This report highlights the strong investor demand for transparency in political spending, with lobbying transparency proposals receiving 31% median support in 2024, highlighting pressure for corporate accountability post-Citizens United. 

Strine and Lund argue that political spending hurts shareholder interests because it increases risks, is not transparent, and correlates with lower financial performance. They make the case that companies should either end all spending, obtain shareholder consent, or limit expenditures to PACs (which are strictly voluntary and have mandated disclosure).

This report reveals that since 2010, U.S. corporations and trade associations have contributed over $1 billion—more than 40% of total funds—to six influential "527" political organizations, significantly impacting state-level elections and policies, often in ways that conflict with their publicly stated values and pose reputational risks. 

A comprehensive evaluation of corporations that gave significant amounts of money to politicians in key swing states that supported or introduced legislation aimed at voter suppression.

The CPA-Zicklin Framework provides suggested key practices that companies can adopt to help manage the risks associated with election-related political spending.

This post summarizes the Center for Political Accountability’s Guide to Corporate Political Spending, which provides best practices for implementing the CPA-Zicklin Model Code. The Model Code identifies a company’s broader societal and democracy obligations and responsibilities that should govern its political spending decisions. This new Guide spells out what concrete steps and actions management should follow as it makes spending decisions and evaluates the accompanying risks. 

Researchers describe the “double legitimacy” problem. American workers need to invest portions of their income into mutual funds to have economic security, thus becoming Worker Investors. Corporations are unconstrained and can dip into these funds to support their political spending. This paper outlines the Big 4’s political power in resolving the double legitimacy problem, and how their refusal is supporting policies that go against the Worker Investor.

This framework guides companies to align lobbying with climate goals, focusing on transparent reporting, board oversight, and annual reviews to support efforts to limit global temperature rise to 1.5°C.

The CPA-Zicklin Framework for Corporate Political Spending was developed to help companies manage the risks associated with election-related spending. The Framework provides twelve provisions that companies can implement to help better engage in and manage election-related spending.  

This playbook sets out practical guidance for companies on how to optimise their indirect “policy footprint”. It covers how to assess and improve associations' alignment and impact, by clarifying their strategic policy priorities, evaluating where to invest in important trade association relationships, and engaging those associations constructively and effectively. 

Provides a framework for boards to manage the reputational, legal, and financial risks of political spending, including misalignment with public commitments, shareholder backlash, and regulatory scrutiny. Emphasizes the need for transparency and alignment with a company’s stated objectives and strategic goals.