Does Disclosure Regulation Affect Mutual Fund Families’ Proxy Voting?

ABSTRACT Nonactivist investors that own more than 5 percent of a firm must report their holdings by filing a 13G in which they must commit to not influencing control of the firm. Mutual fund families are the most common investors filing 13Gs. I study whether the 13G requirement affects mutual fund families’ voting in proxy contests. I find mutual fund families that file the form are less likely to vote for activist proposals than are those that do not, suggesting that the requirement discourages mutual fund families from supporting activists who seek to influence control of the firm. The effects strengthen when vote outcomes directly affect the firm’s control and when activists pose a higher threat to the firm. I further document that the aggregate voting power of 13G-filing mutual fund families correlates with management winning contested votes and retaining board seats during proxy contests. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text. JEL Classifications: G34; G23; G38; K22; L51; M12.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Accounting Review
Published
2024-12-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2308/tar-2022-0653
Primary Topic
Corporate Finance and Governance
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Does Disclosure Regulation Affect Mutual Fund Families’ Proxy Voting?

Eunjee Kim
The Accounting Review
Corporate Finance and Governance
article

Does Disclosure Regulation Affect Mutual Fund Families’ Proxy Voting?

Eunjee Kim
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Nonactivist investors that own more than 5 percent of a firm must report their holdings by filing a 13G in which they must commit to not influencing control of the firm. Mutual fund families are the most common investors filing 13Gs. I study whether the 13G requirement affects mutual fund families’ voting in proxy contests. I find mutual fund families that file the form are less likely to vote for activist proposals than are those that do not, suggesting that the requirement discourages mutual fund families from supporting activists who seek to influence control of the firm. The effects strengthen when vote outcomes directly affect the firm’s control and when activists pose a higher threat to the firm. I further document that the aggregate voting power of 13G-filing mutual fund families correlates with management winning contested votes and retaining board seats during proxy contests. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text. JEL Classifications: G34; G23; G38; K22; L51; M12.

The Accounting ReviewVol. 100(3)
Texas A&M University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 63%
Corporate Finance and Governance
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.