The Toronto-Dominion Bank | Privatisation of Polluting Assets at The Toronto-Dominion Bank

Status
10.80% votes in favour
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Proposal number
2
Resolution details
Lead filer
B.C. General Employee's Union
Resolution ask
Adopt or amend a policy
ESG theme
  • Environment
ESG sub-theme
  • Fossil fuel financing
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Financials
Company HQ country
Canada
Resolved clause
RESOLVED THAT TD amend its Environmental and Social Risk Process for Non-Retail Lending Business Lines to provide that when TD provides new project-specific financial services, including advisory services, on brown-spinning transactions, TD will take reasonable steps to have parties to such transactions take steps and make disclosures consistent with TCFD, including:
ensuring acquiring board oversight of climate-related risks,annual acquiring entity disclosure of Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions from the acquired assets, and regarding such acquired assets, having the acquiring entity set targets for reducing GHG emissions within a reasonable time after completing the transaction
Whereas clause
Public companies with pollution-intensive assets such as coal, oil, and gas projects (polluting assets) are coming under increasing pressure from institutional investors with ESG concerns. Certain issuers have sold or are contemplating selling these pollution-intensive assets. When these assets are sold to private enterprises, investors are concerned about the lack of disclosure that results.
The challenge of facilitating the movement of polluting assets from public companies to private enterprises was outlined by the UN Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI) in a recent publication discussing divestment of polluting assets by public companies[1]:
While a listed company spinning off a polluting asset may eliminate emissions from its balance sheet, it is unlikely to translate to a reduction in real-world emissions. In fact, it may reduce transparency and accountability over how the asset is managed, result in higher absolute emissions from more intensive exploitation of the asset, and shift risk onto governments and taxpayers.
A March 2022 paper by the European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI) labels this phenomenon as “brown-spinning”[2]:
[T]here has been a concerning recent phenomenon known as brown-spinning whereby public companies sell their carbon-intensive assets to players in private markets (including private equity firms and hedge funds). This helps divesting companies to reduce their own emissions but does not result in any overall emission reduction in the atmosphere. [H]aving carbon-intensive assets going dark where they are not subject to the usual strict scrutiny of public markets is worrisome from the perspective of lowering emissions.
TD’s Environmental and Social Risk Process for Non-Retail Lending Business Lines describes heightened due diligence for transactions with higher environmental and social risk and includes a list of prohibited transactions, including mining of conflict minerals and activities within sensitive cultural/ecological sites.[3] A similar approach is needed for the bank’s involvement in brown-spinning transactions to bridge the disclosure gap between public and private enterprises.
TD’s Thermal Coal Position states TD will not lend to, facilitate capital markets transactions for, or advise on M&A for new mining company clients with a certain level of involvement in thermal coal operations. [4]
ECGI describes the benefits of improved disclosure from private entities, stating: “the uneven playing field between public and private companies would be levelled, thus eliminating the classical problem of avoiding regulatory obligations tied to being public by staying private (i.e, removing incentives to remain private longer to avoid sustainability disclosures).”

.[1] https://www.unpri.org/download?ac=16109
[2] https://ecgi.global/sites/default/files/working_papers/documents/gozlugolringefinal.pdf
[3] https://www.td.com/document/PDF/ESG/2021-TD-Environmental-and-Social-Credit-Risk-Process.pdf  
[4] https://www.td.com/document/PDF/ESG/2021-Climate-Action-Report.pdf

How other organisations have declared their voting intentions

Organisation name Declared voting intentions Rationale
Anima Sgr Against The bank, being a financial institution, can implement changes to improve the climate risks exposure relevant to itself, while also impacting borrowers who are privately-owned. However, implementation of the resolution is unlikely to achieve the objectives sought in the proposal, i.e. bridge the disclosure gap between public and private enterprises. Effectively narrowing the disclosure gap requires stakeholders' efforts outside the bank's control. Securities regulators can mandate disclosure in areas affecting investors, but it may require specific legislation.

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.