APPLE INC. | Lobbying Expenditures Disclosure at APPLE INC.

Status
Withdrawn
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Resolution details
Company ticker
AAPL
Lead filer
Boston Common Asset Management
Resolution ask
Other ask
ESG theme
  • Governance
ESG sub-theme
  • Lobbying / political engagement
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Technology
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
Resolved, shareholders request the preparation of a report, updated annually, disclosing:
- Company policy and procedures governing lobbying, both direct and indirect, and grassroots lobbying communications.
- Payments by Apple used for (a) direct or indirect lobbying or (b) grassroots lobbying communications, in each case including the amount of the payment and the recipient.
- Apple’s membership in and payments to any tax-exempt organization that writes and endorses model legislation.
- Description of management’s decision-making process and the Board’s and oversight for making payments described above.

Whereas clause
Whereas, full disclosure of Apple’s lobbying activities and expenditures to assess whether its lobbying is consistent with Apple’s expressed goals and shareholder interests.
Supporting statement
Supporting Statement
Apple spent $56,900,000 from 2010 – 2021 on federal lobbying. This does not include state lobbying expenditures, where Apple lobbied in at least 46 states in 2021 and spent over $1.5 million on lobbying in California from 2010 – 2021. Apple’s state lobbying against privacy laws through groups like the State Privacy and Security Coalition and TechNet has attracted scrutiny.2 Apple also lobbies abroad, spending between €6,500,000 – 6,999,999 on lobbying in Europe for 2021.
Apple fails to disclose its third-party payments to trade associations and social welfare organizations, or the amounts used for lobbying, to shareholders. Companies can give unlimited amounts to third party groups that spend millions on lobbying and undisclosed grassroots activity. These groups may be spending “at least double what’s publicly reported.”3 Apple belongs to the Business Roundtable (BRT), CTIA – the Wireless Association and NetChoice, which together spent $41,730,000 on federal lobbying for 2021.
We are concerned Apple’s lack of disclosure presents reputational risks when its lobbying contradicts company public positions. For example, Apple publicly supports addressing climate change, yet the BRT opposed the Inflation Reduction Act and its historic investments in climate action.4 And while Apple has attracted scrutiny for avoiding federal income taxes,5 the BRT has lobbied against raising corporate taxes to fund health care, education and safety net programs.6 And while Apple does not belong to the controversial American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), it is represented by its trade associations, as CTIA has attracted scrutiny for working with ALEC7 and NetChoice supported its 2022 annual meeting8 and sits on its Private Enterprise Advisory Council.
We urge Apple to expand its lobbying disclosure.
2 https://www.axios.com/2022/03/14/techs-state-privacy-law-lobbying.
3 https://theintercept.com/2019/08/06/business-group-spending-on-lobbying-in-washington-is-at-least-double- whats-publicly-reported/.
4 https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/19/top-us-business-lobby-group-climate-action-business- roundtable.
5 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/06/world/apple-taxes-jersey.html; https://itep.org/fact-sheet-apple-and- tax-avoidance/.
6 https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2021/08/31/business-lobbying-democrats-reconciliation/.
7 https://www.fastcompany.com/90283913/how-the-wireless-industry-and-conservative-dark-money-groups- teamed-up-to-fight-net-neutrality.
8 https://documented.net/investigations/heres-who-bankrolling-alec-2022-annual-meeting.

DISCLAIMER: By including a shareholder resolution or management proposal in this database, neither the PRI nor the sponsor of the resolution or proposal is seeking authority to act as proxy for any shareholder; shareholders should vote their proxies in accordance with their own policies and requirements.

Any voting recommendations set forth in the descriptions of the resolutions and management proposals included in this database are made by the sponsors of those resolutions and proposals, and do not represent the views of the PRI.

Information on the shareholder resolutions, management proposals and votes in this database have been obtained from sources that are believed to be reliable, but the PRI does not represent that it is accurate, complete, or up-to-date, including information relating to resolutions and management proposals, other signatories’ vote pre-declarations (including voting rationales), or the current status of a resolution or proposal. You should consult companies’ proxy statements for complete information on all matters to be voted on at a meeting.