PayPal Holdings, Inc. is a technology platform that enables digital payments and simplifies commerce experiences on behalf of merchants and consumers worldwide. The Company's payment solutions enable its customers to connect, transact, and send and receive payments, whether they are online or in person. It operates a global, two-sided network at scale that connects merchants and consumers with 435 million active accounts across more than 200 markets. Its brands include PayPal, Braintree, Venmo, Xoom, Hyperwallet, PayPal Zettle, PayPal Honey, and Paidy. It enables consumers to exchange funds with merchants using a variety of funding sources, which include a bank account, a PayPal or Venmo account balance, PayPal and Venmo branded credit products, including its installment products, a credit card, a debit card, certain cryptocurrencies, or other stored value products such as gift cards, and eligible rewards. It also offers consumers person-to-person (P2P) payment solutions.

Estimated 2023 AGM date for PayPal

**Our Goal**

A “win” would result in PayPal agreeing to revise its Transparency Reports to provide clear explanation on the number and categories of account suspensions and closures that may reasonably be expected to limit freedom of expression or access to information or financial services. These revisions may exclude proprietary or legally privileged information. 

**Why It's Important**

In June 2021, the [American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)  launched a campaign](https://www.aclu.org/news/lgbtq-rights/paypal-and-venmo-are-shutting-out-sex-workers-putting-lives-and-livelihoods-at-risk) calling on PayPal to provide nondiscriminatory financial services to all users. This is important because PayPal has a history of closing individual and business accounts without giving meaningful notice about the particular Terms of Services provision that was violated. ACLU contends that accountability on human rights, civil liberties, and sound technology policy necessitates that PayPal provide transparency to its users, enabling them to appeal PayPal’s decision to close their account in a timely and efficient manner. 

There have also been reports that PayPal [blocks accounts of sex workers](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-14/porn-site-says-paypal-ban-will-hurt-more-than-100-000-performers), which has been shown to disproportionately harm Black, Brown and trans communities. Additionally, PayPal has routinely[ targeted users for speech protected by the First Amendment](https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/fire-statement-free-speech-and-online-payment-processors). The Company has [stalled](https://www.vice.com/en/article/k7qbnz/venmo-paypal-freeze-transfer-limits-bail-funds) efforts to provide bail support to protestors, [froze](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/paypal-freezes-flin-flon-newspaper-syrian-refugees-1.3977292) the accounts of News Media Canada for a payment to submit an article about Syrian refugees for an award and [terminated service](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/06/paypal-shuts-down-long-time-tor-supporter-no-recourse) to a user for using an open-source software that enables anonymous communication. 

Investors have reason to be concerned because, as the [Electronic Frontier Foundation notes](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/kafkaesque-battle-soulseek-and-paypal-and-why-free-speech-defenders-should-be), few companies dominate the market for online payment processing. PayPal wields tremendous power in the industry and controls the speech environment by turning off the financial faucet for users who express disfavored views or discuss controversial topics. Consequently, this leaves individuals who have been blacklisted by PayPal in financially precarious situations since PayPal is one of the largest payment platforms in the world with [325 million active users](https://www.paypal.com/au/webapps/mpp/about). As such, any arguments that those dissatisfied with PayPal’s terms and conditions should seek alternative payment methods are not convincing. 

Further, PayPal’s [2021 Global Impact Report](https://s201.q4cdn.com/346340278/files/doc_downloads/PayPal-2021-Global-Impact-Report.pdf) failed to include information relating to account suspension or actions that may hinder free speech, undermining its commitment to “build a digital economy that powers a more inclusive and resilient world”. Indeed, this emphasises the contradiction between PayPal’s human rights policy, account suspensions and other potential violations of free speech.

By not being transparent with its users, PayPal is missing out on the opportunity to service these users, which is discriminatory, but also hinders PayPal’s ability to acquire a greater market share and generate revenue. 

**Next AGM**

We won’t know PayPal’s next AGM until the company releases its 2023 Proxy Statement, but based on 2022 dates we expect the 2023 AGM to be held sometime around 2nd June 2023.

**AGM record date**

The record date pertains to the date by which investors must hold their shares in a company in order to participate in the company’s AGM. We won’t know PayPal’s 2023 record date until the company’s 2023 proxy statement is released, but based on their 2022 dates we expect it to be sometime around 5th April 2023.

**Supporting This Campaign**

If you purchase PayPal stock from Tulipshare before the next AGM record date, you will be eligible to vote at the next AGM and receive an email from us closer to the deadline about how to do so.  





Tulipshare is asking Paypal to increase transparency around financial discrimination.

PayPal Holdings Inc

PayPal’s poor transparency reporting veils the contradiction between PayPal’s human rights policy and account suspensions, and other potential violations of free speech, all of which pose a significant legal, reputational and financial risk to PayPal and its shareholders. 

End Financial Discrimination at PayPal

Join @Tulipshare in asking @PayPal to end financial discrimination. 

Apple Inc. (Apple) designs, manufactures and markets smartphones, personal computers, tablets, wearables and accessories and sells a range of related services. The Company’s products include iPhone, Mac, iPad, AirPods, Apple TV, Apple Watch, Beats products, HomePod, iPod touch and accessories. The Company operates various platforms, including the App Store, which allows customers to discover and download applications and digital content, such as books, music, video, games and podcasts. Apple offers digital content through subscription-based services, including Apple Arcade, Apple Music, Apple News+, Apple TV+ and Apple Fitness+. Apple also offers a range of other services, such as AppleCare, iCloud, Apple Card and Apple Pay. Apple sells its products and resells third-party products in a range of markets, including directly to consumers, small and mid-sized businesses, and education, enterprise and government customers through its retail and online stores and its direct sales force.

To discuss campaign regarding App Store takedowns

Tulipshare meets with Apple

Withdrawal agreement reached with Apple

Tulipshare's third meeting with Apple regarding 2023 campaign

Meeting with Apple

You must have purchased Apple shares before this date to vote at the 2023 AGM.

Apple's 2023 record date

Calling on Apple to enhance reporting on App Store takedowns.

Shareholder proposal filed for Apple 2023 AGM

Tulipshare's second meeting with Apple regarding 2023 campaign

To be held virtually at 9 A.M. Pacific Time. 

Apple's 2023 AGM

**Important Disclosure** Tulipshare has co-invested alongside our users in support of this campaign. Tulipshare currently owns 200 Apple shares. Please see below to learn more about supporting our campaign

**Our Goal**

Tulipshare, alongside socially responsible investment firm, Azzad Asset Management, request that Apple’s Transparency Reports be revised to provide clear explanations of the number and categories of app removals from the App Store, in response to or in anticipation of government requests, that may reasonably be expected to limit freedom of expression, freedom of information, or access to information. 

Supporters of this shareholder proposal request that Apple include in its Transparency Reports, or explain why it cannot disclose:
  
- The substantive content of government requests, by country, including which government agencies made requests; number of apps removed by category such as “encrypted communications,” VPN, etc.; and external legal or policy basis as well as internal company criteria on which the apps were removed;
 
- Any indicia of the extent of impact on residents of those countries, such as the number of prior downloads of the app and whether existing usage of the app was eliminated;

- Any efforts by the company to mitigate the harmful effect on freedom of expression and access to information posed by the categories of removals.

Although Apple states that its decision to withhold such information stems from privacy concerns, this request – which is supported by transparency advocate [Open MIC](https://www.openmic.org/) – explicitly states that a revision to Apple’s Transparency Reports should exclude proprietary or legally privileged information.

**Why It's Important**

This proposal has been [filed in response](https://azzadasset.com/press-releases/azzad-commends-apple-shareholders-for-transparency-vote/) to news reports that Apple has removed apps from its App Store, sometimes proactively, to avoid harming relationships with authoritarian governments. This includes complying with requests from Russia and China, two regimes that stand accused of war crimes and genocide, respectively. 

“The current tragic situation in Ukraine highlights the potential risks and dangers of corporate complicity with authoritarian governments,” said Michael Connor, Executive Director of Open MIC. “The shareholder vote sends a strong message to Apple’s board of directors: Apple should not–and cannot–censor iPhone apps that are often tools for pro-democracy organizing or freedom of information and communication.”

In December 2020, [154 human rights organizations](https://www.justiceforall.org/save-uighur/154-civil-society-organizations-write-a-joint-letter-to-apple-on-human-rights/) wrote to CEO Tim Cook regarding Apple’s complicity with the Chinese government’s human rights atrocities, noting that “[e]ven though...app removals gravely affect freedom of expression and access to information, Apple’s Transparency Report currently does not disclose such actions beyond a number.”

[The New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/17/technology/apple-china-censorship-data.html) reported in May 2021: “... Apple has constructed a bureaucracy that has become a powerful tool in China’s vast censorship operation. It proactively censors its Chinese App Store, relying on software and employees to flag and block apps that Apple managers worry could run afoul of Chinese officials.”  Since 2017, the Times said, roughly 55,000 active apps have disappeared from Apple’s Chinese App Store, including “tools for [organizing pro-democracy](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/09/technology/apple-hong-kong-app.html) protests and [skirting internet restrictions](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/29/technology/china-apple-censorhip.html).” Most of those apps have remained available in other countries, the Times said. 

In April 2022, CEO Tim Cook gave a speech in Washington, D.C. in which he described Apple’s commitment to operating its App Store in a manner that promotes privacy. A week later, Commissioner Brendan Carr of the U.S. Federal Communications Commission wrote a [public letter ](https://www.fcc.gov/document/carr-challenges-apple-privacy-human-rights-china)addressing Cook’s speech, stating that: “at the very same time that [Cook was] speaking in D.C. about [Apple’s] App Store policies promoting privacy and human rights, [Apple] was continuing its well documented campaign in Beijing of aggressively censoring apps at the behest of the Communist Party of China.” Carr went on to state that “[i]f you look at the behavior of the Chinese government, you don’t see any resistance from Apple – no history of standing up for the principles that Apple claims to be so attached to."

Apple’s transparency report for the first half of 2020 [disclosed](https://www.apple.com/legal/transparency/cn.html) that it complied with all 46 requests from the Chinese government to remove 152 apps from the App Store. The report did not explain which apps were removed or for what reason.

- Apple’s transparency reporting takes a “[quantitative approach](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/feb/25/apple-censorship-requests-china-shareholder-groups-proposal)” that offers “little context for the app removal requests from the Chinese government or explanation of the risks that may be involved,” according to Institutional Shareholder Services.

- The [2020 Ranking Digital Rights Corporate Accountability Index](https://rankingdigitalrights.org/index2020/companies/Apple) found “Apple lacked transparency about its process for removing apps from the App Store for violations to iOS rules.”

Shareholders are deeply concerned about a material failure in Apple’s transparency reporting that seemingly highlights a contradiction between Apple’s human rights policy and its actions regarding China and its occupied territories, which represent almost a third of Apple’s customer base. This poses significant legal, reputational, and financial risk to Apple and its shareholders.

**The Next AGM**

Last year this proposal calling for a revision to Apple's Transparency Reports received [3,042,933,417](https://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-0000320193/1e8cf761-1736-43bb-81b0-4e8fe94bd0c8.pdf) votes from shareholders, which translates to 31.73% voter support, a strong showing for a proposal filed for the first time. With the help of activist investors like you, we can continue to push for Apple to make this positive change in favour of human rights and freedom of expression.

Apple's 2023 annual general meeting (AGM) is set to be held virtually on March 10, 2023 at 9.00 A.M Pacific Time (5.00 P.M. GMT). You can read the company's [2023 proxy statement](https://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-0000320193/ebbd88bb-cc8f-4e1e-8d5e-a52f8f780b94.pdf) to see what proposals eligible shareholders will be able to vote on.

**AGM Record Date**

The record date pertains to the date by which investors must hold their shares in a company in order to participate in the company’s AGM. In order to be eligible to vote at Apple's 2023 AGM, you should be a shareholder of record at the close of business on January 9, 2023.

**Supporting This Campaign**

If you purchase Apple stock from Tulipshare before the next AGM record date, you will be eligible to vote at the next Apple AGM and receive an email from us closer to the deadline about how to do so. 





Apple Inc.

In response to news reports that Apple has removed apps from its App Store, sometimes proactively, to avoid harming relationships with authoritarian governments – including Apple’s compliance with requests from Russia and China, two regimes that stand accused of war crimes and genocide, respectively – Tulipshare is calling on Apple to revise its Transparency Reports to provide clear explanations of the number and categories of app removals in response to government requests that censor tools for pro-democracy organising or freedom of information and communication.


Press for Apple to Enhance Reporting on App Store Takedowns

Microsoft Corporation is a technology company. The Company develops and supports software, services, devices, and solutions. Its segments include Productivity and Business Processes, Intelligent Cloud, and More Personal Computing. The Productivity and Business Processes segment consists of products and services in its portfolio of productivity, communication, and information services, spanning a variety of devices and platforms. This segment includes Office Consumer, LinkedIn, dynamics business solutions, and Office Commercial. The Intelligent Cloud segment consists of public, private, and hybrid server products and cloud services that can power modern businesses and developers. This segment includes server products and cloud services, and enterprise services. The More Personal Computing segment consists of products and services that put customers at the centre of the experience with its technology. This segment includes Windows, devices, gaming, and search and news advertising.

Estimated 2023 AGM date for Microsoft

Purchase shares before the record date if you want to vote at the AGM.

Estimated 2023 record date for Microsoft

Tulipshare has co-invested alongside our users in support of this campaign. Tulipshare currently owns 132 Microsoft shares. Please see below to learn more about supporting our campaign.

**Our Goal**

Tulipshare and the Center for Political Accountability (“CPA”) request that Microsoft adopt a policy requiring that any trade association, social welfare organisation, or organisation organised and operated primarily to engage in political activities that seeks financial support from Microsoft agree to report to Microsoft, at least annually, the organisation’s expenditures for political activities, including the amount spent and the recipient, and that each such report be posted on Microsoft’s website.

For purposes of this proposal, “political activities” are (i) influencing or attempting to influence the selection, nomination, election, or appointment of any individual to a public office; or (ii) supporting a party, committee, association, fund, or other organisation organised and operated primarily for the purpose of directly or indirectly accepting contributions or making expenditures to engage in the activities described in (i).

As Microsoft shareholders we support transparency and accountability in corporate electoral spending, including the indirect political spending that is the subject of this proposal.  Misaligned or non-transparent funding creates reputational risk that can harm shareholder value. It can also place a company in legal jeopardy. Unless a company knows which candidates and political causes its funds ultimately support, it cannot assure shareholders, employees, or other stakeholders that its spending aligns with core values, business objectives, and policy positions.  Without the information requested by this resolution, none of the board, senior management, or shareowners can assess the risks associated with political spending. 

The risks are especially serious when giving to trade associations, Super PACs, 527 committees, and “social welfare” organisations – groups that routinely pass money to or spend on behalf of candidates and political causes that a company might not otherwise wish to support.  The Conference Board’s 2021 [“Under a Microscope” report](https://www.conference-board.org/publications/Under-a-Microscope-ES) details these risks, discusses how to effectively manage them, and recommends the process suggested in this proposal.


**Why it's Important**

At its core, lobbying is a way for citizens and corporations to make their voices heard by the government when it passes laws and legislations that affect them. However, a company’s spending on corporate political activity is difficult, if not impossible, to track without voluntary disclosures from the company. Often, a company’s lobbying efforts are aimed in direct contrast to their stated mission and values.

One such example is Microsoft’s stance on the overturning of Roe v. Wade. After the ruling, which states that the constitution generally protects the right to choose an abortion, was struck down, Microsoft came out in support of its workers by saying it will cover [employee travel expenses](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jun/25/companies-abortion-access-employees-disney-levi-strauss-microsoft-jp-morgan) for abortions. However, despite this apparent stance in support of abortion rights, the company has a decades-long history of [funding conservative](https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1999/05/07/microsofts-window-of-influence/424f0b28-e86c-42cf-a4c8-cb2db173715d/) rightwing politics. This is a key illustration of how companies, like Microsoft, have the power to influence policies that extend far beyond just their own business  interests.

Corporations usually provide financial support to certain candidates, political action committees (PACs), ballot measures, or other similar organisations to aid them in their long-term goals or to push public policies that align with their business strategy. However these expenditures, aimed to promote a company’s financial returns, can end up at odds with the company’s stated values. In this example, Microsoft has taken no responsibility for policies their funding has ended up supporting. This not only flies against company values, it can also stand to alienate their customer base and damage Microsoft’s  brand reputation hurting the [long-term value](https://hbr.org/2022/07/how-greenwashing-affects-the-bottom-line) for shareholders.

When consumers make their spending decision, they are increasingly looking at the ESG values of their purchases. In particular, [over 40%](https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/growth-marketing-and-sales/our-insights/how-us-consumers-are-feeling-shopping-and-spending-and-what-it-means-for-companies) of consumers consider authenticity very important when making purchase decisions. Thus, putting people before profits and being transparent in business operations makes a key difference for consumers. With the evolution of social media, it is increasingly possible for activists to track down Microsoft’s spending. Irresponsible lobbying can hence negatively impact the company in the long term.

With this proposed model code, however, Microsoft can continue to make its voice heard on legal matters without alienating its stakeholders. Furthermore, by agreeing to be more transparent regarding lobbying practices and considering the potential side effects, the company stays true to its own values as well.

Microsoft has spent [$10.2 million](https://www.politico.com/newsletters/morning-tech/2022/01/24/tech-spent-big-on-lobbying-last-year-00001144) on lobbying the federal government in 2021 , an 8% increase from the previous year. Customers and shareholders, who at the base level provide this funding, have a right to know that this is being done properly and not against values Microsoft markets itself to follow.

**Next AGM**

We won’t know the exact date of Microsoft’s next AGM until they release their 2022 proxy statement, but based on last year’s dates we expect the 2022 AGM to be held sometime around 30th November 2022.

**AGM Record Date**

The record date pertains to the date by which investors must hold their shares in a company in order to participate in the company’s AGM. We won’t know Microsoft’s 2022 AGM record date until they release their proxy statement, but based on last year’s dates we expect it to be sometime around 30th September 2022.

**Supporting this Campaign**

If you purchase Microsoft stock from Tulipshare before the next AGM record date, you will be eligible to vote at the next Microsoft AGM and receive an email from us nearer the time about how to do so. 

Unfortunately we will not be eligible to submit a proposal for the 2022 AGM, but with the launch of this campaign we will begin immediate discussions with Microsoft’s Investor Relations team with the view of submitting a proposal in time for the 2023 proposal if we cannot come to a resolution prior to then.


Microsoft

In response to the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe vs. Wade, Microsoft stated it will provide travel expense reimbursement for employees seeking abortions and gender-affirming care anywhere in the country. However, it has a history of supporting conservative right-wing politics whereby some of the money their funding for political action committees ends up funding anti-abortion movements. 

Stop Microsoft From Funding Anti-Abortion Movements

Stop @Microsoft From Funding Anti-Abortion Movements

The Procter & Gamble Company is focused on providing branded consumer packaged goods to the consumers across the world. The Company operates through five segments: Beauty; Grooming; Health Care; Fabric & Home Care, and Baby, Feminine & Family Care. The Company sells its products through approximately 180 countries and territories primarily through mass merchandisers, grocery stores, membership club stores, drug stores, department stores, distributors, wholesalers, baby stores, specialty beauty stores, e-commerce, high-frequency stores, pharmacies, electronics stores and professional channels. It offers products under the brands, such as Head & Shoulders, Herbal Essences, Pantene, Rejoice, Olay, Old Spice, Safeguard, Secret, SK-II, Braun, Gillette, Venus, Crest, Oral-B, Metamucil, Neurobion, Pepto-Bismol, Vicks, Ariel, Downy, Gain, Tide, Cascade, Dawn, Fairy, Febreze, Mr. Clean, Swiffer, Luvs, Pampers, Always, Always Discreet, Tampax, Bounty, Charmin and Puffs.

Estimated 2023 AGM date for P&G

Estimated 2023 record date for P&G

**Important Disclosure**: Tulipshare has co-invested alongside our users in support of this campaign. Tulipshare currently owns 250 Procter & Gamble shares. Please see below to learn more about supporting our campaign.

**Our Goal**

In 2020 a majority of shareholders backed a proposal for P&G to address their contributions to deforestation. But since then there has been no meaningful action, which suggests the board isn’t listening to shareholders. Our goal is simple: to install a board member who can provide action where the current board cannot. We believe an independent chair with experience in achieving sustainability goals will add value and balance to the board (and company) and ensure deforestation concerns are being addressed.

**Why It's Important**

Procter & Gamble is one of the world’s [top](https://www.consultancy.uk/news/26874/the-worlds-40-largest-fast-moving-consumer-goods-companies) fast moving consumer goods (products that move quickly and at a low cost) companies and they currently target primary forests, like the [Canadian boreal](https://www.nrdc.org/stories/why-canadas-boreal-forest-important), to harvest palm oil for many of their products. So much so that The National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) [called out](https://www.nrdc.org/stop-procter-gamble-flushing-away-our-forests) P&G for “flushing away our forests.” Similarly, Rainforest Action Network [reports](https://www.ran.org/procter-and-gamble/) that P&G is complicit in destroying rainforests and the livelihoods of Indigenous communities by expanding palm oil plantations.

In response to this, in 2020 a shareholder proposal requested that Procter & Gamble evaluate how it can eliminate deforestation and primary forest degradation from its supply chains. A whopping [67%](https://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-0000080424/513b850b-15e6-45b9-b55b-e685be11e4fa.pdf) majority of the votes cast at P&G’s 2020 AGM were in favour of the proposal - the highest **ever** vote for a deforestation proposal, receiving twice as many shareholder votes as any previous resolution filed on the issue, [per](https://www.greencentury.com/pg-shareholders-resoundingly-support-deforestation-proposal/) Green Century Funds. **However, Procter & Gamble has failed to meaningfully investigate its role in driving deforestation and primary forest degradation.**

**As shareholders, we are part owners of the company, and so our concerns should be addressed.**  If the current board is not prepared to facilitate shareholder trust, then we need to look at the construct and determine where improvements can be made.

The Chairman is responsible for leading the Board and focusing it on strategic matters, overseeing the Group's business and setting high governance standards. Today that person is Jon Moeller who also happens to be the President and Chief Executive Officer at P&G. Prior to his current roles at P&G, Moeller spent eight years on the board of Monsanto – the former corporation [responsible](https://www.europeanpressprize.com/article/monsanto-papers/) for producing environmentally harmful and potentially carcinogenic products – during which, Monsanto [influenced and undermined](https://www.baumhedlundlaw.com/toxic-tort-law/monsanto-roundup-lawsuit/monsanto-papers/) scientific research to protect the company’s image and products, even at the expense of human health.

Moeller’s dual role as CEO and board chair amplifies his backsliding approach to environmental sustainability and innovation. Moreover, Moeller [repeatedly](https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/pg-investor-brief-20201006.pdf) refuses invitations to meet with NGOs and P&G family members to discuss environmental supply chain concerns, and instead opts to placate investors rather than meaningfully change corporate practices. In response, human rights activists and descendants from both of Procter & Gamble’s founding families [protested](https://www.cincinnati.com/picture-gallery/news/2022/10/11/photos-p-g-descendants-protest-cincinnati-headquarters/10467981002/) the company’s failure to address unsustainable sourcing of materials from climate-critical forests in the Canadian boreal and Southeast Asia outside P&G’s headquarters during the 2022 AGM.

Overall, Procter & Gamble has failed to meaningfully address shareholders’ concerns, instead responding with greenwashing, misleading talking points, and cosmetic measures. Shareholders have lost confidence in the board’s ability to deliver on deforestation targets, and the company’s inaction will almost certainly lead to missed opportunities for capitalizing on marketplace shifts toward more sustainable products, in addition to furthering risks for the company.

Hence the need for an **independent board chair** to ensure corrective measures will be undertaken when P&G fails to meet its mandate or that of shareholders, and proactively adhere to changes in consumer and marketplace expectations.

**Next AGM**

We won’t know the exact date of P&G’s next AGM until the company releases its 2023 proxy statement, but based on this year’s dates we expect the 2023 AGM to be held sometime around 11th October 2023.

**AGM Record Date**

The record date pertains to the date by which investors must hold their shares in a company in order to participate in the company’s AGM.
 
We won’t know P&G’s 2023 record date until the company’s 2023 proxy statement is released, but based on this year’s dates we expect it to be sometime around 12th August 2023.

**Supporting This Campaign** 

If you purchase P&G stock from Tulipshare before the next AGM record date, you will be eligible to vote at the next P&G AGM and receive an email from us closer to the deadline about how to do so.




It’s time to shake up the board and add an independent chair who can help P&G be more sustainable.

Procter & Gamble

Procter & Gamble have so far ignored shareholders' requests to curb deforestation, so it’s time to shake up the board and add an independent chair who can help P&G be more sustainable.

Create a Planet-Friendly Supply Chain at Procter & Gamble

Create a planet-friendly supply chain at Procter & Gamble

CarMax, Inc. (CarMax) is a retailer of used vehicles. The Company operate in two reportable segments: CarMax Sales Operations and CarMax Auto Finance (CAF). Its CarMax Sales Operations segment consists auto merchandising and service operations, excluding financing provided by CAF. Its CAF segment consists solely of its own finance operation that provides financing to customers buying retail vehicles. CarMax Sales Operations segment sells used vehicles, purchases used vehicles from customers and other sources, sells related products and services, and arranges financing options for customers. Its omni-channel platform provides multiple ways for to interact. The Company provides range of other related products and services, including extended protection plan (EPP) products and vehicle repair service. EPP products include extended service plans and guaranteed asset protection that covers unpaid balance on an auto loan in the event of a total loss of the vehicle or unrecovered theft.

Next CarMax AGM 

Shareholder proposal filed at CarMax

Estimated record date for CarMax

**Our Goal**

Our goal is to support *As You Sow’s* [proposal](https://www.asyousow.org/resolutions/2023/01/09-carmax-responsible-carbon-offsetting) to CarMax Inc. A “win” would result in CarMax agreeing to publish a report disclosing if and how carbon offsets are used to achieve company emissions reduction goals, describing all criteria used for offset purchases, and disclosing the type and quality of offsets purchased.

**Why It's Important**

As Net Zero emissions and carbon neutrality [commitments](https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/11/1130317) have increased globally, the [need for accurate reporting](https://www.forbes.com/sites/kensilverstein/2023/01/25/the-carbon-credit-market-confuses-the-corporate-world/?sh=5430f2545362) on the use and quality of voluntary carbon credits has become paramount.

The voluntary carbon market remains a [“wild west,”](https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/carbon-credit-fraud-assumptions-are-challenged-in-new-study-1.1841036) with no globally accepted standards yet in place for ensuring effective emissions offsets, leading to the [risk](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jan/18/revealed-forest-carbon-offsets-biggest-provider-worthless-verra-aoe) that companies can take credit for offsets not producing real-world emissions reductions.

Expert groups, including the [Climate Action 100+ initiative](https://www.climateaction100.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Climate-Action-100-Benchmark-Indicators-FINAL-3.12.pdf), the [United Nations](https://www.un.org/en/chronicle/article/beyond-carbon-markets), and the [Science Based Targets](https://sciencebasedtargets.org/blog/science-based-net-zero-targets-less-net-more-zero) initiative, agree that best practices for carbon offsetting include limiting use of offsets to achieve decarbonisation targets, especially in sectors where viable low-carbon or zero-carbon technologies exist. Experts [urge](https://sciencebasedtargets.org/resources/files/Beyond-Value-Chain-Mitigation-FAQ.pdf) the prioritisation of operational and value chain decarbonization, and underscore that carbon credits are not substitutes for such emission reductions. Companies can avoid the perception of greenwashing by prioritising value chain decarbonization and being transparent about any use of offsets.

Companies that use offsets should provide clarity on how they are being used, for example, whether they are used to mitigate current emissions for purposes of carbon neutrality goals or to meet company greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets. Companies should also disclose the types of offsets purchased, provide information on the quality of offsets, and provide verification as to additionality, permanence, and other key quality metrics. By [providing clarity](https://cdn.cdp.net/cdp-production/cms/guidance_docs/pdfs/000/003/101/original/CDP_technical_note_-_Climate_transition_plans.pdf?1643994309) on offset use and quality, companies can ensure investors they are responding appropriately to the growing climate challenge and are avoiding greenwashing and associated reputational risks.

CarMax has [committed](https://socialresponsibility.carmax.com/pdf-viewer-3/web/viewer.html#page=1) to achieve a 50% reduction in Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas emissions by 2025, yet its Scope 1 emissions have increased by 55% from its 2018 baseline. CarMax [states](https://s27.q4cdn.com/743947716/files/doc_financials/2021/sr/CarMax-Strategy-and-Responsibility-Overview.pdf) it will purchase “verified and socially beneficial offsets” but does not disclose key details of its offsetting strategy, including the degree to which it relies on offsets to achieve its climate goals. Aligning corporate offsetting policies with best practices in emissions reductions will address investor climate concerns, avoid the perception of greenwashing, and ensure that CarMax is prepared to excel in a decarbonising economy and maximise opportunities to advance technology and resilience.

Proponents recommend, at Board discretion, that the requested report should:

- Clarify if and how carbon offsets are, or are planned to be, used to meet the Company’s 2025 emissions reduction and Net Zero by 2050 goals;

- Disclose Company criteria for procuring [high-quality offsets](https://icvcm.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/ICVCM-Public-Consultation-FINAL-Part-4.pdf), including, for instance, additionality, permanence, leakage, reversibility, and environmental justice risks; and

- Disclose the project name, location, type, supplier, third-party verifier and number of credits purchased, originated, and retired on an annual basis.

**Next AGM**

We won’t know CarMax’s next AGM until the company releases its 2023 Proxy Statement, but based on 2022 dates we expect the 2023 AGM to be held sometime around 28th June 2023.

**AGM Record Date**

The record date pertains to the date by which investors must hold their shares in a company in order to participate in the company’s AGM. We won’t know CarMax’s 2023 record date until the company’s 2023 proxy statement is released, but based on their 2022 dates we expect it to be sometime around 22nd April 2023.

**Supporting This Campaign**

If you purchase CarMax stock from Tulipshare before the next AGM record date, you will be eligible to vote at the next AGM and receive an email from us closer to the deadline about how to do so.  

Tulipshare is asking CarMax Inc implement responsible carbon offsetting.

CarMax Inc.

We want CarMax Inc. to disclose its carbon offsets so investors can assess whether the company is on track to achieve its emissions reduction targets.

Help CarMax Implement Responsible Carbon Offsetting 

We're asking @CarMax implement responsible carbon offsetting!

Mastercard Incorporated is a technology company that connects consumers, financial institutions, merchants, governments and businesses across the world, enabling them to use electronic forms of payment. The Company allows users to make payments by creating a range of payment solutions and services using its brands, which include MasterCard, Maestro and Cirrus. The Company's services facilitate transactions on its core network among account holders, merchants, financial institutions, businesses, governments and other organizations in markets globally. Its products include consumer credit, consumer debit and prepaid, and commercial credit and debit. The Company offers additional payment capabilities that include automated clearing house (ACH) transactions (both batch and real-time account-based payments). The Company also offers other services, including cyber and intelligence solutions. The Company has connections across more than 210 countries and territories.

Next Mastercard AGM 

Estimated record date for Mastercard

**Our Goal**

Our goal is to support *As You Sow’s* [proposal](https://www.asyousow.org/resolutions/2022/12/29-mastercard-disclosure-incongruent-lobbying-activity) to Mastercard. A “win” would result in Mastercard agreeing to publish a report analysing the misalignment of its political and electioneering expenditures during the previous year against its publicly stated values and policies, explaining instances of incongruent expenditures and stating whether the Company plans to make changes in its contributions.

**Why It's Important**

When a company’s political expenditures don’t align with its publicly-stated values, it exposes the company - and therefore investors - to financial and reputational risks, making it essential for Mastercard to disclose its incongruent expenditures and make necessary changes. 

Mastercard states that “[it is committed to doing well by doing good](https://www.mastercard.com/news/perspectives/2022/esg-goals-and-employee-compensation/),” a vision that, allegedly, inspires “[everything](https://www.mastercard.com/global/en/vision/corp-responsibility.html)” the Company does. This includes striving to engage in the political process and policy arena “[in the most responsible and ethical way](https://investor.mastercard.com/corporate-governance/policies-and-reports/default.aspx)”. 

Despite the above mentioned statements, Mastercard’s political expenditures appear to not align with its public statements on company values, views and operational practices. This is important because by not aligning its political expenditure with company values, Mastercard and its shareholders are likely to face financial and reputational risks as well as a reduction in its market share as consumers move to organisations who put their money where their mouth is.

For example, Mastercard trumpets its commitment to “mobilising against climate change” including adopting a [Net Zero by 2040 goal](https://www.asyousow.org/resolutions/2022/12/29-mastercard-disclosure-incongruent-lobbying-activity#_ftn4). In fact, the Company has particularly proclaimed its [efforts to address](https://normative.io/insight/mastercard/) its Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions. However, Mastercard is a [member](https://www.businessroundtable.org/about-us/members) of organisations like the Business Roundtable that opposes meaningful climate action. The Business Roundtable “[spent millions](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/19/top-us-business-lobby-group-climate-action-business-roundtable)” fighting climate legislation, and, in particular, has opposed efforts to require companies to disclose their Scope 3 emissions. 

Similarly, although Mastercard promotes [internal and external](https://www.mastercard.com/news/perspectives/2022/esg-goals-and-employee-compensation/) [ESG](https://www.mastercardservices.com/en/solutions/environmental-social-and-governance) practices, it continues to sponsor the State Financial Officers Foundation (SFOF), an organisation that promotes government policies [punishing](https://www.responsible-investor.com/kkr-no-longer-listed-on-sponsorship-page-of-us-anti-esg-foundation/) companies that take ESG factors into consideration in their investment decision making. While Mastercard is working on [eliminating](https://www.marketwatch.com/story/mastercard-will-let-you-track-the-climate-impact-of-your-spending-habits-11618229211) its greenhouse gas emissions, SFOF promotes legislation that prohibits states from contracting with companies whose greenhouse gas reduction policies negatively [affect fossil fuel companies](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/05/climate/republican-treasurers-climate-change.html). This means that Mastercard sponsors SFOF despite the fact that policies promoted by SFOF directly harm Mastercard’s business. Other organisations, such as Federated Hermes, which previously supported SFOF prior to its anti-ESG work, [withdrew their membership](https://www.netzeroinvestor.net/news-and-views/federated-hermes-to-end-sponsorship-of-us-anti-esg-treasurers-group) with the organisation. 

Mastercard and its shareholders would benefit from the Company weighing the benefits of funding politically-oriented organisations whose policies may negatively impact its business, are likely to increase climate risk, and are not aligned with its own climate-related policies. 

**Next AGM**

We won’t know Mastercard’s next AGM until the company releases its 2023 Proxy Statement, but based on 2022 dates we expect the 2023 AGM to be held sometime around 21st June 2023.

**AGM Record Date**

The record date pertains to the date by which investors must hold their shares in a company in order to participate in the company’s AGM. We won’t know Mastercard’s 2023 record date until the company’s 2023 proxy statement is released, but based on their 2022 dates we expect it to be sometime around 22nd April 2023.

**Supporting This Campaign**

If you purchase Mastercard stock from Tulipshare before the next AGM record date, you will be eligible to vote at the next AGM and receive an email from us closer to the deadline about how to do so.  


Tulipshare is asking Mastercard to disclose incongruent lobbying activity.

Mastercard Inc

We want Mastercard’s political expenditures to align with its public statements on company values and operational practices. 

Disclose Incongruent Lobbying Activity at Mastercard

We're asking @Mastercard to disclose incongruent lobbying activity!

As You Sow

#### Proud to Partner With As You Sow On This Campaign

As You Sow is the nation’s leading shareholder advocacy nonprofit, with a 30-year track record promoting environmental and social corporate responsibility and advancing values-aligned investing. Its issue areas include climate change, ocean plastics, pesticides, racial justice, workplace diversity, and executive compensation. The strategic partnership between As You Sow and Tulipshare empowers retail investors globally to use their shareholder power in support of resolutions on climate, racial justice, and other pressing issues.

The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. is a global financial institution that delivers a range of financial services across investment banking, securities, investment management and consumer banking to a diversified client base that includes corporations, financial institutions, governments and individuals. The Company segments include Global Banking & Markets, Asset & Wealth Management and Platform Solutions. The Global Banking & Markets segment includes financing, advisory services, risk distribution, and hedging for its institutional and corporate clients, including Fixed Income, Currency and Commodities (FICC) and Equities, Investment Banking and Marquee. The Asset & Wealth Management segment includes advice, investing, and execution for institutions and individuals across public and private markets. The Platform Solutions segment includes consumer platforms, such as partnerships offering credit cards and point-of-sale financing, and transaction banking and other platform businesses.

Estimated 2023 record date for Goldman Sachs

Next Goldman Sachs AGM 

**Our Goal**

Our goal is to support both Sierra Club’s and As You Sow’s separate proposals to Goldman Sachs by launching a campaign that allows individuals to invest in a safer and more just future where concrete climate transition plans are implemented.
 
**A “win” for Sierra Club’s proposal would result in:**
Goldman Sachs adopting a policy for a time-bound phase-out of lending and underwriting to projects and companies engaging in new fossil fuel exploration and development. This will enable support for Goldman Sachs’ energy clients’ low-carbon transition.

**A “win” for As You Sow’s proposal would result in:**
Goldman Sachs issuing a report disclosing a transition plan that describes how it intends to align its financing activities with its 2030 sectoral greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets, including the specific measures and policies to be implemented, reductions to be achieved by such measures and policies, and timelines for implementation and associated emission reductions.

**Why It's Important**

Goldman Sachs is one of the world’s largest backers of fossil fuels, providing nearly [$119 billion](https://www.bankingonclimatechaos.org/) in lending and underwriting to fossil fuel companies during 2016-2021, including new fossil fuel exploration and development programs. Thus, Goldman Sachs has a critical role to play in achieving Net Zero by 2050 goals considering the climate crisis is primarily caused by fossil fuel production and combustion, [enabled](https://www.greenamerica.org/blog/climate-urgency-break-your-mega-bank) by funding from financial institutions. 

Climate change poses a systemic risk, with [estimated](https://www.swissre.com/media/press-release/nr-20210422-economics-of-climate-change-risks.html) global gross domestic product (“GDP”) loss of 11-14% by midcentury under current trajectories. The Net Zero Banking Alliance (“NZBA”) [notes](https://www.unepfi.org/net-zero-banking/) that 40% of global banking assets have committed to aligning lending and investment portfolios with Net Zero by 2050. But targets alone are insufficient, which is why investors are calling on Goldman Sachs to demonstrate concrete transition strategies to credibly achieve the company’s disclosed emission reduction targets.

Goldman Sachs is a member of the NZBA and has announced a Net Zero by 2050 greenhouse gas emissions (“GHG”) reduction goal for its financed emissions. It also has set 2030 intensity reduction [targets](https://www.goldmansachs.com/accelerating-transition/accelerating-transition-report.pdf) for the oil and gas, power, and auto manufacturing sectors. As a reminder from our Wells Fargo campaign, intensity targets consider economic output. For example, some intensity targets are measured per unit of GDP, and grow or shrink depending on that measure of economic output. They are not absolute (where reduction goes down a certain set percentage over a certain amount of time).

To achieve these goals, Goldman [states](https://www.goldmansachs.com/accelerating-transition/accelerating-transition-report.pdf) that it is “expanding its commercial capabilities to help clients measure and manage their climate-related exposure”; “developing new financing tools tied to progress on climate transition”; and investing in “climate solutions and emerging technologies” for hard to abate sectors” including a ten-year, $750 billion commitment to sustainable finance. While the described actions will help clients manage and reduce their emissions, they do not demonstrate a concrete transition plan for how Goldman will achieve its 2030 sectoral reduction targets. An effective transition plan creates accountability by describing the indicators, milestones, metrics, and timelines necessary to deliver on its decarbonization targets and ensure investors that it is accountable for reducing its financed emissions in alignment with its 2030 targets. 

A transition plan might include, for example, disclosure of clients’ estimated annual reductions and how the bank plans to achieve remaining emissions reductions. Other elements of such a plan might include client and employee incentives or disincentives; setting mandatory actions, including loan approval guidelines, investment and underwriting priorities, or prohibitions; and developing policies or guidelines that otherwise restrict, limit, or condition bank business activities, along with expected associated reductions from each.

According to [scientific consensus](https://www.iisd.org/system/files/2022-10/navigating-energy-transitions-mapping-road-to-1.5.pdf), limiting warming to 1.5°C means that the world cannot develop new oil and gas fields or coal mines beyond those already approved (new fossil fuel exploration and development). Existing fossil fuel supplies are [sufficient](https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/resources/spm-headline-statements/) to satisfy global energy needs, and new oil and gas fields would [not produce in time](https://www.iea.org/commentaries/what-does-the-current-global-energy-crisis-mean-for-energy-investment) to mitigate current energy market turmoil resulting from the Ukraine War.

The United Nations has [recommended](https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/high-level_expert_group_n7b.pdf) that financial institution transition plans demonstrate how all parts of the business align with interim targets and long-term net zero targets. Moreover, [frameworks](https://www.iigcc.org/media/2022/07/An-investor-led-framework-of-pilot-indicators-to-assess-banks-on-the-transition-to-net-zero-28-July.pdf) and [guidelines](https://assets.bbhub.io/company/sites/63/2022/06/GFANZ_Recommendations-and-Guidance-on-Net-zero-Transition-Plans-for-the-Financial-Sector_June2022.pdf) exist to help financial institutions operationalize and translate net zero commitments into strategies “with specific objectives . . . against which progress can be assessed.”

Goldman Sachs (Goldman Sachs) has [committed](https://www.goldmansachs.com/accelerating-transition/accelerating-transition-report.pdf) to align its financing with the Paris Agreement, achieving net-zero emissions by 2050, [consistent](https://www.unepfi.org/net-zero-banking/commitment/) with limiting global warming to 1.5°C. However, Goldman Sachs’ policies and practices are not net-zero aligned. 

Without a policy to phase out financing of new fossil fuel exploration and development, Goldman Sachs is unlikely to meet its climate commitments and merits scrutiny for material risks that may include:

● Greenwashing: Regulators are [tightening and enforcing](https://www.bankingsupervision.europa.eu/press/speeches/date/2022/html/ssm.sp220922~bb043aa0bd.en.html) greenwashing regulations, which could result in fines and settlements.
● Regulation: Central banks, including the Fed, are starting to implement [climate stress tests](https://www.bankingsupervision.europa.eu/press/pr/date/2022/html/ssm.pr220708~565c38d18a.en.html) and [scenario analyses](https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/other20220929a.htm), and some have begun to [propose](https://www.bis.org/review/r220223e.htm) increased capital requirements for climate risks.
● Competition: Dozens of global banks have adopted policies to phase out financing for new [oil and gas fields](https://oilgaspolicytracker.org/) and [coal mines](https://coalpolicytool.org/).
● Reputation: [Campaigns](https://stopthemoneypipeline.com/) targeting Goldman Sachs’ climate policies include organisations with tens of millions of global members and supporters, including current and potential Goldman Sachs customers.

By exacerbating climate change, Goldman Sachs is increasing systemic risk, which will have significant negative impacts – including [physical risks and transition risks](https://www.bis.org/bcbs/publ/d517.pdf) – for itself and for diversified investors.

Best practices for banks like Goldman Sachs to achieve net zero involve financing of companies reducing scopes 1-3 absolute emissions and allocating capital in line with science-based, independently verified short, medium and long-term decarbonization targets. Organisations like the [Science Based Targets](https://sciencebasedtargets.org/) initiative and [Transition Pathway Initiative](https://www.transitionpathwayinitiative.org/) can provide independent verification of decarbonization targets.
 
This campaign supports two proposals that are asking for: 1) a time-bound phase-out of funding for new fossil fuel exploration and development; and 2) a report that offers shareholders (and the public) valuable information about existing targets and what planned action exists (or doesn’t). Together, these proposals lay the foundation for positive systemic change in the ongoing climate crisis.

**Next AGM**

We won’t know Goldman Sachs’ next AGM until the company releases its 2023 Proxy Statement, but based on this year’s dates we expect the 2023 AGM to be held sometime around 28th April 2023.

**AGM Record Date**

The record date pertains to the date by which investors must hold their shares in a company in order to participate in the company’s AGM. We won’t know Goldman Sachs’ 2023 record date until the company’s 2023 proxy statement is released, but based on this year’s dates we expect it to be sometime around 28th February 2023.

**Supporting This Campaign**

If you purchase Goldman Sachs stock from Tulipshare before the next AGM record date, you will be eligible to vote at the next AGM and receive an email from us closer to the deadline about how to do so.  





Tulipshare is asking GoldmanSachs to implement a climate transition plan.

Goldman Sachs Group

The banking sector has a critical role to play in achieving global Net Zero targets by 2050, and Goldman Sachs, one of the world’s largest financiers of fossil fuels, is no exception.  This is why we’re calling on Goldman Sachs to implement concrete transition strategies for disclosed emission reduction targets. 


Implement a Climate Transition Plan at Goldman Sachs

We're asking @GoldmanSachs to implement a climate transition plan.

Comcast Corporation is a media and technology company. The Company has three primary businesses: Comcast Cable, NBCUniversal and Sky. Its Comcast Cable business operates in the Cable Communications segment. Its NBCUniversal business operates in three business segments: Media, Studios and Theme Parks. Its Cable Communications segment consists of the operations of comcast cable, which provides broadband, video, voice, wireless, and other services under the XFINITY brand. Its Media segment consists of television and streaming platforms, including national, regional, and international cable networks. Its Studios segment consists of film and television studio production and distribution operations. Its Theme Parks segment consists of its Universal theme parks. The Sky segment includes a direct-to-consumer business, providing video, broadband, voice and wireless phone services, and a content business, operating entertainment networks, the Sky News broadcast network and Sky Sports networks.

Next Comcast AGM 

Estimated record date for Comcast

Proposal filed to assess systemic climate risk from retirement plan options.

Shareholder proposal filed at Comcast

**Our Goal**

Our goal is to support *As You Sow’s* [proposal](https://www.asyousow.org/resolutions/2022/12/21-comcast-assess-climate-risk-retirement-plans) to Comcast. A “win” would result in Comcast agreeing to publish a report, disclosing how the Company is protecting Plan beneficiaries with longer investment time horizons from climate risk in the Company’s default retirement options. 

**Why It’s Important**

Climate change poses growing, systemic risk to the economy. If global climate goals are not met, workers face the likelihood of significant negative impacts to their retirement portfolios. Indeed, [Swiss Re](https://www.swissre.com/media/press-release/nr-20210422-economics-of-climate-change-risks.html) predicts a 4% decline in global GDP by 2050 if global temperature increases are kept below 2 degrees Celsius, but up to an 18% decline without effective mitigation. 

Comcast, “[the second largest broadcasting and cable television company in the world by revenue](https://fortune.com/company/comcast/),” has taken some action to address climate change. For example, the Company has [committed to reach carbon neutrality for Scope 1 and 2 emissions](https://update.comcast.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/33/dlm_uploads/2021/06/Comcast-Impact-Report-FIN3.pdf), across its global operations, by 2035. However, while decarbonising part of its business, Comcast’s 401(k) retirement plan (“Plan”) continues to invest significantly in companies that contribute to climate change, jeopardising workers’ life savings. 

Comcast’s employee retirement funds are automatically invested in the Plan’s default investment option unless employees proactively choose different investments. Therefore, the majority of Comcast Plan’s [$17.96 billion in assets are invested in its default option](https://iyv-charts.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/retirement-plans/comcast/comcast-corporation-employee-savings-plans-master-trust-form-5500-filing-and-attachment-2021.pdf).

The Company selected Vanguard Target Retirement funds as the Plan’s default offering, and [these funds](https://investyourvalues.org/retirement-plans/comcast) significantly invest in fossil fuel companies and companies contributing to deforestation. In fact, Comcast’s retirement plan currently offers no diversified equity funds that are low carbon, defined as intentionally avoiding investments in fossil fuels companies, companies with deforestation risk, and companies with high carbon emissions. It offers zero funds screened for environmental/social impact. 

Therefore, by investing employee’s retirement savings into companies with outsize contributions to climate change, Comcast is generating climate risk, including transition risk and long-term systemic risk, to workers’ portfolios. Comcast’s default 401(k) choice risks compromising its obligation to select retirement plan investment options in the best interests of its plan participants, including those with retirement dates more than a decade out. 

A recent scorecard, produced by investor representative As You Sow, shows that the [Comcast retirement plan default option is rated poor](https://investyourvalues.org/retirement-plans/comcast) due to significant investments in fossil fuel companies and companies with deforestation risk. 
Failing to minimise material climate risk in its 401(k) Plan default opinion may make it more difficult for Comcast to attract and retain top talent, especially due to the increasingly competitive employee recruitment and retention landscape. In fact, employee polling indicates that firms’ environmental records are an important consideration in [choosing a job](https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/talent-acquisition/pages/climate-change-branding-can-lift-recruitment-and-retention.aspx). Employee polling also reveals increasing demand for climate-safe [retirement plan options](https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/09/workers-want-elusive-socially-responsible-investments-in-401k-survey.html). 

Given the threat that climate change poses to employee’s life savings, Comcast can help ensure employee loyalty and satisfaction, and demonstrate that it is actively safeguarding all employee retirement savings, no matter when they are set to retire, by minimising climate risk in its Plan offerings, especially in its default option. The federal government recently clarified that fiduciaries may appropriately consider climate risk in the selection of plan offerings, including in the [default option](https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/12/01/2022-25783/prudence-and-loyalty-in-selecting-plan-investments-and-exercising-shareholder-rights). 

**Next AGM**

We won’t know Comcast’s next AGM until the company releases its 2023 Proxy Statement, but based on 2022 dates we expect the 2023 AGM to be held sometime around 1st June 2023.

**AGM Record Date**

The record date pertains to the date by which investors must hold their shares in a company in order to participate in the company’s AGM. We won’t know Comcast’s 2023 record date until the company’s 2023 proxy statement is released, but based on their 2022 dates we expect it to be sometime around 4th April 2023.

**Supporting This Campaign**

If you purchase Comcast stock from Tulipshare before the next AGM record date, you will be eligible to vote at the next AGM and receive an email from us closer to the deadline about how to do so.  

Tulipshare is asking Comcast Corp to report on assessing systemic climate risk from their retirement plan options.

Comcast Corporation

Comcast’s employee retirement funds are automatically invested in funds that invest in fossil fuel companies and companies contributing to deforestation. To protect its employees from climate risk, the Company should assess the risk of its retirement plan options. 

Comcast Should Report On Assessing Systemic Climate Risk From Retirement Plan Options

Johnson & Johnson

## Campaigns that support ‘people’ speak to the ‘Social’ pillar within the traditional ESG agenda. 

This means focusing on social justice through organisational policies and practices regarding human rights, gender equality, business ethics, supply chain management, diversity and inclusion, and social impacts resulting from corporate operations.

Through our ‘people campaigns’, our mission is to promote personal welfare through corporate responsibility. Our approach is to leverage the collective shareholder rights of our investors to fight to influence the corporate governance of public companies and push them to be more ethical. We want to work towards a world where protecting people is central to corporate decision-making. 

### How can actively engaging with your investments help people?

Shareholders who engage with their shareholder rights and use their proxy votes can push for fairer business practices. If you own enough shares in a company, you can even submit shareholder proposals for other shareholders to vote on, thus opening a valuable avenue for activism. 

### What kind of business practices can we push for?

Promoting a safer workplace is of utmost importance, and we’ve already begun work through our Amazon campaign to push for better working conditions for their warehouse workers. But there are other ways to improve a business from a social standpoint. For example, racial equity audits are being implemented in some major global brands to help pinpoint issues with diversity and inclusion. Equal pay and gender equality are other ways to improve social initiatives. It’s also important to monitor how a business’s choices affect their consumers, for instance including potentially harmful ingredients such as talc in skin care products that can potentially cause cancer. 



Health Equity

Alphabet, Inc.

ExxonMobil

Bank of America Corp

BlackRock, Inc.

Papa John’s

Caterpillar Inc.

Berkshire Hathaway

Chubb

Netflix Inc.

Raytheon 

Wells Fargo & Co.

Morgan Stanley

Skechers USA, Inc.

Deere & Co.

Lockheed Martin Corp

# Campaigns that support our ‘planet’ speak to the ‘Environmental’ pillar within the traditional ESG agenda. 

We want to push big businesses to do better in making our planet more sustainable, focusing on organisational policies and practices regarding fossil fuels, climate justice, sustainability, animal welfare, and other environmental issues. 

Through our planet campaigns, our mission is to promote environmental corporate responsibility through shareholder engagement. We want to work towards a sustainable world in which protecting the environment is central to corporate decision-making. 


### How engaging with your investments can help the planet

Governments often put pressure on the private sector to be more sustainable, but for lasting change, the pressure must also come from within.  Publicly-held companies cannot ignore their shareholders. Therefore, shareholders who engage with their shareholder rights and use their proxy votes can push for more sustainable business practices. If you own enough shares in a company, you can even submit shareholder proposals for other shareholders to vote on, thus opening a valuable avenue for activism. 


### What does business sustainability look like?

There has been a lot of focus on sustainability in the past few years, but there is still a lot of work to be done when it comes to measuring targets and effectiveness. It’s going to take a huge effort from the financial industry and global governments to increase the efficacy of sustainability targets, but it can be done. Tulipshare seeks to identify opportunities to drive these changes through shareholder activism where we leverage our investments to fight to influence a corporation's behaviour. 

What’s more, our campaigns are another way to unify shareholder voices and make sure businesses are subjected to higher standards when it comes to looking after our planet.

Climate Change

Capri Holdings Ltd.

JPMorgan

Meta Platforms Inc.

Post Holdings

### Corporate governance pertains to the system by which a company is run. 

Campaigns in the corporate governance category address the system of rules, policies, and practices that dictate how a company’s board of directors manage operations of a company, including principles of transparency, accountability, and security.  Matters that pertain to corporate governance can include board composition, executive compensation, political contribution, and lobbying. Poor corporate governance, at best, leads to a company failing to achieve its goals. At worst, it can lead to a company’s collapse and significant financial loss for its shareholders. We want to ensure companies are run fairly and in a responsible way both for their workforce and society at large.

It’s important for shareholders to stay informed about corporate governance as changes in governance can have an enormous effect on not only the business, but also the businesses wider community and even global impact. 

**How engaging with your investments can influence corporate governance**

Publicly held companies are required by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to distribute proxy statements ahead of their annual general meeting (AGM), which should contain information about any proposed nominations or changes to the board of directors as well as executive pay rises. However, how this is communicated to you as an investor is not standardised across all investment platforms which can make it tricky for investors to keep up with all the current information. 

Shareholders have an opportunity to vote on these matters at the AGM or by proxy. Additionally, some shareholders can also request disclosures on a company’s lobbying activities, to shed light on political activity and contributions.

**What can we do to push businesses to have better governance?**

Shareholders have good reason to be concerned about a CEO’s paycheck because excessive pay contributes to inequality not just through pay structures within the company, but in the economy as a whole. It’s important to remember that an increase in a CEO’s paycheck does not necessarily mean their value to the company has increased. So perhaps it’s no surprise that we’re starting to see an increase in investors having a ‘say-on-pay.’

Electing a good board of directors is also highly important and drastic changes to the board can equal drastic changes to corporate governance. This was demonstrated recently when Exxonmobil was forced by shareholders to fire three of its board directors and replace them with three new directors whose aim was to help the company reduce its carbon footprint.

Besides staying informed and encouraging shareholders to vote in the proxy season, Tulipshare’s focus is to fight for the things our users are passionate and leverage shareholder rights wherever possible. If you would like to suggest a campaign that pertains to corporate governance, we’d love to [hear from you ](https://tulipshare.com)

Operational Transparency

Nike

Amazon

# Campaigns that support ‘people’ speak to the ‘Social’ pillar within the traditional ESG agenda.
This means focusing on social justice through organisational policies and practices regarding human rights, gender equality, business ethics, supply chain management, diversity and inclusion, and social impacts resulting from corporate operations.

Through our ‘people campaigns’, our mission is to promote personal welfare through corporate responsibility. Our approach is to leverage the collective shareholder rights of our investors to fight to influence the corporate governance of public companies and push them to be more ethical. We want to work towards a world where protecting people is central to corporate decision-making.

## How can engaging with your investments help people?
Shareholders who engage with their shareholder rights and use their proxy votes can push for fairer business practices. If you own enough shares in a company, you can even submit shareholder proposals for other shareholders to vote on, thus opening a valuable avenue for activism.

## What kind of business practices can we push for?
Promoting a safer workplace is of utmost importance, and we’ve already begun work through our Amazon campaign to push for better working conditions for warehouse workers. But there are other ways to improve a business from a social standpoint. For example, racial equity audits are being implemented in some major global brands to help pinpoint issues with diversity and inclusion. Equal pay and gender equality are other ways to improve social initiatives. It’s also important to monitor how a business’s choices affect its consumers, for instance including potentially harmful ingredients such as talc in skin care products that can potentially cause cancer.

Workers Rights

Salesforce

Ford

Halliburton

Eli Lilly and Co.

Honeywell

Biogen Inc.

UnitedParcelService

Philip Morris

## Campaigns that support ‘people’ speak to the ‘Social’ pillar within the traditional ESG agenda. 

This means focusing on social justice through organisational policies and practices regarding human rights, gender equality, business ethics, supply chain management, diversity and inclusion, and social impacts resulting from corporate operations.

Through our ‘people campaigns’, our mission is to promote personal welfare through corporate responsibility. Our approach is to leverage the collective shareholder rights of our investors to fight to influence the corporate governance of public companies and push them to be more ethical. We want to work towards a world where protecting people is central to corporate decision-making. 

### How can engaging with your investments help people?

Shareholders who engage with their shareholder rights and use their proxy votes can push for fairer business practices. If you own enough shares in a company, you can even submit shareholder proposals for other shareholders to vote on, thus opening a valuable avenue for activism. 

### What kind of business practices can we push for?

Promoting a safer workplace is of utmost importance, and we’ve already begun work through our Amazon campaign to push for better working conditions for warehouse workers. But there are other ways to improve a business from a social standpoint. For example, racial equity audits are being implemented in some major global brands to help pinpoint issues with diversity and inclusion. Equal pay and gender equality are other ways to improve social initiatives. It’s also important to monitor how a business’s choices affect its consumers, for instance including potentially harmful ingredients such as talc in skin care products that can potentially cause cancer. 



Racial Equity

Mondelez

Child Labour

Tesla Inc.

# Corporate governance pertains to the system by which a company is run.
Campaigns in the corporate governance category address the system of rules, policies, and practices that dictate how a company’s board of directors manage operations of a company, including principles of transparency, accountability, and security. Matters that pertain to corporate governance can include board composition, executive compensation, political contribution, and lobbying. Poor corporate governance, at best, leads to a company failing to achieve its goals. At worst, it can lead to a company’s collapse and significant financial loss for its shareholders. We want to ensure companies are run fairly and in a responsible way both for their workforce and society at large.

It’s important for shareholders to stay informed about corporate governance as changes in governance can have an enormous effect on not only the business, but also the businesses wider community and even global impact.

## How engaging with your investments can influence corporate governance

Publicly held companies are required by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to distribute proxy statements ahead of their annual general meeting (AGM), which should contain information about any proposed nominations or changes to the board of directors as well as executive pay rises. However, how this is communicated to you as an investor is not standardised across all investment platforms which can make it tricky for investors to keep up with all the current information.

Shareholders have an opportunity to vote on these matters at the AGM or by proxy. Additionally, some shareholders can also request disclosures on a company’s lobbying activities, to shed light on political activity and contributions.

## What can we do to push businesses to have better governance?

Shareholders have good reason to be concerned about a CEO’s pay check, because excessive pay contributes to inequality not just through pay structures within the company, but in the economy as a whole. It’s important to remember that an increase in a CEO’s paycheck does not necessarily mean their value to the company has increased. So perhaps it’s no surprise that we’re starting to see an increase in investors having a ‘say-on-pay.’

Electing a good board of directors is also highly important and drastic changes to the board can equal drastic changes to corporate governance. This was demonstrated recently when Exxonmobil was forced by shareholders to fire three of its board directors and replace them with three new directors whose aim was to help the company reduce its carbon footprint.

Besides staying informed and encouraging shareholders to vote in the proxy season, Tulipshare’s focus is to fight for the things our users are passionate and leverage shareholder rights wherever possible. If you would like to suggest a campaign which pertains to corporate governance, we’d love to hear from you.

CEO Pay

AT&T

AbbVie Inc.

# Corporate governance pertains to the system by which a company is run.
Campaigns in the corporate governance category address the system of rules, policies, and practices that dictate how a company’s board of directors manages operations of a company, including principles of transparency, accountability, and security. Matters that pertain to corporate governance can include board composition, executive compensation, political contribution, and lobbying. Poor corporate governance, at best, leads to a company failing to achieve its goals. At worst, it can lead to a company’s collapse and significant financial loss for its shareholders. We want to ensure companies are run fairly and in a responsible way both for their workforce and society at large.

It’s important for shareholders to stay informed about corporate governance as changes in governance can have an enormous effect on not only the business, but also the business's wider community and even global impact.

## How engaging with your investments can influence corporate governance

Publicly held companies are required by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to distribute proxy statements ahead of their annual general meeting (AGM), which should contain information about any proposed nominations or changes to the board of directors as well as executive pay rises. However, how this is communicated to you as an investor is not standardised across all investment platforms which can make it tricky for investors to keep up with all the current information.

Shareholders have an opportunity to vote on these matters at the AGM or by proxy. Additionally, some shareholders can also request disclosures on a company’s lobbying activities, to shed light on political activity and contributions.

## What can we do to push businesses to have better governance?

Shareholders have good reason to be concerned about a CEO’s paycheck, because excessive pay contributes to inequality not just through pay structures within the company, but in the economy as a whole. It’s important to remember that an increase in a CEO’s paycheck does not necessarily mean their value to the company has increased. So perhaps it’s no surprise that we’re starting to see an increase in investors having a ‘say-on-pay.’

Electing a good board of directors is also highly important and drastic changes to the board can equal drastic changes to corporate governance. This was demonstrated recently when Exxonmobil was forced by shareholders to fire three of its board directors and replace them with three new directors whose aim was to help the company reduce its carbon footprint.

Besides staying informed and encouraging shareholders to vote in the proxy season, Tulipshare’s focus is to fight for the things our users are passionate and leverage shareholder rights wherever possible. If you would like to suggest a campaign that pertains to corporate governance, we’d love to hear from you.

Political Spending

Coca-Cola

McDonald's

Dow Inc.

YUM! Brands, Inc.

RBI Inc

# Campaigns that support our ‘planet’ speak to the ‘Environmental’ pillar within the traditional ESG agenda.

We want to push big businesses to do better in making our planet more sustainable, focusing on organisational policies and practices regarding fossil fuels, climate justice, sustainability, animal welfare, and other environmental issues.

Through our planet campaigns, our mission is to promote environmental corporate responsibility through shareholder engagement. We want to work towards a sustainable world in which protecting the environment is central to corporate decision-making.

## How engaging with your investments can help the planet
The UK government has put pressure on the private sector to be more sustainable, but for lasting change the pressure must also come from within. Publicly-held companies cannot ignore their shareholders. Therefore, shareholders who engage with their shareholder rights and use their proxy votes can push for more sustainable business practices. If you own enough shares in a company, you can even submit shareholder proposals for other shareholders to vote on, thus opening a valuable avenue for activism.

## What does business sustainability look like?
There has been a lot of focus on sustainability in the past few years, but there is still a lot of work to be done when it comes to measuring targets and effectiveness. It’s going to take a huge effort from the financial industry and global governments to increase the efficacy of sustainability targets, but it can be done. Tulipshare seeks to identify opportunities to drive these changes through shareholder activism where we leverage our investments to fight to influence a corporation's behaviour.

What’s more, our campaigns are another way to unify shareholder voices and make sure businesses are subjected to higher standards when it comes to looking after our planet.

Plastic Pollution

NIKE, Inc. is engaged in the designing, marketing and distributing of athletic footwear, apparel, equipment and accessories and services for sports and fitness activities. The Company's operating segments include North America; Europe, Middle East & Africa (EMEA); Greater China; and Asia Pacific & Latin America (APLA). It sells a line of equipment and accessories under the NIKE Brand name, including bags, socks, sport balls, eyewear, timepieces, digital devices, bats, gloves, protective equipment and other equipment designed for sports activities. It also designs products specifically for the Jordan Brand and Converse. The Jordan Brand designs, distributes and licenses athletic and casual footwear, apparel and accessories predominantly focused on basketball performance and culture using the Jumpman trademark. It also designs, distributes and licenses casual sneakers, apparel and accessories under the Chuck Taylor, All Star, One Star, Star Chevron and Jack Purcell trademarks. 

We are still waiting to hear back from Nike's IR team.

Follow-up email sent to Nike

Nike's IR team contacted

Estimated 2023 AGM date for Nike

*Important disclosure: Tulipshare has co-invested alongside our users in support of this campaign. Tulipshare currently owns 276 Nike shares. Please see below to learn more about supporting our campaign.*

**Our Goal**

In the face of deteriorating conditions for garment workers, the American Bar Association has developed a set of  [model contract clauses](https://www.americanbar.org/groups/human_rights/business-human-rights-initiative/contractual-clauses-project/aba-business-law-section-working-group-releases-model-contract-c/) designed to protect workers in international supply chains. 

We are asking Nike to implement these  clauses into all of its supply chain contracts, which will not only make human rights policies into “operational commitments” but also continue to allow Nike to be leaders in supply chain innovation moving forward. We are also asking them to disclose data on their Tier 2 and Tier 3 supply chains, which they do not currently provide.

Incorporating these clauses would require the buyer and supplier to cooperate in protecting human rights and make both parties responsible for the contract’s human rights performance. 

Revising Nike’s supply contracts would better protect Nike and its suppliers, as well as other stakeholders, including workers, who, although not party to the contract, are at risk of being adversely impacted by it. Revised contracts would also begin to satisfy the growing body of legislation requiring human rights due diligence and public disclosure relating to human rights abuses. 

Disclosing information about Tier 2 and Tier 3 supply chains would also give shareholders a better understanding of the human rights risks associated with their supply chain design

**Why This Is Important**

In the first three months of the Covid pandemic, garment workers around the world lost upwards of [US$3billion](https://knowthechain.org/wp-content/uploads/2021-KTC-AF-Benchmark-Report.pdf). Cases of wage theft have [increased exponentially](https://www.workersrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Fired-Then-Robbed.pdf) since the pandemic, with reports of factory workers’ children surviving on [just rice](https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2021/dec/16/worst-fashion-wage-theft-workers-go-hungry-as-indian-suppliers-to-top-uk-brands-refuse-to-pay-minimum-wage) while factories refuse to pay minimum wage. By contrast, many apparel brands profited during the pandemic, with Nike able to pay its shareholders [$2.3billion in dividends](https://investors.nike.com/investors/news-events-and-reports/investor-news/investor-news-details/2021/NIKE-Inc.-Reports-Fiscal-2021-Fourth-Quarter-and-Full-Year-Results/default.aspx) last year.

Nike is one of the world’s favourite and [most valuable](https://www.statista.com/chart/24216/most-valuable-apparel-brands/) apparel brands, a household name fronted by heroes from the athletic world and regularly celebrated in pop-culture. 

They are also supply chain innovators, as one of the first global brands to almost fully outsource their production to factories around the world. This lean manufacturing model has enabled consistent and often [record-breaking profits](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nike-results-idUKKCN26D2Y6), and allowed them to  increase their dividend payouts to shareholders for the past 15 years. 

However, it is the garment workers who bear the expense of this model and Nike’s name has often been entangled with sweatshop scandals and [various violations](https://www.bizjournals.com/portland/news/2016/12/13/reports-find-wage-theft-verbal-abuse-forced.html) of labour standards. In 2019 Nike received the lowest rating from the [Tailored Wages UK](https://archive.cleanclothes.org/resources/publications/tailored-wages-2019-the-state-of-pay-in-the-global-garment-industry/view) report, which stated that  the brand “can show no evidence of a Living Wage being paid to any workers".  

In an effort to improve outcomes for workers in its supply chain,  Nike has developed and maintained its own supply-chain [code of conduct](https://about.nike.com/en/newsroom/resources/nike-supplier-code-of-conduct) since the 1990’s. However, Nike diversifies its outsourcing to [so many different](https://sourci.com.au/blog/nike-products-are-manufactured-in-over-41-countries) countries and factories that Tulipshare believes it is difficult and expensive to effectively enforce this code of conduct, as evidenced by the rising wage theft and human rights violations in garment factories.

Tulipshare therefore proposes that Nike disclose information about its Tier 2 and Tier 3 supply chains, and install a set of model contract clauses designed by the American Bar Association which would better protect workers, as outlined in the Our Goal section above.

**Next AGM**

We won’t know Nike's next AGM until the company releases its 2023 Proxy Statement, but based on 2022 dates we expect the 2023 AGM to be held sometime around 9th September 2023.

**AGM Record Date**

The record date pertains to the date by which investors must hold their shares in a company in order to participate in the company’s AGM. We won’t know Nike’s 2023 record date until the company’s 2023 proxy statement is released, but based on their 2022 dates we expect it to be sometime around 8th July 2023.

**Supporting This Campaign**

By supporting this campaign you are adding your voice to the community of Tulipshare campaign supporters in asking Nike to better protect the garment workers in its supply chain by becoming a shareholder in the company and therefore entitled to have a say in company matters.


Tulipshare is asking Nike to protect its garment workers.

Every item of clothing you own was made by someone. But garment workers - most of whom are women  - are some of the most poorly-paid workers in the world. Nike dominates the market share of shoes and sports apparel thanks to its innovative supply chain model. Tulipshare wants Nike to lead the way in improving human rights for the garment workers who make their clothes, many of whom are now facing the worst of the economic fallout of Covid-19. 

Ask Nike to Protect its Supply Chain Garment Workers

Ask Nike to Protect Its Workers @Nike

Capri Holdings Limited is a holding company. The Company owns brands that are designers, marketers, distributors and retailers of branded women’s and men’s accessories, footwear and ready-to-wear bearing the Versace, Jimmy Choo and Michael Kors tradenames and related trademarks and logos. It operates in three reportable segments: Versace, Jimmy Choo and Michael Kors. Versace segment is engaged in the sale of Versace products through retail stores (including concessions) and e-commerce sites, through wholesale doors (including multi-brand stores). Jimmy Choo segment is engaged in the sale of Jimmy Choo products through retail stores (including concessions) and e-commerce sites, through wholesale doors (including multi-brand stores). Michael Kors segment is engaged in the sale of Michael Kors products through retail stores (including concessions) and e-commerce sites, through wholesale doors. It sells its products through three channels of distribution: retail, wholesale and licensing. 

Next Capri Holdings AGM 

Estimated record date for Capri Holdings

IR team contacted

**Important Disclosure** Tulipshare has co-invested alongside our users in support of this campaign. Tulipshare currently owns 617 Capri shares. Please see below to learn more about supporting our campaign.

**Our Goal**

A “win” would result in Capri Holdings agreeing to issue a report assessing if and how the Company could increase the scale, pace and rigour of its efforts to improve traceability and risk assessment as well as worker voice in its supply chains. 

**Why It's Important**

Capri Holdings (Capri) lags in transparency disclosures and remediation procedures when compared to peers. Companies that do not adequately mitigate human rights violations in their supply chains are exposing themselves and their investors to material financial risk. 

Unlike Capri, competitor [Burberry](https://knowthechain.org/company/burberry_2021/) discloses information on its tracing of raw materials, the percentage of its first-tier and raw material suppliers covered by collective bargaining agreements, strengthened migrant worker policies and a wellbeing tool that engages workers.

While Capri has an audit program covering issues including wage, hour and labour laws and health, safety and environmental regulation, the Company does not mention anything about ensuring its manufacturers have an age verification process. In fact, [Corporate Human Rights Benchmark scores](https://assets.worldbenchmarkingalliance.org/app/uploads/2020/11/Capri-Holdings-CHRB-scorecard-2020.pdf) Capri with zeros on each of the six indicators regarding human rights due diligence.

Further, Capri [does not provide](https://s22.q4cdn.com/557169922/files/doc_downloads/2022/06/2022-Annual-Report.pdf) a supplier list or data on purchasing practices, data on improvements of freedom of association and remediation procedures for supply chain workers in high-risk sourcing areas such as China. The Company also [does not disclose](https://knowthechain.org/wp-content/uploads/2021_KTC_AF_Scorecard_Capri.pdf) the steps it has taken to address the risks of alleged Uyghur forced labour across its supply chain tiers.

[Capri’s Code of Conduct for Business Partners](http://s22.q4cdn.com/557169922/files/doc_downloads/code-of-conduct-for-business-partners.pdf) states its own operation and business partners should respect the legal rights of employees to freely and without harassment participate in worker organisations, shall not use any form of slave, forced, prison, or child labour, and disallow any form of discrimination. Nonetheless, there is no evidence to respect the right to collective bargaining and Capri also does not mention the [International Labour Organisation Declaration](https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_norm/---declaration/documents/normativeinstrument/wcms_716594.pdf), including in its own operations. 

Capri states that it has a “[responsibility to those who work with us](https://www.capriholdings.com/RESPONSIBILITY/Corporate-Social-Responsibility/default.aspx)” and that “[the success of our company is directly linked to the sustainability of the world around us.](https://www.capriholdings.com/RESPONSIBILITY/Corporate-Social-Responsibility/default.aspx)” Shareholders agree and encourage the Company to take steps to ensure workers in its supply chains are aware of their rights and are able to exercise their rights of freedom of association and collective bargaining. 

Failure to adopt and implement policies that mitigate these exposures may subject Capri and its investors to significant systemic and company specific risks. 

**Next AGM**

We won’t know Capri Holdings’ next AGM until the company releases its 2023 Proxy Statement, but based on 2022 dates we expect the 2023 AGM to be held sometime around 3rd August 2023.

**Record Date**

The record date pertains to the date by which investors must hold their shares in a company in order to participate in the company’s AGM. We won’t know Capri Holdings’ 2023 record date until the company’s 2023 Proxy Statement is released, but based on their 2022 dates we expect it to be sometime around 6th June 2023.

**Supporting This Campaign**

If you purchase Capri Holdings stock from Tulipshare before the next AGM record date, you will be eligible to vote at the next AGM and receive an email from us closer to the deadline about how to do so.

We're asking Capri Holdings to take a closer look at its supply chain issues.

We want Capri Holdings Limited (the owner of Versace, Michael Kors and Jimmy Choo) to report on how effectively it traces its supply chains and averts risks so investors can assess whether the Company is adequately protecting its workers.

Ensure that the Owner of Versace, Michael Kors and Jimmy Choo Improves its Supply Chains

Versace, Michael Kors, and Jimmy Choo must implement a sustainable supply chain

Tesla, Inc. designs, develops, manufactures, sells and leases fully electric vehicles and energy generation and storage systems, and offer services related to its products. The Company's automotive segment includes the design, development, manufacturing, sales, and leasing of electric vehicles as well as sales of automotive regulatory credits. Additionally, the automotive segment is also comprised of services and other, which includes non-warranty after-sales vehicle services, sales of used vehicles, retail merchandise, sales by its acquired subsidiaries to third party customers, and vehicle insurance. Its energy generation and storage segment include the design, manufacture, installation, sales and leasing of solar energy generation and energy storage products and related services and sales of solar energy systems incentives. Its automotive products include Model 3, Model Y, Model S and Model X. Powerwall and Megapack are its lithium-ion battery energy storage products.

This has been confirmed, with details of time and location to follow.

2023 AGM date for Tesla

**Important disclosure**: Tulipshare has co-invested alongside our users in support of this campaign. Tulipshare currently owns 44 Tesla shares. Please see below to learn more about supporting our campaign.
 
**Our Goal**
 
At Tesla, CEO pay has been linked to company performance [since 2012](https://www.cnbc.com/2014/04/25/teslas-elon-musk-paid-70000-in-2013.html); and in 2018, Elon Musk was given an exorbitant performance-based [compensation award](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318605/000119312518016648/d500497dex991.htm) consisting of a 10-year grant of stock options hinging strictly on financial benchmarks, namely market cap and revenue-based operational milestones. At the time, Tesla’s Board of Directors [assured](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318605/000119312518035345/d524719ddef14a.htm) investors that *“Elon’s compensation will be 100% aligned with the interests of our stockholders.”*

But the interests of Tesla’s shareholders extend beyond financial targets, and they recognise the need for companies to prioritise environmental, social, and governance policies and practices to sustainably achieve long-term goals while avoiding exposure to regulatory, legal, and reputational risks.

 This is why Tulipshare is demanding that Tesla enact mandatory human rights and environmental due diligence policies that are linked to Elon Musk’s compensation package to incentivise timely and systemic improvements regarding human rights and climate change.
 
**Why It's Important**
 
Elon Musk is Tesla’s CEO, chairman, and [largest shareholder](https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-tesla-trial-pay-package-compensation-board-stock-shareholder-2022-3#:~:text=CNBC%20reported%20that%20Musk%2C%20who,it%20at%20around%20%242.3%20billion.). During a time of social unrest, environmental crisis, and financial instability in the wake of the pandemic, Musk’s [~$56 billion](https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-tesla-trial-pay-package-compensation-board-stock-shareholder-2022-3#:~:text=CNBC%20reported%20that%20Musk%2C%20who,it%20at%20around%20%242.3%20billion.) executive compensation plan has “helped lift the ceiling on CEO pay” and widened the gap between workers and top executives’ pay packages, according to [The New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/25/business/highest-paid-ceos-elon-musk.html).
 
Shareholders have sued Musk and Tesla's board of directors, accusing them of breaching their fiduciary duties to the company and its [shareholders](https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-ordered-provide-elon-musk-compensation-plan-documents-shareholder-lawsuit-2021-5?r=US&IR=T) by granting unjust enrichment to Musk and wasting corporate assets. A U.S. court already [ruled](https://law.justia.com/cases/delaware/court-of-chancery/2019/ca-2018-0408-jrs.html) that Tesla’s CEO compensation award should be reviewed under “heightened judicial suspicion” due to the conflict of interest between the approval of the pay package and Musk’s status as a controlling shareholder.

Musk’s compensation award is so massive, that the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) had to exclude his pay from their most [recent report](https://www.epi.org/publication/ceo-pay-in-2021/) because including his $23.5 billion worth of stock options exercised in 2021 in the sample “would have resulted in an increase of CEO pay in 2021 relative to 2020 of over 300% (the ‘average’ for the sample would have been just under $100 million).”
 
EPI equated Musk’s realised compensation to roughly [1,000 times](https://www.epi.org/publication/ceo-pay-in-2021/) the average pay of other large-company CEOs. Though the report acknowledged that “it may make some sense to provide stock options to a CEO to incentivize the CEO to take measures that will boost shareholder returns,” EPI inquired “is it really necessary to give a CEO options on 16 million shares of stock (which is how many shares Musk exercised options on in 2021) to achieve this goal?” **Considering Musk is Tesla’s largest shareholder, he is already incentivized to increase the company’s financial returns.**
 
It may come as a shock for some, but despite Tesla’s [self-declared goal ](https://www.tesla.com/about)of “Accelerating the World’s Transition to Sustainable Energy,” the company actually lacks a low carbon strategy and codes of business conduct – two crucial items on the list of why the company was [removed](https://www.indexologyblog.com/2022/05/17/the-rebalancing-act-of-the-sp-500-esg-index/) from the S&P 500 ESG Index entirely in 2022 (causing a [6% drop](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/18/why-tesla-was-kicked-out-of-the-sp-500s-esg-index.html) in stock price). Tesla was also removed from the ethical index due to [future risks](https://capital.com/tesla-tsla-stock-suffers-in-dow-jones-esg-shuffle) associated with employee discrimination claims and “multiple deaths and injuries related to its autopilot vehicles,” according to S&P Dow Jones Indices. Given that [inflows into sustainable funds](https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/sustainability/our-insights/does-esg-really-matter-and-why) rose from $5 billion in 2018 to more than $50 billion in 2020—and then to nearly $70 billion in 2021, even Musk’s [criticism](https://www.barrons.com/articles/elon-musk-tesla-esg-51653336436) of ESG does not negate the fact that Tesla needs to increase transparency and accountability on ESG performance to ensure shareholder value.
 
Tesla’s 2021 Impact Report [states](https://www.tesla.com/impact) that “Tesla customers helped accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy by avoiding 8.4 million metric tons of CO2e emissions.” However, the Transition Pathway Initiative currently [ranks](https://www.transitionpathwayinitiative.org/companies/tesla) Tesla’s management quality as a one out of six, stating that the company does not recognise climate change as a relevant risk. Moreover, a [2022 report](https://www.asyousow.org/report-pages/2022/road-to-zero-emissions) from As You Sow found that, out of 55 companies assessed, Tesla is actually making the slowest progress to reach net zero emissions - ranking dead last.
Since the pandemic has highlighted that human rights-related risks are endemic in global value chains, a growing number of investors are [increasingly pressuring](https://investorsforhumanrights.org/news/94-investors-over-us6t-assets-voice-support-mandated-corporate-human-rights-and-environmental) companies and their boards to adopt mandatory corporate human rights and environmental due diligence (mHREDD). The adoption of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) has led to [legislative and regulatory developments](https://gbihr.org/images/general/mHREDD_-_GBI__Clifford_Chance_-_January_2020_.pdf) in various jurisdictions seeking to drive stronger business engagement with human rights risks. And as of March 2021, more than half of S&P 500 companies (57%) [implemented](https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2022/03/19/the-evolving-role-of-esg-metrics-in-executive-compensation-plans/) at least one ESG metric in their compensation plans. These businesses [acknowledge](https://gbihr.org/images/general/mHREDD_-_GBI__Clifford_Chance_-_January_2020_.pdf) a bevy of “potential benefits flowing from **mandatory human rights and environmental due diligence (mHREDD)**, including greater certainty, clarity and coherence – and a more level playing field.”
 
In February 2022 – the month before Tesla opened its [first Giga Factory in Europe](https://www.fastcompany.com/90733755/elon-musk-opens-teslas-first-factory-in-europe-but-theres-one-problem) – the European Commission published a proposal for a directive on corporate sustainability due diligence. This proposal [creates](https://www.klgates.com/Ethical-Supply-Chain-The-European-Commissions-Proposal-for-a-Directive-on-Corporate-Sustainability-Due-Diligence-8-2-2022) several new obligations for corporate supply chains, including the need to prevent adverse impacts of corporate activities on human rights, such as child labor and exploitation of workers, and on the environment. Now, in response to outcries in the United States for a mandatory corporate liability scheme in line with the [EU directive](https://ec.europa.eu/info/business-economy-euro/doing-business-eu/corporate-sustainability-due-diligence_en), a proposal is gaining support that would adopt the equivalent requirements of the [Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA)](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3852975) for human rights and would require companies to document efforts to prevent abuse through due diligence. Additionally, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is [considering](https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2022-46) new rules that would require more detailed disclosure of climate-related risks and greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions.
 
**The United Nations has [outlined](https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/environment/srenvironment/activities/2022-07-01/20220701-sr-environment-policybriefing3.pdf) the key elements of effective and equitable human rights and environmental due diligence, which Tulipshare believes Tesla should implement in anticipation of proposed legislation to avoid greater regulatory and legal risk.**

There is [great shareholder risk](https://techcrunch.com/2018/01/27/elon-musks-new-tesla-pay-plan-encourages-him-to-shoot-for-the-stars-but-what-if-he-misses/?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAJkKghFyzkJzJHoO8zwE7TuFaOrPF6CvFVVhrwysd4j86S-f0-_XiCVNoSFWX23SybS2E1A5el9iNFP_5-zgbVeszblDuy8bC_BkP_8LJvj9mS_NCIRdvLlzTTtHIzrNQxidmniG1MjsUn0HZWoMy0NUkCG8vz41HhsGeAP4ADig) in Musk’s current compensation plan that is heavily dependent on share price and market cap, and arguably a company based heavily on buzz rather than meeting production targets. Also, Tesla's shares [have fallen about 16% so far](https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-shares-limelight-3-1-stock-split-kicks-2022-08-25/) this year amid a selloff in high-growth stocks due to worries over aggressive interest rate hikes and geopolitical uncertainties. There are many arguments as to why Tesla’s underlying fundamental value does not justify its stock price, and EPI [found](https://www.epi.org/publication/ceo-pay-in-2021/) that if it does not achieve a 100% market share and an extraordinarily high level of profitability, its stock price will eventually drop significantly – meaning that Musk will have been able to personally claim $23.5 billion in purchasing power in 2021 alone, even though that was never matched by actual economic activity nor the financial benefit of Tesla shareholders whose wealth was diluted to make room for Musk’s stock options.

It’s also worth noting the difficulty in differentiating share price growth that is company-specific versus that driven by overall market trends, and as EPI [points out](https://www.epi.org/publication/ceo-pay-in-2021/), “stock-related compensation of CEOs does a very poor job (by design) of drawing such distinctions and preventing CEOs from being rewarded simply by luck.”

There is some truth to the notion that stock-related executive compensation creates a strong link between CEO performance and CEO pay; however a company’s revenue and share price are not the only indicators of success, sustainability, or shareholder value. This is why support for ESG measures in executive compensation plans has continuously increased year-over-year, and, in 2022, [more than nine out of ten directors](https://www.pwc.com/us/en/services/governance-insights-center/assets/pwc-2022-annual-corporate-directors-survey.pdf)(92%) agree that some type of non-financial metrics should be factored in.
Ultimately, while tying CEO compensation to financial performance has achieved significant growth for the company in the past, this growth is neither sustainable and, in many cases, nor is it ethical. In a world increasingly focused on long-term ESG goals, this could hurt investor sentiment toward the company in the long run. Corporate disclosure of carbon emissions and human rights data allows shareholders and climate activists alike to hold company executives accountable.
 
As [noted](https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-shares-limelight-3-1-stock-split-kicks-2022-08-25/) by B. Riley’s Chief Market Strategist, "Retail investors are a very important cohort for Tesla” and the company’s most recent stock split is “an acknowledgment of that fact." Which is why now is the time for investors to put the pressure on Tesla to live up to its own sustainability-centric ethos.
 
*(*sources for short description: [violation of labor laws](https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/25/tesla-elon-musk-anti-union-tweet-must-be-deleted-nlrb.html), allegations of [child labor](https://www.globalwitness.org/en/campaigns/natural-resource-governance/itsci-laundromat/) in supply chains and [racism](https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-hit-by-new-lawsuit-alleging-racial-abuse-against-black-workers-2022-07-01/), including a [lawsuit](https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-hit-by-new-lawsuit-alleging-racial-abuse-against-black-workers-2022-07-01/) filed by fifteen Black former or current employees)*
 
**Next AGM**
 
In August 2022, Tesla held its AGM virtually via webcast and conducted a [random drawing](https://www.tesla.com/2022shareholdermeeting) which allowed a limited number of shareholders to attend the AGM in-person at Tesla’s headquarters in Austin, Texas USA. We will provide details on how to attend the 2023 AGM once Tesla releases next year’s proxy statement.

In accordance with rule [Rule 14a-5(f)](https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-17/chapter-II/part-240/section-240.14a-5), Tesla has already released the date of the Company's 2023 annual meeting of stockholders via their 10-Q. The 2023 annual meeting date will be held on May 16, 2023. The time and location will be specified on the Company's proxy statement and we will keep shareholders updated when this is released.

In 2022, [69,241,120](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318605/000156459022028207/tsla-8k_20220804.htm) votes supported a proposal requesting that Tesla’s Board of Directors commission an independent, third-party report assessing the extent to which Tesla is effectively fulfilling its responsibility to respect human rights and engage in responsible sourcing practices, including an analysis of how Tesla’s Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, Supplier Code of Conduct, and Human Rights and Conflict Minerals Policy are implemented to address adverse human rights impacts occurring within its direct operations and across the value chain. This signals that shareholders are wising up to Tesla’s ESG-related shortcomings.
 
**AGM Record Date**
 
The record date pertains to the date by which investors must hold their shares in a company in order to participate in the company’s AGM. The Tesla board has fixed the close of business on March 20, 2023 as the record date for determining stockholders of the Company who are entitled to vote at the 2023 Annual Meeting. 

**Supporting This Campaign**
 
If you purchase Tesla stock from Tulipshare before the next AGM record date, you will be eligible to vote at the next Tesla AGM and receive an email from us closer to the deadline about how to do so.


We're asking Tesla to link executive compensation to ESG performance.

Elon Musk is the highest paid executive in the world and his compensation is currently linked to Tesla’s financial performance. However, shareholders have since legally challenged this $56 billion pay package for being excessive, while Tesla has lost its place on the S&P 500 ESG Index for poor ESG performance. Additionally, the company has suffered allegations of child labor in its supply chain, rulings that Tesla violated labor laws, and evidence of racism at the company. We are therefore asking Tesla to tie executive compensation to key metrics of ESG performance.*

Link Tesla’s Executive Compensation to ESG Performance

City to Sea is a not-for-profit organisation, campaigning to stop plastic pollution at source.

City to Sea

**Proud to partner with City to Sea for this campaign**

City to Sea is a not-for-profit organisation, campaigning to stop plastic pollution at source. Their award-winning campaigns tackle the single use plastic items most found on our beaches and in our rivers and oceans. City to Sea design and deliver innovative behaviour-change campaigns that help to stop plastic pollution. From tech-powered solutions, petitions and big media campaigns to grassroots community-led action and game-changing education programmes, City to Sea’s award-winning initiatives are helping individuals and organisations reduce single-use plastic and have a measurable, lasting impact.

The Coca-Cola Company is a beverage company. The Company's segments include Europe, Middle East and Africa; Latin America; North America; Asia Pacific; Global Ventures; and Bottling Investments. It owns or licenses and markets various beverage brands, which are grouped into categories, such as Coca-Cola; sparkling flavors; water, sports, coffee and tea; juice, dairy and plant-based beverages; and emerging beverages. It owns and markets six nonalcoholic sparkling soft drink brands, such as Coca-Cola, Sprite, Fanta, Diet Coke /Coca-Cola Light, and Coca-Cola Zero Sugar. Its water, sports, coffee and tea brands include quarius, Ayataka, BODYARMOR, Ciel, Costa, dogadan, Dasani, FUZE TEA, Georgia, glaceau smartwater, glaceau vitaminwater, Gold Peak, Powerade and others. The Company’s juice, dairy and plant-based beverages brands include AdeS, Del Valle, fairlife, innocent, Minute Maid, Minute Maid Pulpy and Simply. The Company products are available to consumers in more than 200 countries.

Estimated 2023 record date for Coca-Cola

Next Coca-Cola AGM 

We sent an email to engage on this issue. 

Coca-Cola's IR team contacted

**Goal**

Tulipshare and [City to Sea](https://www.citytosea.org.uk/) are calling on The Coca-Cola Company to adopt an ambitious target of reducing the number of single-use plastic bottles it  distributes annually by 25% (currently, Coca-Cola sells [more than 100 billion](https://www.plasticsoupfoundation.org/en/2022/02/is-coca-colas-latest-promise-really-a-step-forward/#:~:text=BIGGEST%20POLLUTER%20IN%20THE%20WORLD,is%20not%20collected%20and%20processed.) plastic bottles every year, or 200,000 bottles a minute). This should be achieved by a huge market shift away from single use packaging towards refill and reuse. The goal would sit alongside the [existing goal](https://www.coca-colacompany.com/news/coca-cola-announces-industry-leading-target-for-reusable-packaging) of 25% of all beverages globally across its brands portfolio to be sold in refillable or returnable glass or plastic bottles, or refillable containers through traditional fountains or Coca-Cola Freestyle dispensers, by 2030.

**The Issue:**

Currently returnable glass bottles and refillable PET [represents](https://www.coca-colacompany.com/news/coca-cola-announces-industry-leading-target-for-reusable-packaging#:~:text=Returnable%20glass%20bottles%20and%20refillable,sales%20in%20another%2020%20markets.) more than 50% of Coca-Cola’s product sales in more than 20 markets, and more than 25% of sales in another 20  markets. Traditional refillable/returnable packaging accounted for approximately 16% of the company’s total volume in 2020. Despite Coca-Cola’s “Every Bottle Back” and “World Without Waste” campaigns, the company retained its title as the [world’s top plastic polluter](https://www.breakfreefromplastic.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/BRAND-AUDIT-REPORT-2021.pdf) for the fourth year in a row.

This campaign is asking them to ramp this up by switching single use plastic market share to that of refill and reuse and to make sure this is an affordable and  accessible option for customers in all the markets in which it operates. This request presents an opportunity for Coca-Cola to shift away from deceptive marketing regarding its sustainability efforts – an issue [under scrutiny](https://www.natlawreview.com/article/coca-cola-sued-deceptive-sustainability-claims#:~:text=Meanwhile%2C%20according%20to%20the%20Complaint,terephthalate%20(PET)%20bottle%20output.) in the U.S. court system – and to help forge a path toward a [circular economy](https://archive.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/explore/plastics-and-the-circular-economy).

**Why this is Important:** 

Coca-Cola produces [200,000 single-use plastic bottles every minute](https://www.plasticsoupfoundation.org/en/2022/02/is-coca-colas-latest-promise-really-a-step-forward/#:~:text=BIGGEST%20POLLUTER%20IN%20THE%20WORLD,is%20not%20collected%20and%20processed.) . They are responsible for about  one fifth of the world’s entire PET plastic usage. At the same time The Coca-Cola Company has been  named as the [world’s worst](https://www.reuters.com/business/sustainable-business/coca-cola-criticized-plastic-pollution-pledges-25-reusable-packaging-2022-02-10/#:~:text=The%20company%20was%20the%20world's,annual%20report%20released%20in%20October.) corporate plastic polluter for the fourth year in a row. Its single-use  plastic bottles were the most frequently found discarded on beaches, rivers, parks and other litter  sites in 51 of 55 nations surveyed.

As well as plastic pollution and littering, the production of single-use plastics on this scale is having a  disastrous effect on our efforts to tackle the climate crisis. Greenhouse gases (GHGs) from the  plastics industry are huge. The plastic industry currently pumps out a massive 850  million metric tonnes of GHGs – the equivalent of 189 coal-fired power plants in a year, almost double the entire emissions of the [aviation sector](https://theconversation.com/plastic-warms-the-planet-twice-as-much-as-aviation-heres-how-to-make-it-climate-friendly-116376). GHGs are  emitted at every stage of the plastics lifecycle, from its extraction and transport, refining and  manufacture, through to waste management. The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) estimates that if trends continue, plastics will account for 20% of oil [consumption by 2050](https://www.ciel.org/news/fueling-plastics/). By 2050, the GHGs from plastic [could reach](https://www.ciel.org/project-update/plastic-climate-the-hidden-costs-of-a-plastic-planet/) over 56  gigatons, roughly 10-13% of the entire remaining carbon budget.

Plastic production is set to rise over the next decade, driven in large part by single-use plastic  packaging. In fact, if we changed nothing at all about the plastic industry as it currently operates, it is estimated that plastic pollution [could double](https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/10/1103692) by 2035 and triple by 2050. The impact it’s having on the oceans, terrestrial environment, wildlife and human health  is devastating – and it’s felt the most by those in marginalised communities creating a social justice as well as environmental issue. The harm caused by plastic begins at the very start of its lifecycle.  Much of the plastic and petrochemical infrastructure [is located](https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/03/1088712) in areas where people are experiencing disadvantages due to socio-economic disparities. This is a situation seen around the  world. Plastic production, use, and disposal is much more than an environmental problem, it’s also a social justice, racial justice and human rights issue.
 
The responsibility for this climate, ecological, and social crisis sits with those who produce and manufacture single-use plastics in the greatest quantity. This campaign serves a foundation stone for beginning to take that responsibility seriously.

**Supporting This Campaign** 

Tulipshare is in contact with Coca-Cola's investor relations team in hopes of coming to a resolution and has not yet submitted a proposal in respect of this campaign for their 2023 AGM. By investing behind this campaign, you are adding your voice to a group of investors passionate about creating  better plastic policies at Coca-Cola.

When Coca-Cola shares their proxy statement ahead of their 2023 Annual General Meeting ("AGM"),  they will reveal the date in which shareholders are required to hold shares to be eligible to vote. This is known as the record date. This date tends to fall around the same time year over year. Based on last year’s record date, you would need to buy shares by February 23, 2023 to be able to vote at Coca-Cola's 2023 AGM, however we won't know the record date for certain until Coca-Cola issues their proxy  statement closer to their AGM.




We recommend that The Coca-Cola Company reduces its single-use plastic bottle usage by 25% by  2025.

Reduce Single-Use Plastic Bottle Sales by 750,000,000 a Year by 2025

@CocaCola reduce single-use plastic bottle sales by 750,000,000 a year by 2025

Environmental Organisation and Shareholder Advocacy Nonprofit 

The Sierra Club and As You Sow

**Proud to Partner With The Sierra Club and As You Sow For This Campaign**

The Sierra Club is the most enduring and influential grassroots environmental organization in the United States. We amplify the power of our millions of members and supporters to defend everyone’s right to a healthy world.

As You Sow is the nation’s leading shareholder advocacy nonprofit, with a 30-year track record promoting environmental and social corporate responsibility and advancing values-aligned investing.

JPMorgan Chase & Co. is a financial holding company. It has four segments: Consumer & Community Banking (CCB), Corporate & Investment Bank (CIB), Commercial Banking (CB), and Asset & Wealth Management (AWM). CCB segment offers products and services to consumers and small businesses through bank branches; ATMs; digital, including mobile and online; and telephone banking. CIB segment consists of banking and markets and securities services, offers a suite of investment banking, market-making, prime brokerage, lending, and treasury and securities products and services to a global client base of corporations, investors, financial institutions, merchants, government and municipal entities. CB segment provides financial solutions, including lending, payments, investment banking and asset management products across three primary client segments: middle market banking, corporate client banking and commercial real estate banking. AWM segment is engaged in investment and wealth management.

Estimated 2023 record date for JPMorgan

Next JPMorgan AGM

**Our Goal**

Our goal is to support both Sierra Club Foundation and *As You Sow’s* separate proposals to JPMorgan (JPM).
 
**A “win” for Sierra Club’s proposal would result in:**
- JPM adopting a policy for a time-bound phase-out of lending and underwriting to projects and companies engaging in new fossil fuel exploration and development.

**A “win” for As You Sow’s proposal would result in:**
- JPM issuing a report disclosing a transition plan that describes how it intends to align its financing activities with its 2030 sectoral greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets, including the specific measures and policies necessary to achieve its targets, the reductions to be achieved by such measures and policies, and timelines for implementation and associated emission reductions.

**Why It’s Important**

JPMorgan Chase & Co. (“JPMorgan”) is the [largest](https://www.ran.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/BOCC_2022_vSPREAD-1.pdf) global financier of fossil fuels, [providing](http://bankingonclimatechaos.org/) over $382 billion in lending and underwriting to fossil fuel companies during 2016-2021 (34% more than the second-highest bank), including over $116 billion to 100 top companies engaged in new fossil fuel exploration and development. And CEO Jamie Dimon continues to make public [statements](https://reports.jpmorganchase.com/investor-relations/2021/ar-ceo-letters.htm) calling for new oil leases and gas pipelines.

At the same time, it is a member of the Net Zero Banking Alliance (“NZBA”) and has an existing Net Zero by 2050 greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) reduction goal and a 2030 intensity reduction targets for its oil and gas, electric power, and auto manufacturing emissions. You might notice, [as have shareholders](https://www.ft.com/content/70d783fd-64cd-41dc-9847-9d5dc0c8630c), that there seems to be a contradiction between commitment and action. While it is great that JPMorgan has climate goals, these goals, particularly its intensity emissions goal, need to be accompanied by a viable transition plan. This plan should include timelines and policies to grant credibility for the goal, especially in regards for how it will align its financing activities. Because, as you might see from the above, it doesn’t really seem like JPMorgan is slowing down its influx of investment into fossil fuels. 

The banking sector has a critical role to play in achieving the Paris Agreement’s global Net Zero by 2050 goals. There are several banks you could choose to invest in given your preference, but it is important to remember that targets alone are insufficient. Investors seek disclosures demonstrating banks’ concrete transition strategies to credibly achieve their disclosed emission reduction targets. Targets are not the same as concrete action. 

Some banks seem to be trying harder than others at putting their money where their mouth is. 

JPMorgan, as stated above, is the #1 global financier of fossil fuels, pumping over $400 billion into fossil fuels in the last 6 years. Have you ever read one single statistic that makes you feel more existential angst about your own effort to lower your carbon footprint? We haven’t. 

In October 2021, JPMorgan [announced](https://www.jpmorgan.com/content/dam/jpmc/jpmorgan-chase-and-co/documents/jpmc-esg-report-2021.pdf) a Net Zero by 2050 greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) reduction goal; it also set 2030 intensity reduction targets for its oil and gas, electric power, and auto manufacturing emissions. JPMorgan [states](https://www.jpmorgan.com/content/dam/jpmc/jpmorgan-chase-and-co/documents/jpmc-esg-report-2021.pdf) that it will implement these targets by assessing client’s emissions and decarbonization plans when considering new transactions; by supporting clients with capital and expertise, strategic advice, connectivity to bank products and solutions, and sustainable investing; and facilitating approximately $1 trillion through 2030 to accelerate the transition to a low-carbon economy. JPMorgan has also [committed](https://www.jpmorgan.com/content/dam/jpmc/jpmorgan-chase-and-co/documents/jpmc-esg-report-2021.pdf) to integrate climate into its risk management framework.

These are important first steps. But JPMorgan cannot stop there. Shareholders are very concerned that JPMorgan does not demonstrate a concrete transition plan for achieving its 2030 sectoral reductions targets. An effective transition plan creates accountability by describing the policies, indicators, milestones, metrics, and timelines to deliver on its 2030 decarbonization targets and ensure investors that it is fully accountable for the risks associated with its financing of high-carbon activities. Currently, JPMorgan has not demonstrated whether its planned actions will result in 1.5 degree aligned emissions reductions.

Without a policy to phase out financing of new fossil fuel exploration and development, JPMorgan is unlikely to meet its climate commitments, likely drawing scrutiny for material risks including:

●    Greenwashing: Regulators are tightening and enforcing [greenwashing](https://www.bankingsupervision.europa.eu/press/speeches/date/2022/html/ssm.sp220922~bb043aa0bd.en.html) rules, which could result in major fines. 

●    Regulation: Central banks, including the Fed, are starting to [implement climate stress tests](https://www.bankingsupervision.europa.eu/press/pr/date/2022/html/ssm.pr220708~565c38d18a.en.html) and [scenario analyses,](https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/other20220929a.htm)  and some have begun to propose increased capital requirements for banks’ climate risks.  

●    Competition: Dozens of global banks have policies to phaseout financial support for [new oil and gas](https://oilgaspolicytracker.org/) fields and [coal mines](https://coalpolicytool.org/). 

●    Reputation: Campaigns [targeting](https://stopthemoneypipeline.com/) BAC’s climate policies include hundreds of organisations with tens of millions of global members and supporters, including current and potential BAC customers. 

The disclosures requested in this resolution will help assure investors that JPMorgan has an effective and accountable transition plan in place for achieving its 2030 intensity goals.
 
We are asking you to support the proposals filed by Sierra Club Foundation and As You Sow because together they represent a vital opportunity for the [biggest fossil fuel funder](https://www.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2021/10/jpmorgan-chase-world-s-biggest-funder-fossil-fuels-announces-net-zero) to be held to account for its actions and commitments. Your support represents a call for meaningful climate action and demonstrates that shareholders, and the public, are carefully watching JPMorgan. 

**Next AGM**

We won’t know JPMorgan Chase’s next AGM until the company releases its 2023 Proxy Statement, but based on 2022 dates we expect the 2023 AGM to be held sometime around 17th May 2023.

**AGM Record Date**

The record date pertains to the date by which investors must hold their shares in a company in order to participate in the company’s AGM. We won’t know JPMorgan Chase’s 2023 record date until the company’s 2023 proxy statement is released, but based on 2022 dates we expect it to be sometime around 18th March 2023.

**Supporting This Campaign**
If you purchase JPMorgan stock from Tulipshare before the next AGM record date, you will be eligible to vote in favour of this campaign at the next AGM and receive an email from us closer to the deadline about how to do so.




Tulipshare is asking JPMorgan to strengthen their climate transition plan. 

CEO Jamie Dimon continues to make public statements calling for new oil leases and gas pipelines, so it doesn’t seem like the company is slowing down its influx of investment into fossil fuels anytime soon. Granted, they do have some climate goals, but these goals, particularly its intensity emissions goal, need to be accompanied by a viable transition plan.

Stop JPMorgan Chase's Investments in Fossil Fuels

Strengthen JPMorgans Climate Transition Plan

Amazon.com, Inc. provides a range of products and services to customers. The products offered through its stores include merchandise and content that it purchased for resale and products offered by third-party sellers. It manufactures and sells electronic devices, including Kindle, Fire tablet, Fire TV, Echo, and Ring, and it develops and produces media content. It also offers subscription services such as Amazon Prime, a membership program. Its segments include North America, International and Amazon Web Services (AWS). The AWS segment consists of global sales of compute, storage, database, and other services for start-ups, enterprises, government agencies, and academic institutions. It provides advertising services to sellers, vendors, publishers, authors, and others, through programs, such as sponsored advertisements, display, and video advertising. Customers access its offerings through websites, mobile applications, Alexa, devices, streaming, and physically visiting its stores.

Next Amazon AGM 

Estimated 2023 record date for Amazon



**Our Goal**  
  
We refiled our proposal, recommending that Amazon provide an independent audit of the working conditions and treatment that Amazon warehouse workers face. Shareholders want Amazon to take concrete action to improve the working conditions and treatment imposed upon its warehouse workers in a meaningful way.

Last year, this proposal received a whopping 44% of votes in favour. You can see the voting results in this [8-K form](https://ir.aboutamazon.com/sec-filings/sec-filings-details/default.aspx?FilingId=15857331). This year, we are hoping for a majority vote! 
  
**Why It's Important**  
  
While Amazon purportedly [strives](https://www.aboutamazon.com/about-us) to be the “Earth’s Best Employer” and “Earth’s Safest Place to Work”, there have been continuing reports of its employees being subjected to unsafe working conditions and unfair treatment on a global scale, specifically its warehouse workers. 

Amazon’s human capital management system is in crisis, causing workers in the US to be injured at rates [more than twice](https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/12/tech/amazon-injury-data-study/index.html) the industry average. The need for an independent health and safety audit at Amazon is increasingly evident, especially when considering the company’s own CEO, Andy Jassy, relied on [misleading and outdated statistics](https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-jassy-injury-claims-shareolder-letter-2022-4) to claim that Amazon's high injury rate is "about average" in his letter to shareholders. Amazon also used outdated statistics in a January 2022 report to erroneously claim its rate of injury had improved by 40%, when, in fact, the US Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety Health Administration (OSHA) data shows Amazon’s injury rate [worsened](https://techxplore.com/news/2022-07-activists-amazon-misled-shareholders-warehouse.html) by 20%.

Amazon’s continued pattern of “cherry-picking and distorting data to create the illusion that Amazon's business model is less dangerous than it is in reality” is what led the Strategic Organizing Center (SOC) to file a complaint against Amazon with the US Securities Exchange Commission (SEC). In the [complaint](https://thesoc.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/SOC-to-SEC-re-Amazon-complaint-220707_FINAL.pdf), SOC argues that Amazon’s false and misleading assertions are what led some investors, including BlackRock, to vote against Tulipshare’s proposal last year. Similarly, the US Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York is [investigating](https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/webform/sdny-amazon-warehouse-investigation) workplace safety and related issues at Amazon warehouses, including injuries resulting from workplace hazards, worker rate requirements and the pace of work, and whether Amazon appropriately reported on-the-job injuries.

Amazon’s claim that it “provides a safe and positive workplace” directly contradicts reality. For example, OSHA [issued](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/mar/02/amazon-safety-citations-osha-department-of-justice) multiple citations against Amazon at six warehouses in December 2022, January 2023 and February 2023 over unsafe working conditions, ergonomic hazards and failure to properly report injuries. The severity of the problem is highlighted by the fact that over the past year OSHA concluded that Amazon is endangering employees in at least seven warehouses across five states - an unprecedented geographic range for its investigations. 

As recently as February 2023, OSHA cited Amazon at a seventh warehouse for ignoring well-known safety hazards. OSHA also found recordkeeping violations, with Amazon failing to properly record worker injuries and illnesses. This recent violation prompted OSHA’s Assistant Secretary for Occupational Safety and Health to [declare](https://www.osha.gov/news/newsreleases/national/02232023-0) that the agency is “continu[ing] to find that Amazon's work processes are designed for speed, not safety, and that these processes cause serious injuries to workers.” He explained further that, "Amazon needs to focus more of its passion for innovation and performance on eliminating the hazards that injure workers." 

In January 2023, a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) judge [held](https://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/desktop/document/NLRBALJDecisionAmazoncomServicesLLCNoCA2801532023BL28745?doc_id=X3M9V37S000000) that Amazon violated US Federal labour law by illegally threatening to withhold wage increases and improved benefits if workers elected a union, and by illegally removing an employee’s digital message board post inviting colleagues to sign a petition. As part of the judge’s [order](https://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/desktop/document/NLRBALJDecisionAmazoncomServicesLLCNoCA2801532023BL28745?doc_id=X3M9V37S000000), Amazon was required to conspicuously post a notice to employees stating that the company had violated federal law and that employees do, in fact, have the right to unionise and act together with other employees for their benefit and protection.

Union-busting tactics employed by Amazon also include retaliation against employees seeking to unionise and captive audience meetings. According to NLRB General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo, [Amazon’s captive audience meetings](https://aboutblaw.com/2sF) “inherently involve an unlawful threat that employees will be disciplined or suffer other reprisals if they exercise their protected right not to listen to such speech.”

Moreover, Amazon’s union-busting tactics start at the top. NLRB filed a complaint and notice of hearing against CEO Jassy for breaking labour laws with his public anti-union statements. The complaint [alleges](https://www.vice.com/en/article/m7gkqb/amazon-ceos-anti-union-media-comments-broke-the-law-labor-officials-allege) that Jassy’s comments had the effect of “interfering with, restraining, and coercing employees” regarding their rights to inform themselves about unions and to choose whether or not to join them.

During the global pandemic, Amazon’s profits experienced a [37% increase](https://www.forbes.com/sites/shelleykohan/2020/10/29/amazon-sales-up-37-for-q3-and-projected-to-hit-over-372-billion-for-2020/?sh=29e60d232df7) in year-on-year quarterly sales as reported in October 2020. This amounts to over $96.1 billion in revenue. Though inflation and rising interest rates have reportedly [affected](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/02/business/amazon-earnings.html) Amazon’s overall growth recently, Amazon’s core e-commerce business of selling products directly to consumers was only down 2% and the services it offers to third-party sellers, which provide 59% of products sold, was up 20% as of February 2023.

Former CEO and current Executive Chair Jeff Bezos’ net worth continues to grow and as of February 2023 exceeds [$100 billion](https://www.forbes.com/real-time-billionaires/#773eacc13d78), making Bezos one of the richest people on the planet. There is a massive income disparity at Amazon, highlighted by a report which states that it takes [eight weeks](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/amazon-warehouse-worker-jeff-bezos-salary-tuc-union-b1775679.html) for an Amazon warehouse worker to earn what Jeff Bezos makes in a single second. Indeed, Amazon workers in San Bernardino, US [report](https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/08/15/amazon-air-hub-walkout-labor-union/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=wp_business) that they spend 75% of their net salary on maintenance costs, have no savings and rely on food stamps to get by.

In response to the increased demand for online shopping during the COVID-19 pandemic, Amazon [hired](https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/10/29/amazon-hiring-pandemic-holidays/) an additional 400,000 employees in the U.S. alone. However, there have also been increased complaints of unsafe working conditions. A warehouse worker from St. Louis, Missouri [reported](https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2023/02/osha-is-finally-investigating-the-hell-out-of-amazon/) that her quota is to pack 70 packages per hour for up to 11 hours. During one of her shifts she tore a ligament in her wrist. Not only did Amazon make her finish her shift, but when she returned the next day, she was sent back to work with the expectation to meet her normal productivity rate or face discipline. 

There is widespread demand for Amazon to improve the treatment of its workers. Over [400 legislators](https://www.zdnet.com/article/400-global-public-officials-call-on-amazon-to-pay-its-dues/) from 34 countries have signed a letter addressed to Jeff Bezos demanding that Amazon better protect its workers, stating that “the world knows that Amazon can afford to pay its workers, its environmental cost, and its taxes. And yet -- time and again -- you have dodged and dismissed your debts to workers, societies, and the planet.” 

There are numerous stories of Amazon warehouse workers getting injured while on the job, [particularly during the holiday season](https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-employees-describe-peak-2019-2?r=US&IR=T). A report found that in Rugeley, England, on average one ambulance was called each week to the Amazon warehouse which employed over 1,000 people. Across the pond in the US, there have been numerous reports of [workers dying mid-shift](https://www.popsci.com/technology/amazon-warehouse-deaths-safety/), with one worker dying from cardiac arrest on Prime Day, one of the busiest retail days of the year.

Other reports of the mistreatment of Amazon warehouse workers [state](https://observer.com/2018/04/amazon-britain-harsh-working-conditions/) that workers fear losing their jobs for not meeting unattainable quotas and taking breaks to use the restroom, forcing them to [urinate in bottles](https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-unions-warehouse-speed-work-labor-2022-10?r=US&IR=T) as they arrive at the warehouse and during their shifts. 

The unionisation efforts by Amazon warehouse workers in Alabama prompted Bezos to publicly acknowledge that Amazon needs “[to do a better job for our employees.](https://www.forbes.com/sites/sarahhansen/2021/04/15/jeff-bezos-on-amazon-union-vote-we-need-to-do-a-better-job-for-our-employees/?sh=355a20161c66)” Now is the time for Amazon to follow up with meaningful action. An independent audit of Amazon’s workers would shine a spotlight on warehouse workers’ unsafe working conditions and unfair treatment, forcing Amazon to both acknowledge the disparity between reality and its purported goals of being the “Earth’s Best Employer” and “Earth’s Safest Place to Work” and to enact positive change that will improve conditions for its warehouse workers.

Strikes among Amazon workers in the [UK](https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/amazon-workers-uk-warehouse-set-further-strike-dates-2023-02-13/) and the [US](https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/08/15/amazon-air-hub-walkout-labor-union/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=wp_business) are ramping up with workers continuously demanding safer working conditions and pay raises. We urge you to support this campaign to ensure that the US e-commerce giant is held accountable. 

**Next AGM**
We won’t know Amazon’s next AGM until the company releases its 2023 Proxy Statement, but based on 2022 dates we expect the 2023 AGM to be held sometime around 25th May 2023. 


**AGM Record Date**
The record date pertains to the date by which investors must hold their shares in a company in order to participate in the company’s AGM. We won’t know Amazon’s 2023 record date until the company’s 2023 Proxy Statement is released, but based on their 2022 dates we expect it to be sometime around 31st March 2023.


**Supporting This Campaign**

If you purchase Amazon stock from Tulipshare before the next AGM record date, you will be eligible to vote at the next AGM and receive an email from us closer to the deadline about how to do so.  


Tulipshare is asking Amazon to provide an independent audit of warehouse workers’ wages and working conditions. 

Amazon should provide an independent audit of warehouse workers’ wages and working conditions. 


Ensure Fair and Safe Working Environments for Amazon Warehouse Workers

@amazon Ensure fair and safe working environments for Amazon warehouse workers

Meta Platforms, Inc. builds technologies that help people connect, find communities, and grow businesses. The Company's products enable people to connect and share with friends and family through mobile devices, personal computers, virtual reality (VR) headsets, and wearables. The Company operates through two segments: Family of Apps (FoA) and Reality Labs (RL). FoA segment includes Facebook, Instagram, Messenger, WhatsApp, and other services. RL segment includes augmented and VR-related consumer hardware, software, and content. Facebook enables people to connect, share, discover and communicate with each other on mobile devices and personal computers. Instagram is a place where people can express themselves through photos, videos, and private messaging, and connect with and shop from their favorite businesses. Its RL products include Meta Quest virtual reality devices, as well as software and content available through the Meta Quest Store, which enable a range of social experiences.

Next Meta AGM 

Estimated 2023 record date for Meta

One such incident was the January 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol which was incubated by the [spread of disinformation on social media regarding the 2020 US presidential election results](https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/01/04/facebook-election-misinformation-capitol-riot/). Meta has a responsibility to its users and investors to improve the implementation of its “[Community Standards](https://transparency.fb.com/policies/community-standards/)” and effectively control the dissemination of user content that contains or promotes hate speech, disinformation, or content that incites violence and/or harm to public health or personal safety.

**Our Goal**

Our goal is to support As You Sow’s [proposal](https://www.asyousow.org/resolutions/2022/12/9-meta-report-risks-failures-in-content-governance) to Meta by launching a campaign that allows individuals to invest in a safer and more just future and ensure Meta is striving to oversee content shared on the company’s platforms in a way that does not harm society and create investor risk by voting at the company’s next shareholder meeting. The proposal on behalf of shareholders seeks to remedy the past ineffectiveness of Meta’s technological and human-screening system by requesting that Meta’s Board of Directors prepare and publish a report analysing why the enforcement of “Community Standards” as described in the “Transparency Center” has proven ineffective at controlling the dissemination of user content that contains or promotes hate speech, disinformation, or content that incites violence and/or harm to public health or personal safety. A “win” would result in Meta being required to issue this report which should include:


- A quantitative and qualitative assessment by  external, independent, and qualified experts of the effectiveness of Meta’s algorithms, staff and contractors to locate and eliminate content violating Community Standards;
- Examination of benefits to users and impact to revenue if Company voluntarily follows existing legal frameworks established for broadcast networks (e.g. laws governing child pornography and political advertisements); and 
- Analysis of the benefits of the Company continuing to conduct technology


This report should cover each of Meta’s major products, including Facebook, Messenger, Instagram, WhatsApp, and others with over 100 million users.

**Why It’s Important**

The Meta (formerly Facebook) brand has continued to be wracked by management missteps and lack of Board oversight, resulting in continued harm by its platform including:

- Millions of high-profile users [exempted from its rules](https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-files-xcheck-zuckerberg-elite-rules-11631541353), permitting continued widespread; incitement of violence and harassment;

- [Internal Company research](https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-knows-instagram-is-toxic-for-teen-girls-company-documents-show-11631620739)demonstrating that Instagram is toxic for teen girls;

- [Mental health crises](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/31/technology/facebook-accenture-content-moderation.html) among outsourced moderators due to viewing child pornography and animal cruelty;

- [Lack of cooperation with authorities](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/jan/21/facebook-admits-encryption-will-harm-efforts-to-prevent-child-exploitation) to prevent and detect child exploitation and abuse;

- [Ignored employee red flags](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/22/technology/facebook-election-misinformation.html?referringSource=articleShare) about the spread of election misinformation;

- Political advertisements containing [deliberate lies and mistruths](https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/10/10/facebook-policy-political-speech-lets-politicians-lie-ads/);

- [Hate speech](https://www.dailydot.com/debug/hate-speech-facebook/) that continues to thrive;

- [Anti-immigrant violence](https://www.dw.com/en/new-study-shows-afd-facebook-posts-spur-anti-refugee-attacks/a-41972992) around the world.

A whistle-blower complaint filed with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) argues that the company has failed to adequately warn investors about the material risks of dangerous and criminal behaviour, terrorist content, hate speech, and [misinformation on its sites](https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/10/22/facebook-new-whistleblower-complaint/). Company failure to control these activities reflects a grave lack of oversight by management and the board. Since the SEC is not required to take any action on whistle-blowers’ tips, and when the commission does conduct investigations, it does so on a confidential basis as a [matter of policy,](https://www.sec.gov/whistleblower/frequently-asked-questions#faq-12) it isn’t clear whether the SEC is [investigating Meta](https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/facebook-whistleblower-documents-detail-deep-look-facebook-rcna3580). Nevertheless, two new whistle-blower complaints filed with the SEC accuse Meta of misleading investors about its efforts to control [misinformation about climate change and COVID-19](https://www.theverge.com/2022/2/20/22943279/facebook-whistleblower-climate-change-misinformation-frances-haugen-sec). Despite establishing an internal Oversight Board, the company’s platforms continue to [harm society and create investor risk](https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/facebook-repeatedly-lied-to-oversight-board-about-secret-vip-list-that-let-users-break-rules-whistleblower-says/ar-AAPptDX?MSCC=1599977381&pfr=1). An internal review of company practices [highlighting harassment and incitement to violence states](https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-files-xcheck-zuckerberg-elite-rules-11631541353), “We are not actually doing what we say we do publicly,” and deems company’s actions “a breach of trust.”


Though Meta’s failure to police its platform became a hot topic in relation to the 2020 US presidential election, the issue extends outside the US, including in Myanmar and Sri Lanka, where [the company has issued apologies](https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/meghara/zuckerberg-open-letter-hate-speech-myanmar) for its actions contributing to physical violence against religious or ethnic groups. 
Management has attempted to address the material risk of dangerous user content through the creation of the “Transparency Center” that displays qualitative and quantitative reports on the elimination of posts that violate [the 25 “Community Standards.”](https://transparency.fb.com/; see also https://transparency.fb.com/policies/community-standards/?source=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fcommunitystandards)  Shareholders applaud this action, yet ask why this seemingly robust technological and human-screening system is ineffective?

**Proposal Background**

This is the second year for this type of governance of media content proposal with Meta (formerly Facebook).
Last year, during the 2021 proxy season, As You Sow submitted [this proposal](https://www.asyousow.org/resolutions/2020/12/11/facebook-report-on-problematic-media-content-management) that went to a vote and earned a 19.5% overall vote (which translated to approximately 63.2% of independent shareholders). By independent shareholders, we mean shareholders other than Mark Zuckerburg. These independent shareholder statistics were reported by [Open MIC](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_wXI7MBJ1Rh08JlNOWB50e3_XspyHV3M/view).

During the 2020 proxy season, As You Sow filed [this proposal](https://www.asyousow.org/resolutions/2019/12/12/reboot-facebook) that addressed similar concerns, but the “ask” was different than the proposal for 2021 and 2022. As You Sow withdrew this proposal when it was determined that As You Sow would probably not win the no-action challenge that was filed against it.

The CEO of As You Sow had a meeting with the Meta on March 21, 2022 regarding this year’s proposal. After that meeting, it became apparent that As You Sow and Meta will not be coming to an agreement. Since an agreement was not reached and As You Sow won the no-action challenge on March 31, 2022, As You Sow proceeded to take the matter to vote at the company AGM on 25th May 2022.

**2022 AGM Results**

However, the proposal did not pass, receiving only a 19.2% backing from other shareholders (they have since released their [Form 8-K](https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/1326801/000132680122000066/fb-20220525.htm)). We do know that 61.3% of individual shareholders backed the proposal, meaning many individual shareholders are engaging with this issue and want to see change. We will work closely with As You Sow to bring you updates on what the next steps are regarding this proposal and whether they plan to refile next year. 

**Next AGM**

We won't know the exact date of Meta's 2023 AGM until they release their 2023 proxy statement, but we expect it to fall around 25th May 2023, similar to last year's date.

**AGM Record Date**

We expect the record date - or the date by which you must have held Meta stock in order to participate in the 2023 AGM - to fall around 1st April 2023, based on last year's date. However, we won't know the exact date until Meta releases its 2023 proxy statement.

**Supporting This Campaign**

If you purchase Meta stock from Tulipshare before the next AGM record date, you will be eligible to vote at the next AGM and receive an email from us closer to the deadline about how to do so.



Meta Platforms Inc., the parent company of social media giants Instagram and Facebook, employs 68,000 people and has a market value of $840 billion. Considering there are over 2 billion monthly active users on Instagram and 2.912 billion monthly active users on Facebook, management missteps and a lack of Board oversight on misleading and harmful information shared on the platforms can lead to dire consequences. 