APPLE INC. | Report on Charitable Giving at Apple Inc.

Status
1.87% votes in favour
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Proposal number
7
Resolution details
Company ticker
AAPL
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
Shareholders request that Apple Inc. report to shareholders annually, at reasonable expense and excluding confidential information, an analysis of how Apple Inc.’s contributions impact its risks related to discrimination against individuals based on their speech or religious exercise.
Supporting statement
Corporations routinely use their platforms to voice support for humanitarian causes and human rights. Some of the most fundamental are the rights to free speech and religion, which are recognized by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and the UN Declaration of Human Rights(1). Unfortunately, many companies are supporting organizations that are undermining these freedoms. This discrepancy is especially concerning because Apple Inc. purports to support free speech and religious freedom in its 2022 ESG report.(15)

Apple Inc. needs to rebuild trust by increasing transparency around these practices.

The 2024 edition of the Viewpoint Diversity Score Business found that 62% of scored companies, including Apple Inc., support non-profits that are influencing public policy by actively attacking free speech and religious freedom. Groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center have been criticized across the political spectrum as “a partisan progressive hit operation”(2) more interested in “bludgeon[ing] mainstream politically conservative opponents”(3) than upholding civil rights. It uses its “Hate Map” and “Hate Watch” to target many mainstream political and religious groups and individuals, including Moms for Liberty, the Family Research Center, Homeschool Legal Defense Association, Ruth Institute, Dr. Ben Carson, and Franklin Graham.(4) It has also used its influence to get social media and tech companies to adopt standards and model policies that restrict or censor similar speech and speakers online through co-authoring the Change the Terms model policy.(5)

Similarly, Human Rights Campaign has led coalitions calling on major social media platforms to censor “hate speech and harassment” that includes many mainstream views on parental rights and human sexuality.(6) It has advocated for legislation like the Equality Act, which would pose serious threats to religious freedom, free speech, and the progress women have made toward equality in law and culture.(7) And its Corporate Equality Index requires companies to provide “puberty blockers for youth” in their healthcare plans(8) even though nearly 70% of Americans oppose the practice and has induced corporations like Anheuser-Busch(9) and Target(10) into marketing decisions that have severely and permanently harmed their brand value.

Many companies, including John Deere, Jack Daniels, Harley Davidson, Lowes, Home Depot, Ford, and Coors, have already taken affirmative steps to refocus their charitable giving in a manner that acknowledges the diverse views held by their customers and employees.(11) Many have also explicitly cut ties with the Human Rights Campaign as a part of this effort.

But Apple has supported many of these groups, including the SPLC(12) and Center for American Progress(13), and is a Platinum sponsor of HRC.(14)

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.