Tag: ESG

Paying more for less

Mary Pat Campbell

Link: https://allisonschrager.substack.com/p/paying-more-for-less

Excerpt:

Between the controversies at Disney, Bud Light, and Target, I think we need a return to shareholder primacy.

In 2019, many of the biggest American CEOs signed a manifesto declaring the end of shareholder primacy and embracing a new stakeholder model. With shareholder primacy, the main objective of a corporation is to maximize profits, both long- and short-term profits, because that is what boosts share prices and dividends, and shareholders like that. With the stakeholder model, a corporation has many other objectives: worker well-being, the environment, and the good of society. That may sound nice, but often, these stakeholders have competing objectives, and choosing who gets priority is a question of values.

When Milton Friedman argued for shareholder primacy, he said that a CEO should not forgo profits to exercise his personal values. It is not his money to spend, and not everyone shares his values, nor should they. And worse, I blame the multi-stakeholder model  for making everything feel more political.

Now, I realize even before 2019, companies were getting more political, but it got ramped up several notches in 2020. And now, everything you buy feels like a political statement. And even innocuous well-intentioned marketing campaigns that aim to give visibility to marginalized groups are taken as an explicit endorsement of a more divisive political agenda. I think shooting Bud Light cans in protest is stupid. But I get that people feel frustrated that everything is political and often not their politics.

And even if corporations mostly did pursue profits after 2019, and the stakeholder manifesto was a cynical ploy to appease young workers, get ESG capital, or avoid regulation, rhetoric matters. Before 2019, people could shrug at corporate pandering because it all seemed like a marketing ploy, and who can argue with selling lawn chairs and beer to the trans community? It is a growing demographic.

But in the context of announcing that you are doing it to make the world a better place, it strikes a different tone. And since stakeholder capitalism is about choosing between competing values, it is political. And now everything is worse for profits and society, since it adds to division and rancor.

Milton Friedman was right; shareholder primacy is better for corporations and society.

If CEOs really want to save the world, they should do the brave thing: announce an end to stakeholder capitalism and go back to just worrying about profits.

Author(s): Allison Schrager

Publication Date: 5 Jun 2023

Publication Site: Known Unknowns at substack

ESG tug-of-war leaves taxpayers shortchanged

Mary Pat Campbell

Link: https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/4028654-esg-tug-of-war-leaves-taxpayers-shortchanged/

Excerpt:

The whole ordeal picked up steam years ago with efforts initiated by progressives in states like California, which has repeatedly imposed politically motivated restrictions on its largest pension funds, CalPERS and CalSTRS. In 2000, the state forced the funds to divest from tobacco companies, a move that cost nearly $3.6 billion in investment earnings. The pension funds have faced frequent — and occasionally successful — demands from activists and legislators on the left to divest of other progressive bogeymen, like firearms, oil and gas, and private prisons.

These politically motivated demands to place social goals above the fiduciary responsibility to pensioners persist, not just in California but also in Maine, Vermont, Massachusetts and many other blue states. At a time when many state pension funds are facing enormous fiscal imbalances, these policies are worsening the problem and shifting massive burdens onto taxpayers, who will have to foot the bill for the progressive aims of policymakers.

Indeed, research shows that putting social policies ahead of fiduciary responsibility can come at a hefty cost. A study found that public pension funds with ESG investment mandates have investment returns that are 70 to 90 basis points lower than those that do not — meaning retirees are financially hurt by these investment strategies.

Not to be outdone, conservatives in red states have been fighting back with anti-ESG policies of their own. Unfortunately, rather than establishing an environment that ensures taxpayers are best served, many of these policies elevate conservative cultural preferences above fiscal considerations. Like the pro-ESG policies of the left, these anti-ESG policies have cost taxpayers considerably.

Author(s): Brandon Arnold

Publication Date: 1 Jun 2023

Publication Site: The Hill

CalPERS and CalSTRS Know Fossil Fuel Divestment is a Recipe for Disaster

Mary Pat Campbell

Link: https://alec.org/article/calpers-and-calstrs-know-fossil-fuel-divestment-is-a-recipe-for-disaster/

Excerpt:

In the Golden State, the California State Teachers’ Retirement System (CalSTRS) and the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) are waking up to the fact that divestment hurts retirees and taxpayers.

CalPERS and CalSTRS are two of the largest pension funds in the country (by both membership and portfolio size). As California Senate Bill 252, a bill calling for fossil fuel divestment from public retirement systems in California, continues to move along in committee, CalPERS and CalSTRS have publicly opposed the bill because it conflicts with their duties as pension plan managers.

As ALEC VP of Policy Lee Schalk and I mentioned in our OC Register column last month, politicized investment strategies are a recipe for disaster. Research from Mike Edleson and Andy Puzder found that ESG investing yields lower returns than investing without political constraints. Additionally, researchers at Boston College found that ESG has failed to achieve its stated social goals.

Both CalPERS and CalSTRS realize that divestment hampers their ability to put members’ retirements benefits first, and the research shows divestment does not achieve its stated social goals. 

Author(s): Thomas Savidge

Publication Date: 28 April 2023

Publication Site: ALEC

NGO Study IDs Vanguard, BlackRock as Big Climate-Change Villains

Mary Pat Campbell

Link: https://www.ai-cio.com/news/ngo-study-ids-vanguard-blackrock-big-climate-change-villains/

Excerpt:

Guess who the largest investors in climate-harming energy companies are? That would be major asset managers, with BlackRock and Vanguard Group the biggest offenders. So says an environmentalists’ report, “Investing in Climate Chaos.”

The report, spearheaded by Urgewald, a German environmental group, and conducted “in partnership” with more than 20 other nongovernmental organizations, comes down hard on two financial service stalwarts in particular: Vanguard, the mutual fund powerhouse, and BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager.

Beyond those two, half of the stakes in fossil fuel companies identified in the report are held by just 23 investors. What’s more,18 of them are U.S.-based, the advocacy group stated, basing the report on data collected in January.

….

BlackRock has positions in oil and gas companies that account for two-thirds of the world’s yearly hydrocarbon production, per Urgewald. Its single largest energy holding is also Exxon, which is the firm’s ninth biggest equity position overall. . Although the asset manager has a policy against investing in any business that gets at least one-quarter of its revenue from coal, the report charged that BlackRock exempts power companies that use coal. “As a result, BlackRock remains the world’s largest investor in coal developers,” it said.

….

In the past, BlackRock has responded to critics on the right and the left by saying that, while it supports ESG, is not about to “dictate how clients should invest.” In a statement, it declared that “transition to a low carbon is in the interest of realizing the best long-term financial results for our clients.” 

Vanguard, also under GOP attack, has made much the same argument. It did raise environmentalists’ ire last year when it quit the investment-industry initiative on combating climate change, saying it wanted to “speak independently on matters of importance to our investors.” Some contended that Vanguard was just knuckling under to politicians’ pressure.

Author(s): Larry Light

Publication Date: 25 Apr 2023

Publication Site: ai-CIO

Recent SEC Proposals to Come Under Scrutiny of Financial Services Committee

Mary Pat Campbell

Link: https://www.ai-cio.com/news/sec-recent-proposals-to-come-under-scrutiny-of-financial-services-committee/

Excerpt:

The House Committee on Financial Services will hold an oversight hearing on the Securities and Exchange Commission next Wednesday and Chairman Gary Gensler is expected to testify. The SEC’s proposed budget and their recent proposals, especially the climate disclosure proposal will all likely be discussed.

The SEC requested $2.436 billion for 2024, an increase of $265 million from this year primarily to hire new staff. The new hires are proportionally concentrated in the Divisions of Risk Analysis and Investment Management, whose staffs would increase by more than 5% each. The largest aggregate staffing increase would be to the Division of Enforcement, from its current 1,505 positions to 1,558.

…..

Womack also suggested that the SEC’s proposal on climate disclosure, which would require entities registered with the SEC to disclose their carbon emissions, was not within the SEC’s legal authority, a concern shared by several other Republican members of the committee.

The climate disclosure proposal has been a sensitive issue for agricultural interests. Representative Ashley Hinson, R-Iowa, emphasized the potential impact of this rule on farmers at the hearing. She said that this proposal would be bad for farmers in her state who would have to collect and disclose their emissions data to issue securities and to work with larger businesses who must collect emissions data from their value chain.

Representative Michael Cloud, R-Texas, shared this sentiment during the hearing and said that any issuer subject to Scope 3 disclosure would compel farms in their supply chain to collect this data, a tedious process, which might reduce farmer’s access to credit if they do not comply.

Author(s): Paul Mulholland

Publication Date: 12 April 2023

Publication Site: ai-CIO

New York Common Commits $1.3 Billion to Sustainable Program

Mary Pat Campbell

Link: https://www.ai-cio.com/news/new-york-common-commits-1-3-billion-to-sustainable-program/

Excerpt:

The $242.3 billion New York State Common Retirement Fund has committed $1.3 billion to two funds as part of its Sustainable Investments and Climate Solutions program. It also earmarked more than $600 million to alternative investments in February.

The pension program committed $1 billion to funds tracking the MSCI World ex USA Climate Change Index, which overweights companies expected to benefit from the transition to a low-carbon economy and underweights companies facing greater climate change risks. A company’s carbon intensity, climate risk management, potential stranded assets, physical risk exposure and development of climate solution products and services are the key factors assessing these rankings.

….

Finally, within the pension fund’s emerging manager program, which invests in newer, smaller and diverse firms, $15 million was allocated to the Empire GCM RE Anchor Fund, which will focus on creating and acquiring industrial outdoor storage in the Netherlands, Germany and Sweden.

Author(s): Michael Katz

Publication Date: 10 April 2023

Publication Site: ai-CIO

Illinois Bill Would Give State Treasurer Voting Control On Pension Assets – Wirepoints

Mary Pat Campbell

Link: https://wirepoints.org/illinois-bill-would-give-state-treasurer-voting-control-on-pension-assets-wirepoints/

Excerpt:

Count on the Illinois legislature to find a way to further maim its crippled pension system.

Senate Bill 2152 would strip pension trustees of control over how to vote shareholder matters and vest the power in the state treasurer, currently, Michael Frerichs.

Still worse, the treasurer would then be bound to comply with the Illinois Sustainable Investing Act on how he votes on behalf of stocks owned by the pensions. That law requires officials like the treasurer to include “sustainability” considerations in how public money is invested. It’s basically a progressive policy agenda also known as ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance). It’s often ridiculed as “woke capitalism,” and includes the goals of zero fossil fuels, “equity,” gender and identity politics, and pretty much any other social justice fad in vogue.

….

Shareholders, including pensions, usually have the right to vote on key corporate issues such as board of director elections, rights offerings, mergers and acquisitions. For interests in private investment partnerships, which pensions also hold, voting powers include other major matters. If the bill becomes law, Frerichs, or whoever is treasurer, would hold a proxy for all those votes and execute ballots, voting as he alone decides — a huge concentration of power in one individual.

The bill would eliminate any fiduciary obligation to vote shares in a way that maximizes their value, diluting that goal with progressive’s political agenda. Today, pension managers are fiduciaries for pensioners – a strict, legal standard — but the treasurer would not be if the bill becomes law.

Author(s): Mark Glennon

Publication Date: 17 Mar 2023

Publication Site: Wirepoints

GOP-led House committee launches working group to combat ESG proposals

Mary Pat Campbell

Link: https://www.pionline.com/washington/republican-led-house-committee-launches-anti-esg-working-group

Excerpt:

Congressional Republicans on Friday took another step in their quest to dismantle the Biden administration’s environmental, social and governance rule-making initiatives.

The House Financial Services Committee has formed a working group to “combat the threat to our capital markets posed by those on the far-left pushing environmental, social and governance proposals,” the committee’s Chairman Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., announced.

The group will be led by Rep. Bill Huizenga, R-Mich., and include eight other Republican committee members.

Among its priorities, the group will examine ways to “rein in the SEC’s regulatory overreach;” reinforce the materiality “standard as a pillar of the nation’s disclosure regime;” and hold to account market participants who “misuse the proxy process or their outsized influence to impose ideological preferences in ways that circumvent democratic lawmaking,” according to a news release.

“This group will develop a comprehensive approach to ESG that protects the financial interests of everyday investors and ensures our capital markets remain the envy of the world,” Mr. McHenry said in the news release. “Financial Services Committee Republicans as a whole will continue our work to expand capital formation, hold Biden’s rogue regulators accountable, and support American job creators.”

Author(s): Brian Croce

Publication Date: 3 Feb 2023

Publication Site: Pensions & Investments

Panel on “Central Bank Independence and the Mandate—Evolving Views”

Mary Pat Campbell

Link: https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/powell20230110a.htm

Excerpt:

It is essential that we stick to our statutory goals and authorities, and that we resist the temptation to broaden our scope to address other important social issues of the day.4 Taking on new goals, however worthy, without a clear statutory mandate would undermine the case for our independence.

In the area of bank regulation, too, the Fed has a degree of independence, as do the other federal bank regulators. Independence in this area helps ensure that the public can be confident that our supervisory decisions are not influenced by political considerations.5 Today, some analysts ask whether incorporating into bank supervision the perceived risks associated with climate change is appropriate, wise, and consistent with our existing mandates.

Addressing climate change seems likely to require policies that would have significant distributional and other effects on companies, industries, regions, and nations. Decisions about policies to directly address climate change should be made by the elected branches of government and thus reflect the public’s will as expressed through elections.

At the same time, in my view, the Fed does have narrow, but important, responsibilities regarding climate-related financial risks. These responsibilities are tightly linked to our responsibilities for bank supervision.6 The public reasonably expects supervisors to require that banks understand, and appropriately manage, their material risks, including the financial risks of climate change.

Author(s): Jerome Powell

Publication Date: 10 Jan 2023

Publication Site: Federal Reserve

The great anti-ESG backlash

Mary Pat Campbell

Link: https://thespectator.com/topic/great-anti-esg-backlash/

Excerpt:

The ESG story starts in 2004, when the three-letter acronym appeared in a UN report arguing for environmental, social and governance considerations to be hardwired into financial systems. Since then the term has been on a long but rapidly accelerating journey from NGO-world obscurity into the financial mainstream and subsequently the political limelight, prompting strong reactions from a chorus of prominent figures. Elon Musk calls it “a scam.” Peter Thiel says it’s a “hate factory.” Warren Buffett describes it as “asinine.”

Unsurprisingly for a piece of UN jargon that has become part of the political cut and thrust, “ESG” is often used to mean different things. Properly defined, it refers to an investment strategy that factors in environmental, social and corporate governance considerations. That might mean not investing in oil and gas companies, for example. Or it might mean only investing in companies that have a stated commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion. As it has grown in infamy, the acronym has also come to refer not only to investment products billed as ESG, but to other practices through which investment firms use their customers’ money to push political ends. For example, your pension may not be invested in an ESG fund, but the manager of that money may still be using stocks owned on your behalf to pursue political goals. A third, even broader, meaning is as a synonym for woke capitalism: a broad catch-all for big business’s embrace of bien pensant opinion, particularly on the environment.

….

This win-win rhetoric has been the rallying cry of the ESG crowd on what has looked like an unstoppable march. Make money and do good: who could possibly object? Millions have bought into this seductive logic. Globally, more than $35 trillion of assets are invested according to ESG considerations, an increase of more than 50 percent since 2016. From 2020 to 2022, the size of ESG assets in the United States grew by 40 percent. According to an analysis by the asset manager Pimco, ESG was mentioned on just 1 percent of earnings calls between 2005 and 2018. By 2021, that figure had risen to 20 percent.

….

If the anti-ESG movement has the wind in its sails, that’s in large part thanks to last year’s tumultuous geopolitical events and economic trends, foremost among them the war in Ukraine. The Russian invasion has transformed the ESG debate in two ways.

First, it has underscored the ethical dilemmas ESG champions would rather ignore. For example, many ESG funds rule out investment in weapons manufacturers. Is it really ethical to deny capital to the firms producing the material Ukraine needs to survive? Indeed, the socially responsible position is arguably the exact opposite.

Second, it has transformed the energy conversation in a way that has made many more of us acutely aware of the importance of cheap, abundant and reliable energy — and conscious that it cannot be taken for granted. In other words, each of us is a little more like Riley Moore’s West Virginia constituents, who don’t have much time for net-zero grandstanding given that they will be the ones who pay a heavy price for someone else’s pursuit of feel-good goals. What has always been true is becoming clearer: a financial system that starves domestic energy producers of capital not only hurts those whose savings are being used to pursue political ends, but ends up as a de facto tax on US consumers in the form of higher energy costs. ESG, says Goldman Sachs’s Michele Della Vigna, “creates affordability problems which could generate political backlash. That is the risk — political instability and the consumer effectively suffering from this cost inflation.”

Author(s): Oliver Wiseman

Publication Date: 22 Dec 2022

Publication Site: The Spectator

Arizona divesting funds from BlackRock over ESG push

Mary Pat Campbell

Link: https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/arizona-divesting-funds-from-blackrock-over-esg-push

Excerpt:

Arizona is forging ahead with its plan to pull the state’s funds from BlackRock due to concerns over the massive investment firm’s push for environmental, social, and governance (ESG) policies that have led other states to take similar actions.

Arizona Treasurer Kimberly Yee said in a statement released Thursday that the state treasury’s Investment Risk Management Committee (IRMC) began to assess the relationship between the state’s trust fund and BlackRock in late 2021. 

“Part of the review by IRMC involved reading the annual letters by CEO Larry Fink, which in recent years, began dictating to businesses in the United States to follow his personal political beliefs,” Yee wrote. “In short, BlackRock moved from a traditional asset manager to a political action committee. Our internal investment team believed this moved the firm away from its fiduciary duty in general as an asset manager.”

In response to those findings, Yee noted that Arizona began to divest over $543 million from BlackRock money market funds in February 2022 and “reduced our direct exposure to BlackRock by 97%” over the course of the year. Yee added that Arizona “will continue to reduce our remaining exposure in BlackRock over time in a phased in approach that takes into consideration safe and prudent investment strategy that protects the taxpayers.”

….

Florida’s chief financial officer announced recently that the state’s treasury is taking action to remove about $2 billion in assets from BlackRock’s stewardship before the end of this year. In October, Louisiana and Missouri announced they would reallocate state pension funds away from BlackRock, which amounted to roughly $1.3 billion in combined assets. Taken together with Arizona’s divestment, roughly $3.8 billion in state funds have been divested from BlackRock by those four states alone.

Additionally, North Carolina’s state treasurer has called for BlackRock CEO Larry Fink’s resignation and the Texas legislature has subpoenaed BlackRock for financial documents.

The investment firm has also taken heat from activists who argue BlackRock isn’t doing enough to follow through with its ESG commitments. New York City Comptroller Brad Lander wrote to Fink in September citing an “alarming” contradiction between the company’s words and its deeds. Lander wrote, “BlackRock cannot simultaneously declare that climate risk is a systemic financial risk and argue that BlackRock has no role in mitigating the risks that climate change poses to its investments by supporting decarbonization in the real economy.”

Author(s): Eric Revell

Publication Date: 11 Dec 2022

Publication Site: Fox Business

(Updated) New Hong Kong Watch report finds that MSCI investors are at risk of passively funding crimes against humanity in Xinjiang

Mary Pat Campbell

Link: https://www.hongkongwatch.org/all-posts/2022/12/5/updated-new-hkw-report-finds-that-msci-investors-are-at-risk-of-passively-funding-crimes-against-humanity-in-xinjiang

Report PDF: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/58ecfa82e3df284d3a13dd41/t/638e318e6697c029da8e5c38/1670263209080/EDITED+REPORT+5+DEC.pdf

Graphic:

Excerpt:

A new report by Hong Kong Watch have found that a number of pension funds may be passively invested in at least 13 China based companies where there is credible evidence of involvement in Uyghur forced labour programs and construction of internment camps in Xinjiang.

 As part of the report, Hong Kong Watch found that major asset managers are exposed passively to these companies as a result of their inclusion on Morgan Stanley Capital International’s Emerging Markets Index, China Index and All World Index ex-USA.  

….

Commenting on the release of the report, Johnny Patterson, co-founder and a research fellow at Hong Kong Watch, said:

“13 companies on MSCI’s emerging markets index are either known to have directly used forced labour through China’s forcible transfer of Uyghurs, or been involved in the construction of camps. Given this Index is the most widely tracked Emerging Markets index in the world, it raises serious questions about how seriously international financial institutions take their international human rights obligations or the ‘S’ in ESG.

Our view is that firms known to use modern slavery or known to be complicit in crimes against humanity should be classed alongside tobacco as ‘sin stocks’, or stocks which investors do not touch. Governments have a duty to signal which firms are unacceptable, but international financial institutions must also be doing their full due diligence. It is unacceptable that enormous amounts of the money of ordinary pensioners and retail investors is being passively channelled into firms that are known to use forced labour.” 

Publication Date: 5 Dec 2022

Publication Site: Hong Kong Watch