CCRcorp Sites  

The CCRcorp Network unlocks access to a world of insights, research, guides and information in a range of specialty areas.

Our Sites

TheCorporateCounsel

TheCorporateCounsel.net

A basis for research and practical guidance focusing on federal securities laws, compliance & corporate governance.

DealLawyers

DealLawyers.com

An educational service that provides practical guidance on legal issues involving public and private mergers & acquisitions, joint ventures, private equity – and much more.

CompensationStandards

CompensationStandards.com

The “one stop” resource for information about responsible executive compensation practices & disclosure.

Section16.net

Section16.net

Widely recognized as the premier online research platform providing practical guidance on issues involving Section 16 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and all of its related rules.

PracticalESG

PracticalESG.com

Keeping you in-the-know on environmental, social and governance developments

We’ve talked a lot about proxy season trends over the past several years. Last week I wrote about the trends so far in 20216. Overall, the number of ESG proposals and the support behind them is down. However, there is one group faring worse than ESG proponents this proxy season, and that’s anti-ESG. Anti-ESG advocates started bringing their own shareholder proposals a few years ago. They’ve never gone over particularly well, and this year is no different. A recent memo from Mayer Brown discusses the trends:

“As in recent years, anti-ESG proposals constituted a large portion of overall shareholder proposals in 2026, constituting about 20% of the total shareholder proposals voted on to date. Approximately 28 additional anti-ESG proposals were excluded under Rule 14a-8. Consistent with both 2024 and 2025, none of the ESG related proposals received a passing shareholder vote; in 2026, the average vote in favor of anti-ESG proposals was about 1.2%, and such proposals received a median support level of 1.27%”

Previously, anti-ESG used their proposals to “block” their pro-ESG counterparts. They sought to preclude pro-ESG proposals by staking out the opposite position on an ESG issue first. This would make the pro-ESG proposal duplicative and allow for its exclusion. In those cases, winning didn’t matter. It was about getting on the proxy card so others couldn’t. However, with the SEC sitting on the sidelines this proxy season, companies aren’t having much trouble excluding ESG proposals. This makes the purpose of anti-ESG proposals unclear. The level of support is too low to win votes or force settlements. For now, anti-ESG shareholder proposals are just more noise.

Our members can learn more about shareholder activism here.

If you’re not already a member, sign up now and take advantage of our no-risk “100-Day Promise” – during the first 100 days as an activated member, you may cancel for any reason and receive a full refund. But it will probably pay for itself before then. Members also save hours of research and reading time each week by using our filtered and curated library of ESG/sustainability resources covering over 100 sustainability subject areas – updated daily with practical and credible information.

Practical Guidance for Companies, Curated for Clarity.

Back to all blogs

The Editor

Zachary Barlow is a licensed attorney. He earned his JD from the University of Mississippi and has a bachelor’s in Public Policy Leadership. He practiced law at a mid-size firm and handled a wide variety of cases. During this time he assisted in overseeing compliance of a public entity and litigated contract disputes, gaining experience both in and outside of the courtroom. Zachary currently assists the PracticalESG.com editorial team by providing research and creating content on a spectrum of ESG… View Profile