The Kay Report: tackling short-termism in the UK equity markets
28 September 2012
The first edition of Market reCap looked at Professor
Kay's
interim report on the UK equity markets, which was issued in
February 2012.
The final report was published on 23 July
2012, and concludes that short-termism is a problem in UK equity
markets. The principal causes are suggested to be the decline of
trust and the misalignment of incentives throughout the equity
investment chain.
This article examines the key recommendations
in the report, and what can be expected to emerge in response to
it.
Key themes
The report identifies several major themes
giving rise to the current situation:
- the increased fragmentation of shareholdings,
driven by the diminishing share of large UK insurance companies and
pension funds, and by the globalisation of financial markets. This
reduces the incentives for engagement and the level of control
enjoyed by each shareholder (particularly given that legal
ownership, decision making on disposal and voting, beneficial
ownership and economic rights in respect of a share may be held by
or exercised by different people);
- the evolution of the equity markets in a way
which contributes to poor managerial decisions by companies, in
particular by focusing on M&A activity or restructurings at the
expense of developing a company's business;
- trading and transactional cultures prevailing
in the investment chain, rather than relationships based on trust
and confidence; and
- undue reliance on the large quantities of
information disclosed by companies, much of which is of little
value but could drive damaging short-term decisions by
investors.
Recommendations
So what is to be done to address these issues?
The report proposes a number of disparate solutions which recognise
that cultural changes may be more effective than new regulatory
measures. Professor Kay's aim is to set incentives to adopt the
right behaviour, rather than rules to stop the wrong behaviour.
Specific recommendations include the
following:
(i) the
UK Stewardship Code being developed to incorporate a more expansive
form of stewardship which focuses on strategic issues in addition
to questions of corporate governance;
(ii)
directors, asset managers and asset holders should adopt "Good
Practice Statements" that promote stewardship and long-term
decision making;
(iii) directors’
remuneration being structured to relate incentives to sustainable
long-term business performance, with long-term incentives provided
only in the form of shares to be held at least until after the
executive has retired from the business;
(iv)
asset managers’ remuneration should be aligned with the interests
and timescales of their clients, and pay should not be related to
the short-term performance of the investment fund;
(v) all
participants in the equity investment chain ought to observe
fiduciary standards in their relationships with their clients and
customers, and the Law Commission should be asked to review the
legal concept of fiduciary duty as applied to investment;
(vi)
all income from stock lending to be disclosed and rebated to
investors;
(vii) mandatory
quarterly reporting obligations should be removed, and succinct
high quality narrative reporting strongly encouraged;
(viii) an independent
review to be commissioned in relation to the metrics and models
employed in the investment chain to highlight their uses and
limitations;
(ix)
companies should consult their major long-term investors over
significant board appointments;
(x) the government
ought to explore means for individuals to hold shares through
CREST; and
(xi)
an independent investors' forum should be established to facilitate
collective engagement by investors in UK companies.
No action required
A number of further possible steps were
expressly discounted. Albeit with a certain reluctance, no
immediate change was advocated to the current regulatory framework
of merger control in the UK, though it was suggested the scale and
effectiveness of merger activity in relation to UK companies should
be kept under careful review by BIS and by companies
themselves.
The interim report queried whether on a
takeover transaction the level of acceptances required from the
target's shareholders should be raised. The final report noted that
the Takeover Panel had recently consulted on this issue and found a
large majority of respondents to be opposed to this change - and,
perhaps more importantly, "such a move would have relevance
principally for hostile transactions, which account for a very
small proportion of all bids".
Professor Kay also rejected calls to amend
Section 172 of the Companies Act 2006 (the duty for directors to
act in good faith to promote the success of the company) to lay
greater emphasis on long-term factors and engagement with
shareholders. Any director who thinks his duty can be reduced to an
obligation to achieve the highest possible share price in the
short-term is said to have misunderstood the law.
Next steps
As is apparent, the report's recommendations
propose actions to be taken by the government and various
authorities in relation to the equity markets, such as the
Financial Reporting Council in developing the Stewardship Code.
The government is due to respond formally to
the report in detail later this year, and implementation is likely
to require further consultations. Nevertheless, concrete action
should be possible on a reasonable timescale since Professor Kay
has explicitly set out to avoid further legislation and regulation,
save where absolutely necessary.
A copy of the final report can be accessed
here.
Daniel
Hooke is a Senior Associate (PSL) in the Corporate Group of Field
Fisher Waterhouse LLP in London.