2017–2019 Corporate governance reforms [Archived]
2017–2019 Corporate governance reforms [Archived]

The following Corporate practice note provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:

  • 2017–2019 Corporate governance reforms [Archived]
  • Background
  • Executive pay
  • Strengthening the voice of employees, customers and other stakeholders
  • Corporate governance in large privately-held businesses
  • Timing
  • FRC consultation on revised UKCG Code
  • IA public register
  • Wates corporate governance principles for large private companies
  • Revised AIM Rules
  • More...

This archived Practice Note provided an overview of various corporate governance reforms that were announced and/or implemented between 2017–2019, including the Companies (Miscellaneous Reporting) Regulations 2018, the 2018 UK Corporate Governance Code, the Wates Corporate Governance Principles, the 2018 revisions to the AIM Rules and the QCA Code, the BEIS consultation on insolvency and corporate governance and the Kingman review. It has not been updated since 2019.

Background

In November 2016 the government, acting through the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS), published a green paper on corporate governance reform (Green Paper). The Green Paper sought views on the following areas where the government was considering updating the UK’s corporate governance framework:

  1. executive pay

  2. strengthening the voice of employees, customers and other stakeholders

  3. extending some of the features of the corporate governance regime to large private companies

The government invited comments on the Green Paper by 17 February 2017.

Following the consultation, in August 2017 the government published its response to the Green Paper in which it announced a package of reforms focused on these three areas.

Executive pay

The government felt that a small minority of businesses continued to disregard shareholders’ views on executive pay. There were concerns that remuneration committees were not taking sufficient account of wider workforce pay and conditions in setting executive remuneration and that executive pay had become unnecessarily complex and opaque. To

Popular documents