On Thursday, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) was unable to agree on whether Yamaha Motor Corporation, U.S.A. could sponsor a Separate Segregated Fund (a corporate “SSF” or “PAC” in common parlance) that solicited contributions from the employees of its dealers and service centers.  The request resulted in an unsurprising deadlock and a surprising discussion about foreign ownership.  Three things stand out in that discussion.

First, with the arrival of two new FEC Commissioners in October, many have wondered if there will be a change in the pattern of 3-3 votes that have defined FEC decision making over the past several years.  The deadlock preventing the FEC from providing Yamaha with an advisory opinion gave little comfort to those looking for change.  Based on the discussion during Thursday’s meeting, it appears that the still-contentious issue of the implications of Citizens United, as well as the FEC’s inability to begin rulemaking, blocked resolution of the more prosaic question of whether to treat Yamaha’s dealers and service centers as affiliated entities.

Second, this matter was raised before the Commission last year.  As was true last year, there are no longer four votes to reaffirm the three decades of advisory opinions that have held that domestic subsidiaries of foreign corporations may establish and administer SSFs, so long as certain procedural protections exist.  During Thursday’s discussion, FEC Chair Weintraub indicated the issue of a foreign entity’s U.S. subsidiary sponsoring an SSF may be the camel’s nose under the tent, since the concern animating the discussion seemed to be the ability of foreign corporations to move money into United States subsidiaries for use in independent expenditures or electioneering communications.  This could be good news for existing SSFs, as some Commissioners may view SSFs less as an issue themselves and more as a bargaining chip to address what they view as issues of greater consequence.

Third, there was an interesting and important legal issue before the Commission that was barely discussed beyond Commissioner Peterson’s opening remarks.  The “Draft A” opinion presented to the Commission concluded that Yamaha lacked sufficient control over its dealers’ and service centers’ employees to place them within the company’s restricted class while “Draft B” reached the opposite conclusion.  This is an issue of some practical importance, and worthy of the Commission coming to a substantive conclusion, perhaps in a case with somewhat different—and less distracting—facts.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Kevin Glandon Kevin Glandon

Insurance Advocacy for Policyholders

Kevin Glandon has helped policyholders recover over $1 billion for first party losses and third-party liabilities. Kevin has extensive experience with complex, multimillion-dollar property damage and business interruption claims arising out of catastrophic events, including damage to or destruction…

Insurance Advocacy for Policyholders

Kevin Glandon has helped policyholders recover over $1 billion for first party losses and third-party liabilities. Kevin has extensive experience with complex, multimillion-dollar property damage and business interruption claims arising out of catastrophic events, including damage to or destruction of commercial real estate, hotels, and manufacturing plants caused by hurricanes, floods, and fires–prominent risks potentially impacted by climate change. Kevin also has significant experience litigating and advising on coverage for environmental and products liability claims.

Kevin also assists clients with insurance recovery under cyber, fidelity and crime insurance, builder’s risk, and product recall policies, and has advised on impacts due to communicable disease and insurance-related due diligence in connection with major acquisitions. He advises clients regarding efficient and practical insurance strategies to prepare for and respond to first-party losses and third-party claims, and has worked extensively with forensic accountants, insurance brokers, and subject matter experts to achieve an effective, multidisciplinary approach to claim resolution. Kevin’s insurance-related experience spans the fields of commercial real estate, hospitality, manufacturing, government contracting, energy production, and professional sports.

Political Law

He also has experience advising clients in compliance and defense matters regarding political and election law, including the Foreign Agents Registration Act, the Securities and Exchange Commission’s pay-to-play rules, the Federal Election Campaign Act, Senate and House ethics rules, and numerous state and local political and election laws and regulations.