Key Takeaways
- The Division of Corporate Finance is making permanent its temporary decision from November 2025 that it would not respond to no-action requests or express its views on any basis for exclusion under Rule 14a-8.
- The decision is significant because it ends a practice under which the Division had, for decades, issued informal no-action letters expressing its enforcement position when a public company sought to exclude a shareholder proposal.
- As lawsuits may replace Division mediation over exclusion disputes, public companies should factor litigation risk and cost into their exclusion calculus and ensure their legal analysis is sufficiently rigorous to withstand judicial scrutiny.
On Aug. 14, 2026, the Division of Corporation Finance (Division) of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announced that it will permanently discontinue responding to no-action requests under Exchange Act Rule 14a-8, effective immediately. The Division will also no longer issue letters stating it will not object to the omission of a shareholder proposal. This announcement makes permanent and expands the pilot “no response” practice that the Division adopted for the 2025-2026 proxy season, removing the last vestiges of its decades-long informal role in mediating shareholder proposal disputes between public companies and proponents.
Background: The November 2025 Announcement
On Nov. 17, 2025, the Division announced that for the 2025-2026 proxy season (Oct. 1, 2025, through Sept. 30, 2026), it would no longer respond to no-action requests or express its views on any basis for exclusion under Rule 14a-8, with the exception of requests submitted under Rule 14a-8(i)(1) (relating to proposals that are not a proper subject for action by shareholders under state law). The Division offered a limited accommodation: A public company that included in its Rule 14a-8(j) notice an unqualified representation that it had a reasonable basis to exclude a proposal based on Rule 14a-8, prior to published guidance and/or judicial decisions could receive a letter from the Division stating that, based solely on that representation, the Division would not object to the omission.
As discussed in the December 2025 client alert, the initial shift was significant because it effectively ended a practice under which the Division had, for decades, issued informal no-action letters expressing its enforcement position when a public company sought to exclude a shareholder proposal. The November 2025 announcement was limited to a single proxy season, leaving open the possibility that the Division might return to its prior practice.
What Changed on Aug. 14, 2026
The Aug. 14, 2026, statement goes further than the November 2025 pilot in important respects:
- No sunset. The practice is now indefinite — it applies “effective immediately, unless and until the Division announces otherwise.”
- Rule 14a-8(i)(1) requests discontinued. The Division will no longer respond even to no-action requests premised on Rule 14a-8(i)(1) (the improper under state law basis). Notably, the Division received no such requests during the entire 2025-2026 proxy season.
- No more “no objection” letters. The accommodation introduced in November 2025 — under which the Division would respond to a public company’s unqualified representation of a reasonable basis to exclude a shareholder proposal with a letter stating it would not object — has also been eliminated.
- Procedural changes. The Division’s shareholder proposal email address is no longer operational. All Rule 14a-8(j) notices must be submitted through the SEC’s online Shareholder Proposal Form. Questions and other correspondence must also be submitted through that form.
The Division stated that it is taking this step “[i]n order to focus Division resources on the review of Securities Act and Exchange Act filings, including those reviews that are statutorily required, for the protection of investors and facilitation of capital formation, and in light of the extensive body of guidance from the Commission and the staff available to both companies and proponents on Rule 14a-8.” The Division also noted that the SEC has long recognized that “[n]o response or other action by the Commission or its staff is required” regarding Rule 14a-8(j) notices.
The Division of Investment Management announced that it will take a “substantially similar approach” for investment companies, directing that Rule 14a-8(j) notices for investment companies be submitted by email to [email protected].
Practical Implications for Public Companies
Public companies and their advisors should consider the following as they plan for the 2026-2027 proxy season and beyond:
- Exclusion decisions rest entirely on the company and its counsel. With the elimination of even the limited “no objection” letter available during the 2025-2026 proxy season, public companies will receive no comfort from the Division on any exclusion decision. The analysis must stand on its own, supported by Rule 14a-8, published Division guidance and applicable judicial authority.
- Rule 14a-8(j) notice requirements are unchanged. A public company intending to exclude a shareholder’s proposal must still file a notice with the SEC and the proponent at least 80 calendar days before filing its definitive proxy statement. The notice must include the company’s reasons for exclusion, referring if possible to the most recent applicable authority such as prior Division letters.
- Draft notices with the real audience in mind. The audience for a Rule 14a-8(j) notice is now the shareholder proponent, other shareholders, proxy advisory firms and potentially a court — not the Division. Notices should contain robust legal analysis that would persuade these constituencies. As noted in the December 2025 alert, many public companies are expected to continue filing notices resembling traditional no-action requests for precisely this reason.
- Maintain a detailed contemporaneous record. Public companies should document their exclusion analysis in a thorough internal record at the time the decision is made. This record will be critical in the event of litigation or engagement with the proponent.
- Prepare for increased litigation risk. A shareholder proponent who disputes an exclusion can no longer turn to the Division as a first line of recourse. The proponent’s primary remedy is now a judicial proceeding to compel inclusion. Public companies should factor litigation risk and cost into their exclusion calculus and ensure their legal analysis is sufficiently rigorous to withstand judicial scrutiny.
- Brief boards and disclosure committees early. Board and disclosure committees should be briefed on these developments early in their 2026-2027 proxy season planning cycle, so they understand the new decision-making framework.
- Note the procedural shift. The Division’s prior email submission channel for shareholder proposals is no longer operational. All submissions, questions and correspondence with the Division relating to Rule 14a-8 must go through the SEC’s online Shareholder Proposal Form. Investment companies should direct Rule 14a-8(j) notices and related correspondence to the Division of Investment Management’s dedicated email.
- Plan for this as the new normal. There is no sunset or review date for the Division’s updated position. Public companies should build their proxy season processes around the assumption that the Division will not be involved in the Rule 14a-8 exclusion process for the foreseeable future, absent a further SEC or Division announcement.
For questions about the Rule 14a-8 shareholder proposal process for the 2026-2027 proxy season, contact the authors, your McGuireWoods contact or a member of the firm’s Public Company Advisory Practice Group.