INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES (IBM) CORPORATION | Public report on congruency in China business operations and ESG activities at INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION

Status
7.10% votes in favour
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Proposal number
7
Resolution details
Company ticker
IBM
Resolution ask
Report on or disclose
ESG theme
  • Social
ESG sub-theme
  • Human rights
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Technology
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
Resolved: Shareholders request that the Board of Directors commission and publish a third-party review within the next year (at reasonable cost, omitting proprietary information) of whether the Company’s activities and expenditures related to doing business in China align with its ESG commitments, including its Human Rights Statement of Principles. The Board of Directors should report on how it addresses the risks presented by any misaligned activities and expenditures and the Company’s plans, if any, to mitigate these risks, such as detailing its plans to shift these activities and expenditures to less repressive and hostile regimes.
Supporting statement
Supporting Statement: IBM’s 2021 ESG report touts its alleged environmental and ethical impacts.1 It advertises the company’s goals of reducing pollution and reaching net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, as well as policies and practices that it says prioritize qualities such as ethics and accountability.2 The ESG report also highlights the company’s commitment to human rights and its Human Rights Statement of Principles.3
But nothing about doing business in China, which is controlled by the dictatorial and inhumane Chinese Communist Party (CCP), does anything to further these ideals.
For starters, China is the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases, emitting more greenhouse gases than the entire U.S. and the developed world combined.4 Exceeding more than 27 percent of the world’s total global emissions, China’s emissions have more than tripled over the last three decades.5
Furthermore, the Chinese government has an abhorrent human rights record. Its abuses against the Uyghurs and other ethnic minorities in Xinjiang has sparked outrage, as evidence of forced labor programs, forced sterilizations, and torture at the hands of the CCP are undeniable.6 Chinese authorities also amplify the magnitude of trafficking crimes in the country by perpetrating genocide and using emerging technologies to carry out discriminatory surveillance and ethno-racial profiling measures designed to subjugate and exploit minority populations.7
This poor human rights record makes China’s increasingly aggressive stance toward Taiwan even more alaiming, as it makes claims of sovereignty over the island. It has recently sent warplanes towards the territory’s air defense zone, and has called for Taiwan’s “reunification” with China, stoking fears and geopolitical instability.8
IBM nonetheless conducts a significant amount of business in China. In fact, according to reports, IBM facilitates the Chinese regime’s mass surveillance against its own citizens.9 Indeed, IBM conducts business in China despite it leading the world in greenhouse gas emissions and committing genocide against ethnic minorities — actions that run directly counter to everything that IBM’s ESG report says the company stands for. As such, it is critical that the Board commission and publish a third-party review that includes experts who are fully aware of the dangers that China poses to the U.S. and its allies around the world, including its military-civil fusion strategy10 and environmental and human rights abuses, to ensure that IBM’s actions as a company live up to its words.

How other organisations have declared their voting intentions

Organisation name Declared voting intentions Rationale
Rothschild & co Asset Management Against
Kutxabank Gestion SGIIC SAU. Against

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.