Item 4: Shareholder Proposal – Production of an Annual Report on Certain Trade Association and Lobbying Expenditures

Item 4: Shareholder Proposal – Production of an Annual Report on Certain Trade Association and Lobbying Expenditures

The Unitarian Universalist Association (“UUA”), 24 Farnsworth Street, Boston, MA 02210-1409, the holder of 12 shares of common stock, has advised us that it intends to introduce the following resolution, which is co-sponsored by Reynders McVeigh Capital Management / Fresh Pond Capital, Center for Community Change and School Sisters of Notre Dame Cooperative Investment Fund:

Whereas, we believe in full disclosure of BlackRock’s direct and indirect lobbying activities and expenditures to assess whether our company’s lobbying is consistent with its expressed goals and in the best interests of stockholders.

Resolved, the stockholders of BlackRock request the preparation of a report, updated annually, disclosing:

1.

Company policy and procedures governing lobbying, both direct and indirect, and grassroots lobbying communications.

2.

Payments by BlackRock used for (a) direct or indirect lobbying or (b) grassroots lobbying communications, in each case including the amount of the payment and the recipient.

3.

BlackRock’s membership in and payments to any tax-exempt organization that writes and endorses model legislation.

4.

Description of management’s and the Board’s decision making process and oversight for making payments described in sections 2 and 3 above.

For purposes of this proposal, a “grassroots lobbying communication” is a communication directed to the general public that (a) refers to specific legislation or regulation, (b) reflects a view on the legislation or regulation and (c) encourages the recipient of the communication to take action with respect to the legislation or regulation. “Indirect lobbying” is lobbying engaged in by a trade association or other organization of which BlackRock is a member.

Both “direct and indirect lobbying” and “grassroots lobbying communications” include efforts at the local, state and federal levels.

The report shall be presented to the Audit Committee or other relevant oversight committees and posted on BlackRock’s website.

Supporting Statement

We encourage transparency in BlackRock’s use of corporate funds to lobby. BlackRock spent $18,570,000 from 2010 – 2017 on federal lobbying. This figure does not include state lobbying expenditures, where BlackRock also lobbies but disclosure is uneven or absent. For example, BlackRock spent $938,394 on lobbying in California from 2011 – 2017. And BlackRock CEO Laurence Fink stated that “lobbying is really good because it is maximizing shareholder value” (“Unusual Debate at Davos: Lobbying, Maximizing Shareholder Value and the Duty of CEO’s,” ProMarket, April 1, 2016).

BlackRock lists memberships in the Investment Company Institute and the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, which together spent over $25,434,947 on lobbying in 2016 and 2017. BlackRock is reportedly a member of the Chamber of Commerce (“Is the Most Powerful Lobbyist in Washington Losing Its Grip?” Washington Post, July 14, 2017), which spent more than $1.4 billion in lobbying since 1998, and belongs to the Business Roundtable, which is lobbying against the right of shareholders to file resolutions. BlackRock does not comprehensively disclose its memberships in, or payments to, trade associations, nor the amounts used for lobbying.

We are concerned that BlackRock’s lack of disclosure presents reputational risks when its lobbying contradicts company public positions. For example, BlackRock believes climate change risk is an investment issue, yet the Chamber undermined the Paris climate accord (“Paris Pullout Pits Chamber against Some of Its Biggest Members,” Bloomberg, June 9, 2017). We believe that companies should ensure there is alignment between their own positions and their lobbying, including through trade associations.

 

The Board of Directors’ Statement in Opposition

The Board of Directors believes that the actions requested by the Proponent are unnecessary and not in the best interests of our shareholders.

We believe that advocating for public policies that increase financial transparency, protect investors and facilitate responsible growth of capital markets is an important part of our responsibilities to our shareholders and clients. We provide on our website extensive disclosure of our public policy engagement efforts, political activities and the decision-making and oversight associated with these efforts and activities.

We review our public disclosure on our public policy engagements and political activities at least annually to ensure it accurately reflects our activities and policies and provides our shareholders with a clear understanding of our priorities. As part of our process, we consider feedback from our shareholders and other stakeholders.

We received a nearly identical proposal last year from the same proponent. Similar to last year, we engaged with the proponent and this year’s co-filers on the issues raised in the proposal. Following this discussion, we enhanced our disclosures to address some of the concerns raised by the proponent. These enhancements included clarifying that BlackRock does not engage in “grassroots lobbying” and updating the link to the government website reporting the federal political contributions made by BlackRock’s political action committee so that readers are taken directly to BlackRock’s report. Similar to last year, we engaged extensively with this proponent to explain our approach to public policy engagement and took steps to address items where the proponent thought additional clarification and facilitation would be helpful to our shareholders.

We believe that our current disclosures offer the appropriate amount of detail and background on our engagement on public policy issues. A report beyond what has been published on our website and required in our public filings would impose administrative burdens on the Company but provide only minimal additional information to BlackRock’s shareholders. As a result, we believe that adoption of the proposal is unnecessary and not in the best interest of BlackRock or our shareholders.

As detailed in our statement of Public Policy Engagement and Political Participation Policies on our website, BlackRock is committed to:

Full Transparency of Positions:

  BlackRock employs an in-depth, multi-layer strategy of control programs including monitoring external and internal threats and events, managing access, facilitating use of appropriate authentication options, validating controls and programs by internal teams and independent third parties, and testing various compromise scenarios that are overseen by a global information security team.

Effective Oversight and Governance:

  BlackRock’s Chief Legal Officer and the head of BlackRock’s Global Public Policy Group brief the Board’s Risk and Nominating and Governance Committees to keep our Directors apprised of, and engaged in, the Company’s legislative and regulatory priorities and advocacy initiatives.

  The Global Public Policy Group works closely with the Company’s business and legal teams to identify legislative and regulatory priorities that will protect investors, increase shareholder value and facilitate responsible economic growth.

  As an asset manager, BlackRock focuses on issues that impact the asset management industry and the clients for whom we act as agent in managing assets.

  As part of BlackRock’s engagement in the public policy process, the Company participates in a number of trade organizations and industry groups, and we publicly disclose our principal trade associations.

Full Compliance with Restrictions on Political Contributions and Filing and Disclosure Obligations:

  In compliance with federal regulations, as well as applicable state and local law, BlackRock does not contribute corporate funds to federal, state or local candidates, political party committees, political action committees or any political organization exempt from federal income taxes under Section 527 of the Internal Revenue Code.

  Although permitted under federal law, BlackRock does not spend corporate funds directly on independent expenditures, including electioneering communications and ballot initiatives, and does not engage in “grassroots lobbying”.

  BlackRock’s political action committee is funded voluntarily by employees and its contributions are publicly disclosed to the Federal Election Commission.

  BlackRock publicly discloses quarterly all U.S. federal lobbying costs and the issues to which our lobbying efforts relate, as required under the Lobbying Disclosure Act. BlackRock also makes such disclosures at the state or local level to the extent required to do so under applicable lobbying laws..

Board Recommendation

Title Goes Here