TARGET CORPORATION | Political contribuions congruency analysis at TARGET CORPORATION

Status
14.75% votes in favour
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Proposal number
7
Resolution details
Company ticker
TGT
Lead filer
Tara Health Foundation
Resolution ask
Report on or disclose
ESG theme
  • Governance
ESG sub-theme
  • Lobbying / political engagement
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Consumer Discretionary
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
RESOLVED: Shareholders request that Board annually report, at reasonable expense, on the Company’s political and electioneering expenditures, identifying, and analyzing any trends indicating incongruence between such expenditures and the Company’s operational and strategic needs and its publicly stated company values and policies. The report should state whether Target has made, or plans to make, changes in contributions or communications as a result of identified incongruencies.
Whereas clause
WHEREAS: Public data collected by OpenSecrets.org show that Target Corporation (“Target,” and “the Company”) and its employee PAC rank in the top 3% of political donors.1



As long-term shareholders of Target, we support transparency and accountability in corporate electoral spending. Informed disclosure is in the best interest of the company and its shareholders. As the Supreme Court recognized in its 2010 Citizens United decision, such transparency “permits citizens and shareholders to react to the speech of corporate entities in a proper way” and “enables the electorate to make informed decisions and give proper weight to different speakers and messages.”



Greater political spending transparency is associated with increased investment levels, both domestic and foreign, and decreased investment volatility.2 Increased institutional investment, increased analyst following, and decreased analyst forecast error and forecast dispersion are all positively correlated with greater transparency.3



Target publicly discloses a policy on corporate political spending and its direct contributions to candidates, parties, and committees. However, we believe this is deficient because Target does not disclose information regarding misalignment between its political spending and the company’s publicly stated values and vision as articulated in its political engagement policy4 and its latest Sustainability and Governance Report.5 Investors are unable to determine if Target is directing its political expenditures in a way that is consistent with company values and interests and mitigates reputation risk.



To minimize values misalignment and reputation and brand risk, Target should establish clear policies and reporting on such misalignment.
Supporting statement
SUPPORTING STATEMENT: Proponents recommend, at management discretion, that Target include in its analysis metrics that illuminate the degree to which political contributions align with stated values and policy priorities year over year and present such metrics in the aggregate to avoid singling out specific individuals. Proponents further recommend that the report also contain management’s analysis of risks to our company’s brand, reputation, or shareholder value of political spending, including expenditures for electioneering communications, that conflict with publicly stated company values. “Expenditures for electioneering communications” means spending, from the corporate treasury and from its PACs, during the year, directly or through third parties, in printed, internet, or broadcast communications, which are reasonably susceptible to interpretation as being in support of or in opposition to a specific candidate.

How other organisations have declared their voting intentions

Organisation nameDeclared voting intentionsRationale
Rothschild & co Asset ManagementFor
Anima SgrForA report on the congruence of the company's political expenditures with its stated values would enable investors to have a more comprehensive understanding of how the company oversees and manages risks related to its political spending.
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.