Alight Solutions has published the June update of its 401(k) Index, noting that it was another active trading month for investors.
There were five above-normal trading days in June, Alight says. All but three days in the month had net trading flows going from equities to fixed income.
On average, 0.015% of 401(k) balances were traded daily, compared to an average of 0.018% last month. Investors favored moving assets into fixed-income funds during 18 out of 21 trading days. Trading inflows exclusively went to fixed-income funds with stable value leading the way, while outflows were primarily from target-date, large U.S. and international equity funds, Alight says.
After reflecting market movements and trading activity, average asset allocation in equities decreased from 68.8% in May to 67.7% in June, Alight says. New contributions to equities decreased from 69% in May to 68.7% in June.
According to the index, a “normal” level of relative transfer activity is when the net daily movement of participants’ balances, as a percent of total 401(k) balances within the index, equals between 0.3 times and 1.5 times the average daily net activity of the preceding 12 months. A “high” relative transfer activity day is when the net daily movement exceeds two times the average daily net activity. A “moderate” relative transfer activity day is when the net daily movement is between 1.5 and two times the average daily net activity of the preceding 12 months.
By using this site you agree to our network wide Privacy Policy.
SEC Votes in Favor of Proxy Voting Advice Rule Amendments
According to a statement from the SEC, the amendments address concerns voiced by investors and industry stakeholders regarding the proxy voting advice rules established under the Trump administration.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has adopted amendments to its rules governing proxy voting advice, representing another step forward in what has been a fraught regulatory process.
SEC Chair Gary Gensler said in a statement that the final amendments aim to avoid burdens on proxy voting advice businesses that may impair the timeliness and independence of their advice. The amendments also address misperceptions about liability standards applicable to proxy voting advice, while preserving investors’ confidence in the integrity of such advice, Gensler said.
“I am pleased to support these amendments because they address issues concerning the timeliness and independence of proxy voting advice, which would help to protect investors and facilitate shareholder democracy,” Gensler says. “It is critical that investors who are the clients of these proxy advisory firms are able to receive independent and timely advice.”
As outlined in a press release distributed after the vote, the final amendments rescind two rules applicable to proxy voting advice businesses that the Commission adopted in 2020. Specifically, the final amendments rescind conditions to the availability of two exemptions from the proxy rules’ information and filing requirements on which proxy voting advice businesses often rely.
These conditions require that, first, public companies that are the subject of proxy voting advice have such advice made available to them in a timely manner, and second, that clients of proxy voting advice businesses are provided with a means of becoming aware of any written responses by those companies to proxy voting advice. The SEC’s release states that institutional investors and other clients of proxy voting advice businesses have continued to express concerns that these conditions could impose increased compliance costs on proxy voting advice businesses and impair the independence and timeliness of their proxy voting advice.
The final amendments also delete the 2020 changes made to the proxy rules’ liability provision. As explained in the SEC’s release, although the 2020 changes were intended to clarify the application of this liability provision to proxy voting advice, they instead created a risk of confusion regarding the application of this provision to proxy voting advice, undermining the goal of the 2020 changes.
The final amendments address the confusion while affirming that proxy voting advice generally is subject to liability under the proxy rules, the SEC says. Finally, the adopting release rescinds guidance that the SEC issued in 2020 to investment advisers regarding their proxy voting obligations.
The vote on the rule amendments comes more than a year after Gensler signaled that the SEC would revisit the proxy voting framework established by the SEC during 2019 and 2020 under the leadership of the Trump administration. Then-SEC Chair Jay Clayton argued those amendments would facilitate the ability of those who use proxy voting advice—investors and others who vote on investors’ behalf—to make “informed voting decisions without imposing undue costs or delays that could adversely affect the timely provision of proxy voting advice.”
The Trump-era SEC adopted amendments to its rules that exempt persons furnishing proxy voting advice from the information and filing requirements of the federal proxy rules. In addition, the changes amended the definition of “solicitation” in Exchange Act Rule 14a-1(l) to specify that it includes proxy voting advice, with certain exceptions.
From the moment of their proposal through Wednesday’s vote, these rule amendments have raised the ire of the proxy voting industry and many of its clients. Immediately after Wednesday’s vote, the proxy voting advisory firm Institutional Shareholder Services issued a statement with mixed interpretation of the regulatory update.*
“While we applaud the Commission for removing some of the 2020 rule’s more draconian provisions, the rule should have been rescinded in its entirety,” the statement reads. “As investors and their representatives made abundantly clear in two rounds of public comments, the proxy rule is a solution in search of a problem. Today’s action misses the mark by failing to address the most critical defect; namely, the reclassification of proxy advice provided in a fiduciary capacity as proxy solicitation. We firmly believe the Commission’s decision to regulate a form of independent investment advice as though it were a solicitation of a specific outcome in a shareholder vote exceeds the agency’s statutory authority, is contrary to law, and is arbitrary and capricious. That is why we filed our suit challenging the 2020 rule and the 2019 guidance on which the rule was based. Oral arguments in the case are scheduled for late this month.”
Glass Lewis, another prominent provider that has commented in opposition to the Trump-era rules, has not yet responded to a request for comment about Wednesday’s vote. On the other hand, the American Securities Association, which has been a vocal supporter of the Trump-era framework, quickly issued a statement bemoaning Wednesday’s vote.
“Today, the U.S. Securities Exchange Commission finalized rules that would gut the proxy adviser reforms adopted in 2020 and proposed undoing reforms to the shareholder proposal system under Rule 14a-8—both reforms the American Securities Association strongly supported,” the ASA statement reads. “Today’s actions will cost public companies and their American investors millions of dollars. By removing anti-fraud liability and conflict disclosures from the proxy process, the SEC has guaranteed that monopoly rents continue to flow to proxy advisers.”
*Editor’s note: PLANADVISER Magazine is owned by Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS). ISS has been involved in litigation seeking to halt the implementation of the proxy voting rule changes.