of the company.

Reporting by Eva Mathews in Bengaluru; Editing by Maju Samuel

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here

Musk trial asks the $2 bln question: Who controls Tesla?

July 9 (Reuters) – Does Elon Musk control Tesla Inc (TSLA.O) or does Tesla control Elon Musk?

More than $2 billion hinges on that question as a trial kicks off on Monday. Shareholders allege that Musk used his control of Tesla to force the company in 2016 to rescue SolarCity, saving the solar panel maker – and Musk’s investment in the company – from bankruptcy.

The union pension funds and asset managers leading the case want Musk to repay to Tesla the cost of the $2.6 billion deal and to disgorge the profits on his SolarCity stock. If they win, it would be one of the largest judgments against an individual.

The two-week trial in the Court of Chancery in Wilmington, Delaware, will boil down to whether Musk, who owned about 22% of Tesla at the time of the deal, is that rare controlling stockholder who does not hold a majority stake.

“I think it’s going to be very hard for the court to ignore the reality that Elon Musk is Elon Musk and his relationship with Tesla,” said Ann Lipton, a professor at Tulane University Law School.

She said the case might present an unusual situation given Musk’s celebrity status, his personal ties to Tesla board members and those board members’ financial ties to SolarCity.

“Put it all together, and it might be enough to count as a controlling shareholder,” she said.

Few executives dominate their company’s image as much Musk, known for taunting regulators, battling naysayers and personally engaging with his 57 million Twitter followers.

“We are highly dependent on the services of Elon Musk, Technoking of Tesla and our Chief Executive Officer,” said Tesla’s 2020 annual report.

Plaintiffs allege that Musk drove the negotiations and even pushed Tesla’s board to raise, not lower, the price for SolarCity.

A higher price benefited Musk, who was the largest shareholder of SolarCity, with a stake of about 22%, as well as four members of Tesla’s board, who directly or indirectly owned SolarCity stock, according to court records.

Board members settled allegations against them last year for $60 million and did not admit to any fault.

Plaintiffs also allege the deal benefited two of Musk’s cousins who founded SolarCity, saving a company that was rapidly running low on cash.

Musk has said he was “fully recused” from board negotiations and that shareholders voted to approve the deal because it was central to his “Master Plan, Part Deux” that aims to integrate sustainable solar energy with electric self-driving cars.

He has said that what plaintiffs see as evidence of control is little more than strong management.

“Taken to its natural conclusion, virtually all ‘hands-on’ and ‘inspirational’ CEOs with minority stock ownership would be deemed controllers,” Musk’s lawyers wrote in a court filing.

If Vice Chancellor Joseph Slights determines Musk was a controlling shareholder, it will fall to Musk to prove the SolarCity deal met the high bar of the “entire fairness” standard, which examines process and price, said legal experts.

Musk has noted in court papers that the SolarCity deal has been a huge success for Tesla shareholders, demonstrating the deal was not only fair, but a boon. After Tesla split its stock 5-1 in 2020, it has risen to $652 on Thursday from near $37 a share when the deal closed in November 2016.

“If the vice chancellor thinks this deal was awful and was not effectively negotiated on behalf of the company, he’ll strike it down,” said Larry Hamermesh, a professor at Delaware Law School.

Reporting by Tom Hals in Wilmington, Delaware, and Sierra Jackson in New York;
Editing by Noeleen Walder and Dan Grebler

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here