Whereas, we believe in full disclosure of Duke’s lobbying activities and expenditures to assess whether its lobbying is consistent with its expressed goals and in shareholders’ best interests.

Resolved, the shareholders of Duke Energy (“Duke”) request the preparation of a report, updated annually, disclosing:

1.   Company policy and procedures governing lobbying, both direct and indirect, and grassroots lobbying communications.

2. Payments by Duke used for (a) direct or indirect lobbying or (b) grassroots lobbying communications, in each case including the amount of the payment and the recipient.
3. Duke’s membership in and payments to any tax-exempt organization that writes and endorses model legislation.
4. Description of management’s and the Board’s decision-making process and oversight for making payments described in sections 2 and 3 above.

For purposes of this proposal, a “grassroots lobbying communication” is a communication directed to the general public that (a) refers to specific legislation or regulation, (b) reflects a view on the legislation or regulation and (c) encourages the recipient of the communication to take action with respect to the legislation or regulation. “Indirect lobbying” is lobbying engaged in by a trade association or other organization of which Duke is a member.

Both “direct and indirect lobbying” and “grassroots lobbying communications” include efforts at the local, state and federal levels.

The report shall be presented to the Corporate Governance Committee and posted on Duke’s website. 

Supporting Statement

            Duke spent $56,459,187 from 2010 – 2018 on federal lobbying. This does not include state lobbying, where Duke also lobbies but disclosure is uneven or absent. Duke spent $4,487,041 on lobbying in North Carolina from 2010 – 2016, and Duke’s lobbying over a pipeline that would cross the Appalachian Trail has attracted attention.[1]

            Duke belongs to the Chamber of Commerce, which has spent over $1.5 billion on lobbying since 1998, and Business Roundtable (BRT), which spent $23,160,000 on lobbying for 2018 and is lobbying against shareholder rights to file resolutions. Duke discloses its trade association dues used for lobbying on its website, but fails to clarify if this captures all payments, leaving a loophole for additional payments beyond dues that could be used for lobbying, yet not be disclosed. Duke reportedly charges its customers for trade association dues.[2] And Duke does not disclose its payments to tax-exempt organizations that write and endorse model legislation, such as the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC).

            We are concerned that Duke’s lack of disclosure presents reputational risks when its lobbying contradicts company public positions. Duke has drawn scrutiny for signing the BRT Statement on the Purpose of the Corporation, yet also attending the ALEC annual conference.[3]

            Investors participating in the Climate Action 100+ representing $34 trillion in assets are asking companies to align their lobbying with the Paris agreement goals. Duke uses the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) for sustainability reporting, yet currently fails to report “any differences between its lobbying positions and any stated policies, goals, or other public positions” under GRI Standard 415.

[1] https://maplight.org/story/energy-giants-spend-big-on-lobbying-to-clear-pipeline-path-through-national-forests-appalachian-trail/

[2] https://www.energyandpolicy.org/duke-energy-north-carolina-rate-increase-coal-ash/

[3] https://readsludge.com/2019/08/27/these-ceos-promised-to-be-socially-responsible-but-their-companies-are-pushing-alecs-right-wing-agenda/