When retribution from the Oval Office threatens the nation’s legal system, there is cause for worry in C-Suites across America.

“While the companies making these contributions may be seeking a favorable regulatory environment, these political donations further erode public trust and expose companies to legal, reputational, and business risks…”

A new report warns of “profound risks” in American politics as cryptocurrency companies increase their political spending and Donald Trump oversees regulatory retreat while promising to create a “crypto strategic reserve”.

What is a 501(c)(4) organization? According to The 2024 CPA-Zicklin Index of Corporate Political Disclosure and Accountability, IRC section 501(c)(4) exempts from federal income tax “certain civic groups and nonprofit organizations, whose primary purpose is to promote social welfare.”

“With Donald Trump, everything is transactional and based on his animosity towards people. Some companies donate to gain access, while others do so for protection,” Bruce Freed explains

“Every company is lining up to ‘buy favors,'” said Bruce Freed, CPA President.

“The donations to the inaugural fund are basically to gain favour and to gain access,” said Bruce Freed, president and co-founder of the Center for Political Accountability

The high risk of getting political spending wrong makes it ripe for focused oversight, said Bruce Freed, president of the Center for Political Accountability.

In thinking ahead to the 2025 proxy season, companies should consider, among other things, their CPA-Zicklin Index score.

When Donald Trump was elected the 47th US president earlier this month, he did so with considerable help from corporate America. But corporate money is not just deeply embedded in political campaigns, it also has a major influence on the success or failure of specific legislation.

The Index’s data reflect leading companies holding firm overall to established norms of political disclosure and accountability, despite fierce headwinds against environmental, social, and governance (ESG) and related principles for investors and U.S. corporations.

In 2020, fewer than half of companies in the S&P 500 disclosed their election-related contributions to PACs and trade associations, according to the Center for Political Accountability. Among those that did disclose, two-thirds of their spending went to trade associations.

Wells Fargo gave a total of $704,300 to three Democratic and three Republican organizations known as 527s that are focused on electing governors, attorneys general and state lawmakers, according to data from the Center for Political Accountability

“two of the largest institutional investors, BlackRock and Vanguard, voted for CPA’s resolution for the first time last year. BlackRock did so for six of the 12 CPA resolutions and Vanguard for three.”

Electric co-ops top industry’s political contributions; utilities change approach.

DoorDash and CVS also contributing funds to Raga group trying to re-elect Todd Rokita, who favors total abortion ban.

As it sought a massive, corrupt bailout in Ohio, Akron-based FirstEnergy also spent lavishly on Trump-aligned dark money groups and at hotels and golf courses owned by the former president, a new report said this week.

…the Center for Political Accountability issued an analysis that showed Comcast and other corporations that have liberal abortion employee policies were major contributors to the Republican State Leadership Committee.

87 percent of respondents said they believe publicly traded companies should be required to have a code of conduct for assessing and governing their political spending

“What’s important to understand is that they are doing this in a social setting, so [lobbyists and staffers] become friends. It’s not just lobbyists going into the office,” said Bruce Freed, president of the Center for Political Accountability.

A recently released survey, commissioned by the Zicklin Center for Governance and Business Ethics at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania and the Center for Political Accountability and conducted by a leading non-partisan polling firm, set out to identify how retail shareholders expect companies to approach, govern and assess their political spending

What exactly is the scope and impact of corporate political spending? Much has been written about the risks – legal, reputational and bottom line – faced by companies engaging in this spending.

Corporate Underwriters: Where the Rubber Hits the Road, from the nonpartisan Center for Political Accountability, examines “the scope of corporate political spending and its impact on state and national politics and policy” by taking a deeper dive into six highly influential “527” organizations.

Voters who are invested in the stock market want more transparency of corporate political spending, according to a new poll released as races heat up for the White House and down-ballot offices.

CEOs are looking to keep doors open” with both Republicans and Democrats.

Even as some corporate bigwigs have taken to the sidelines, Trump’s fundraising has outstripped President Biden’s.

It’s a real problem and it raises questions in terms of conflicts and what the companies are doing, and how their money is being used,” said Bruce Freed, the president of the nonpartisan Center for Political Accountability.

“Climate change is such an important area of risk,” says Jeanne Hanna, research director at the Center for Political Accountability. “A lot of companies acknowledge that they face quantifiable economic risks if climate change carries on. It can do damage to their markets. It could do damage to their production. Companies themselves recognize it as…

Of the 345 companies that have been on the S&P 500 since 2015, 270 of them now prohibit or fully disclose spending on candidates or their committees. That’s up from 168 a few years prior, according to CPA’s analysis

“The index is recognized by companies as credible and serious. It is respected,” Bruce Freed, CPA president, told DMI. “Increasingly, companies want to be ‘Trendsetters’ (achieving scores of 90+ out of 100) that they can tout to show their best practices. In the 2023 index, 39% of the S&P 500 were in the top quintile.”

Even if executives hope to steer clear of this election, “if they engage in political spending, they’re speaking,” said Bruce Freed, president of The Center For Political Accountability, which has pushed for spending disclosures. “They won’t be sitting it out. As long as they’re giving, that creates risk because of what it associates them with.”

There’s a noticeable trend in the S&P 500 towards political disclosure and accountability becoming the norm, with a significant percentage of companies scoring high on the CPA-Zicklin Index of Corporate Political Disclosure and Accountability.

Freed told Popular Information that the corporations sending millions in PAC donations to election deniers are “putting themselves at risk.” He thinks the companies are underestimating the economic danger of undermining “the rule of law.” Instead of focusing on the preservation of “the political system that they need to be able to operate and grow,”…

A rush of shareholder proposals demanding transparency have been filed for the 2024 proxy season, with a strong emphasis on lobbying alignment.

With corporate political disclosure and accountability accepted as the norm, the next step for companies is to put in place a framework for approaching, governing and assessing their election-related spending.

The vast majority of companies utilize various forms of public policy advocacy to impact legislative and regulatory decisions mainly through lobbying and campaign contributions.

“Now, the CPA has developed a Guide to Becoming a Model Code Company, designed to help companies and their boards understand the Model Code and how it can help them manage election-related political spending in high-risk environments…”

Three fundraising accounts tied to key Michigan Democrats each got contributions of at least $200,000 from a nonprofit bankrolled by one of the state’s largest electric utilities in 2022, according to a tax filing obtained by The Detroit News.

Big brands like Comcast, Walmart, Pfizer, and AT&T fund the ring-wing political group that wrecked our democracy.

“They’ve reverted to spending as usual, and they are engaging in spending for access.”

As we begin this new year—a highly charged election year—it might be helpful to check out the Guide to Corporate Political Spending produced by the non-partisan Center for Political Accountability.

The number of public corporations in the S&P 500 Index getting scores of 90 percent or better, called Trendsetters, jumped from 89 last year to a record 100 now, according to data in the 2023 CPA-Zicklin Index of Corporate Political Disclosure and Accountability.

One fifth of S&P 500 firms rank as ‘trendsetters’ in 2023 CPA-Zicklin Index of Corporate Political Disclosure and Accountability…

One fifth of S&P 500 firms rank as ‘trendsetters’ in 2023 CPA-Zicklin Index of Corporate Political Disclosure and Accountability.

As the U.S. continues to look polarized politically, a growing number of S&P 500 companies have made the effort to earn the highest scores from a watchdog organization that’s focused on transparency in corporate political spending.

The Center for Political Accountability recently published this 10-page guide to corporate political spending. The guide suggests solutions to 5 common challenges that arise from contributions to political candidates, trade associations, and other third-party groups.

The purpose of the Guide is to help safeguard companies as they make political spending decisions in today’s charged environment.

Today members of the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility (ICCR) announced they had sent letters to members of the Business Roundtable urging them to align political spending with their state core values, to mitigate both reputational risks to the company, and broader risks to democracy.

Corporations increasingly face risk from their political spending, and that risk is heightened when they have not charted where funds will actually go.

“The whole issue of dark money and soliciting dark money presents a real crisis in our political system today and poses a real risk to companies,” said Bruce Freed, president of the Center for Political Accountability, a Washington, D.C., group that pushes companies to disclose more about their financing of political efforts. “At this point,…

Bud Light. Disney. Goya. Coca-Cola. Delta. The one thing these companies all have in common is they have all found themselves in the crosshairs of American politics.

Coca-Cola and UPS investors are among those rejecting abortion bids. Growing Awareness of risks from political, lobbying donations.

Donations have helped utilities increase electricity prices, hinder solar schemes and helped elect sympathetic legislators…

Blue-chip companies gave to Republican group funneling money to lawmakers who overturned abortion-ban veto in North Carolina.

As the 2024 election cycle begins in earnest, companies must act on their fiduciary responsibility to more closely monitor their political spending and the accompanying risk.

Annual meetings kicked off with a bang this year as companies and their executives confronted increasingly thorny questions from both liberal and conservative stakeholders…

More than $37m has already been spent in an election that will this month determine control of Wisconsin’s supreme court, easily making it the most expensive judicial contest in US history.

Your March 13 editorial (“Out of the darkness“) tying the recent Larry Householder guilty verdict to the perils that companies face from “dark money” political spending hit the bullseye.

A sordid chapter in Ohio’s political and corporate history came to a close as former Republican House Speaker Larry Householder and former state GOP chairman Matt Borges were convicted last Thursday, March 9, in federal court on racketeering-conspiracy charges.

“FirstEnergy is the poster child of the risks and damage a company faces from ill-considered political spending,” said Bruce Freed, president of the Center for Political Accountability.

Action range from full disclosure to bans on corporate money in politics.

‘Interplay between government institutions and businesses engaging in both policy and politics is rightfully being scrutinized in ways not seen for generations,’ says IBM’s Christopher Padilla.

At least 10 major corporations made substantial donations “directly or indirectly” to the re-election campaign of Gov. Ron DeSantis, with three of them giving more than $2 million and are now touting their promotion of Black History Month.

The 2024 election cycle will likely see record campaign spending and companies will find themselves ever more intensely scrutinized for the way they engage in politics.

Companies such as Amazon, Disney and Walmart funded Florida governor who has imposed curbs on teaching about race in school.