Shareholders of U.S. corporations have lost billions of dollars in acquisitions they never approved. In the United Kingdom the listing rules give shareholders a binding say when targets are large relative to acquirers. A transatlantic comparison suggests that if U.S. shareholders had a say on acquisitions, they would incur fewer losses.
There is a significant difference in the difference in performance between deals subject to a vote in the United Kingdom but not in the United States and deals with no mandatory vote in either country. The United States has given shareholders a mandatory say on pay; shareholders might also wish to have a binding say on corporate acquisitions.
The increasing use of dual class voting structures in public companies, and the frequency with which such structures contain sunset provisions, raises...
Traditionally, fund managers cast votes on behalf of the investors whose capital they manage. Recently, this system has come under intense debate given...