SUPPORTING STATEMENT: Current disclosure is insufficient to allow shareholders to evaluate the proper use of corporate assets given to third-party organizations and how those assets should be used.

For instance, as of August 2023, a review of an organization called GLSEN’s website had included McDonald’s as a “freshmen partner” on its corporate partnerships page.1 A review of GLSEN’s website as of November 2023, however, no longer lists the Company’s name.

The ambiguity around this partnership is important because GLSEN advocates a divisive and controversial agenda. For example, GLSEN advocates for concealing a student’s preferred gender identity from parents, providing sexually explicit books to minors, and integrating gender ideology at all levels of curriculum in public schools—all behavior that seeks to build barriers between parents and their children.2

Without further disclosure, it is unclear to whom, how much, and for what purposes, Company funds are going, and whether such organizations engage in conduct that may cause financial and reputational harm, such as the divisive political and policy advocacy outlined above.

Recent events have made clear that company bottom-lines, and therefore value to shareholders, drop when companies engage in overtly political and divisive partnerships. Following Bud Light’s embrace of partisanship, its revenue fell $395 million in North America when compared to the same time a year ago.3 This amounts to roughly 10 percent of its revenue in the months following its leap into contentious politics.4 Target Corporation’s market cap fell over $15 billion amid backlash for similar actions.5 And Disney stock fell 44 percent in 2022 – its worst performance in nearly 50 years -amid its decision to put extreme partisan agendas ahead of parents’ rights.6