主要邮局, 邮政信箱 751	www.asyousow.org
	伯克利, 加州 94704	自1992年以来，建立一个安全、公正和可持续的世界

根据14a-103规则的豁免请求通知

注册人名称：Oracle Corp (ORCL)
依赖豁免的人姓名：As You Sow^®
依赖豁免的人地址：主邮局，邮政信箱751，加利福尼亚伯克利94704

根据1934年证券交易法案制定的规则14a-6(g)(1)提交书面材料。根据该规则的规定，此申报人无需提交，但是出于公开披露和考虑这些重要问题的目的，他自愿提交了。

Oracle公司（ORCL）
投票赞成：项目4 - 关于评估系统性气候风险的报告

养老计划期权

年会：2024年11月14日

联系人：Grant Bradski | gbradski@asyousow.org

决议

已解决： 股东要求甲骨文公司发布一份报告，披露公司如何保护计划受益人—尤其是那些具有更长投资时间视野的人—免受目前对高碳公司的投资所造成的未来投资组合风险的影响。

概要

气候变化的经济后果，无论是已经发生的还是尚未发生的，威胁着退休计划受益人的储蓄，特别是那些退休时间超过十年的人。甲骨文的401(k)储蓄和投资计划的投资既会创造，也将面临不断增长的系统性气候风险，包括：对基础设施的实际影响；供应链中断；减少资源供应；与被滞留资产相关的财务损失；以及不准确的估值，等等。气候灾害的广泛影响将对为退休储蓄的员工产生整体投资组合后果。

随着私人机构和政府加大应对和减缓气候变化的努力，不断变化的监管和业务环境将增加那些被迫被动地应对的公司的过渡成本，加剧那些资产未得到负责管理的计划受益人的金融风险。由于与气候变暖相关的物理、金融和过渡风险预计会随着时间的推移而增加，长期投资时间跨度更长的年轻计划受益人可以预期面临比接近养老的受益人更高的与气候相关风险。

本提案要求甲骨文评估并报告其如何保护在公司的养老期权中拥有更长投资时间视野的受益人免受气候风险。 甲骨文员工中多数递延工资被投资于该计划的目标日期基金，这是一系列基于年龄的基金，对高碳行业和导致森林砍伐的行业有显著暴露。公司未能充分管理计划中的气候风险，因此可能会对受益人造成伤害，尤其是年轻受益人。这反过来可能会使甲骨文吸引和留住顶尖人才更加困难，同时也会削弱与公司努力解决其运营和供应链气候影响相关的声誉收益。

2024年 代理备忘录 甲骨文公司 | 汇报评估系统性气候风险 从养老计划期权

简而言之，气候变化威胁着工人的养老金。对员工退休计划的负责管理要求积极考虑和管理计划在不同时间范围内对系统气候风险的贡献，这是受益人最大利益所需。根据联邦法律，董事会负责监督计划受托人，“确保他们的表现符合...计划的需求。”¹未能考虑计划通过投资对系统气候风险的长期贡献会加剧明天退休人士面临的风险，因为这些投资锁定了气候变化不断增长的影响。甲骨文必须证明其通过在基金的谨慎构建中作为一部分积极减轻与气候相关的金融和经济风险，以长期保障员工的财务安全。

支持投票的理由

DISCUSSION

According to recent analysis by As You Sow, the Oracle 401(k) Plan invests as much as $1 billion in high-carbon industries.² This constitutes over 8% of total assets in Plan fund options (excluding assets invested in the employee stock option plan and the self-directed brokerage window). The Plan, in the aggregate, also invests more than $46 million in deforestation-risk agricultural commodities.³

The most popular Plan options are the Vanguard Target Retirement Fund series, which collectively hold 26% of Plan assets.⁴ Target Date Funds (TDFs) are an attractive option for Plan administrators because they shift responsibility for reallocating the portfolio over time to the Target Date fund manager. However, according to a recent report, TDFs have a 16% higher weighted average carbon intensity compared to all sampled retirement plans.⁵ True to form, the Vanguard Target Retirement Funds invest significantly in carbon polluters.⁶

_____________________________

¹ https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/29/2509.75-8

² https://investyourvalues.org/retirement-plans/oracle

³ https://investyourvalues.org/retirement-plans/oracle

⁴ https://investyourvalues.org/retirement-plans/oracle

⁵ https://iyv-charts.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/files/U.S.+Retirement+Carbon+Footprint+Report.pdf

⁶ https://fossilfreefunds.org/fund/vanguard-target-retirement-2050-fund/VFIFX/fossil-fuel-investments/FSUSA072BK/FOUSA05HZH

2024 Proxy Memo Oracle Corp | Report on Assessing Systemic Climate Risk from Retirement Plan Options

Such investments introduce climate risk into the Plan’s portfolio in mutually reinforcing ways. As the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office (GAO) explains, “Retirement plan investments are subject to both physical and transition risks from climate change.”⁷ The physical risks that climate change poses to both Oracle and the global economy are well established, with climate-related damages already costing the global economy an estimated $16 million per hour.⁸ Physical risks include losses from the increased occurrence of catastrophic storms, floods, droughts, and wildfires, whether from direct impacts on physical infrastructure or from disruptions to supply chains and losses from the deleterious effect of intensifying climate impacts on a company’s operations over time. Transition risk, meanwhile, includes costs associated with a company’s failure to appropriately anticipate and plan for the “policy, legal, technology, and market changes needed to transition to a lower-carbon economy…”⁹

The present and future impacts of climate change can endanger the full range of beneficiaries’ retirement savings. A 2021 Swiss Re report calculated that climate change would result in an 11% to 14% decline in global GDP by 2050, with the impact rising to an 18% decline in the absence of action or falling to 4% with aggressive mitigation.¹⁰ In short, climate change could result in a reduction of the world economy by $23 trillion by the year 2050.¹¹ While many retirement plan fiduciaries rely on studies from investment consultants that minimize the expected costs of climate change, a recent study found that the economic studies behind many of the models used by those consultants are at odds with the scientific literature identifying the impacts of inadequately mitigated climate change.¹² Thus, the decision by retirement plan fiduciaries to continue to fund the climate crisis directly and seriously endangers the worker retirement savings the plan is intended to protect.

In addition, high-carbon investments can be a risk in the short term. The GAO notes that investments in oil, coal, and gas could experience a decrease in annual returns of 9% through 2050, while annual returns in electric utilities could decline by about 3% over the same timetable.¹³ In fact, investing in renewable power stocks has beat a high-carbon strategy by more than threefold in the last decade.¹⁴

The Plan’s investments also create climate risk in a more insidious form—investments in high-carbon companies contribute to and lock in future climate change. High-carbon investments are thus likely to disproportionately impact younger employees who will not access retirement funds for decades since tax-deferred retirement vehicles like 401(k)s carry tax penalties to discourage participants from withdrawing funds prior to retirement. Thus, a 30-year-old worker contributing to their employer-offered defined-contribution plan can usually expect to have their funds invested for at least 30 years. As high-carbon investments increase systemic climate risk over time, retirement portfolios face the likelihood of diminishing returns, harming younger workers proportionally more than workers who will access retirement savings in the shorter term. It is unsurprising, therefore, that those with the most at stake—plan beneficiaries—overwhelmingly favor responsible management of climate risk in their retirement portfolios.¹⁵

_____________________________

⁷ https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-21-327.pdf

⁸ https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2023/10/climate-loss-and-damage-cost-16-million-per-hour/

⁹ https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-21-327.pdf

¹⁰ https://www.swissre.com/media/press-release/nr-20210422-economics-of-climate-change-risks.html

¹¹ https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/22/climate/climate-change-economy.html

¹² https://carbontracker.org/reports/loading-the-dice-against-pensions/

¹³ https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-21-327.pdf

¹⁴ https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-18/renewable-returns-tripled-versus-fossil-fuels-in-last-decade#xj4y7vzkg

¹⁵ See https://www.schroders.com/en-us/us/institutional/clients/defined-contribution/schroders-us-retirement-survey/sustainability/

2024 Proxy Memo Oracle Corp | Report on Assessing Systemic Climate Risk from Retirement Plan Options

Plan fiduciaries have an opportunity now to address the requests of this proposal and better protect plan beneficiaries’ life savings from growing climate risks, particularly those beneficiaries with longer investment time horizons.

Oracle has taken actions to address climate change highlighted by its target of 100% renewable energy use by 2025, and the goal to achieve Net Zero emissions by 2050.¹⁶ Not only do the Plan’s carbon-intense investments directly undermine this commitment, but they also risk the Company’s climate reputation.

In a competitive employee retention and recruitment landscape, companies are identifying new ways to engage and retain top talent by appealing to the values and interest of the workforce. A recent Gallup poll found that “70 percent of U.S. workers said that a firm's environmental record is important to them and is a consideration when deciding whether to take a job with a company.”¹⁷ For companies attempting to retain top talent, 40% of respondents in a 2022 Schroders study said that when an ESG investment option is added to a defined-contribution plan it improves how they view their employer.¹⁸ The study also found that nearly three-in-four plan participants (74%) said they would or might increase their overall contribution rate if offered ESG options. An overwhelming majority of consumers, too, expect corporations to address their impact on the climate. Younger consumers, especially, are prepared to enforce that expectation with their purchasing power.¹⁹

Oracle must begin addressing its 401(k) Plan’s continued contributions to climate change or risk negative effects to its reputation, its Plan returns, its employees’ futures, employee recruitment and retention, and consumer retention.

_____________________________

¹⁶ https://www.oracle.com/uk/a/ocom/docs/ppn-carbon-reduction-plan-nov-2021.pdf

¹⁷ https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/talent-acquisition/pages/climate-change-branding-can-lift-recruitment-and-retention.aspx

¹⁸ https://www.schroders.com/en-us/us/institutional/clients/defined-contribution/schroders-us-retirement-survey/sustainability/

¹⁹ https://www.oliverwymanforum.com/climate-sustainability/2021/apr/consumers-want-companies-to-take-a-stand-on-climate.html

2024 Proxy Memo Oracle Corp | Report on Assessing Systemic Climate Risk from Retirement Plan Options

The Company’s failure to properly manage climate risk by mitigating investments in high-carbon industries could constitute a failure to manage its Plan in the best interest of the Plan’s beneficiaries. Carbon-intense investments create risk and may sacrifice value. As New York Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli explained when announcing the state’s plan to enforce a carbon-neutrality mandate, “[I]nvesting for the low-carbon future is essential to protect the fund’s long-term value.”²⁰

Fiduciary responsibility extends to considerations of climate risk. According to a report from the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, an independent federal agency, in September 2020: “Fiduciary duty requires the assessment of material risks and the management of these risks on behalf of stakeholders in keeping with their stated long-term goals, and climate risk is increasingly being recognized as one such risk.”²¹ Oracle’s own operational climate goals make it clear that it considers climate risk to be material, and the law requires consideration of material risk.

Recent changes to federal law support addressing material climate risk in retirement plans. The Department of Labor recently finalized regulations under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, which “empower plan fiduciaries to safeguard the savings of America's workers by clarifying that fiduciaries may consider climate change and other environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors when they make investment decisions.”²² The rule additionally makes clear that “a fiduciary's duty of prudence must be based on factors that the fiduciary reasonably determines are relevant to a risk and return analysis and that such factors may include the economic effects of climate change.”²³ In short, this new rule confirms the authority of plan administrators to consider climate change as a risk factor when selecting plan investment options, including default options.

It is by failing to address climate risk to the Plan’s full range of beneficiaries that the Company exposes itself to potential legal liability, by not addressing this material risk. For example, in 2020, a lawsuit was filed in Australia by an employee who claimed his pension fund did not adequately disclose or assess the effect of climate change on its investments.²⁴ Recently, in the UK, ExxonMobil was fined for failing to disclose climate-related impacts and risks stemming from its pension plan.²⁵ It is likely that similar action will be taken against U.S. corporations.

_____________________________

²⁰ https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/NYOSC/bulletins/2b0442d

²¹ https://www.cftc.gov/sites/default/files/2020-09/9-9-20%20Report%20of%20the%20Subcommittee%20on%20Climate-Related%20Market%20Risk%20-%20Managing%20Climate%20Risk%20in%20the%20U.S.%20Financial%20System%20for%20posting.pdf (emphasis added)

²² https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ebsa/about-ebsa/our-activities/resource-center/fact-sheets/final-rule-on-prudence-and-loyalty-in-selecting-plan-investments-and-exercising-shareholder-rights

²³ https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ebsa/about-ebsa/our-activities/resource-center/fact-sheets/final-rule-on-prudence-and-loyalty-in-selecting-plan-investments-and-exercising-shareholder-rights

²⁴ https://www.plansponsor.com/pension-fund-climate-change-lawsuit-settles/

²⁵ https://www.edie.net/exxonmobil-pension-plan-fined-for-failure-to-disclose-climate
-risks/?utm_campaign=P%26P%20%7C%20ESG%20Monitor%20Analytics&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=276597309&_hsenc=p2
ANqtz-9kN88Pbkwp57mHvfyuJzBBpiKuik1-WrETc7P35QksodM6QqxDPgyWKpnPCMy-
LuKunu1u2OCd_05mCcNBmaki4QDk8w&utm_content=276597309&utm_source=hs_email

2024 Proxy Memo Oracle Corp | Report on Assessing Systemic Climate Risk from Retirement Plan Options

Importantly, plan fiduciaries and beneficiaries do not need to choose between maximizing returns and managing climate risk.²⁶ Assessing and mitigating participants’ exposure to climate-related financial risk is directly related to participants’ goals of maximizing financial benefit and minimizing risk. Many of the anticipated financial costs of climate change are already being experienced by Oracle employees. A recent report from the University of Waterloo and As You Sow found that Oracle 401(k) participants could have earned an estimated $719 million in additional returns, if Oracle “had divested from the Energy Sector ten years ago.”²⁷ These findings follow an earlier analysis from researchers at the University of Waterloo looking at six major U.S. pension funds, estimating that plan participants would have been $21 billion richer, with returns on their investments 13% higher on average over 10 years, had they excluded fossil fuels.²⁸ Other researchers have found similar impacts on passively invested index funds.²⁹ The overwhelming majority of Oracle 401(k) Plan assets are in index funds or index-based target date funds that are not integrating climate risk as a metric in managing portfolio investments. The findings from these reports highlight the present-day impacts of investing in high-carbon industries with embedded climate-related financial risks.

A recent Bloomberg report notes that, as of September 2022, 1,500 institutions, representing more than $40 trillion in assets, had committed to reducing exposure to investments in high-carbon industries.³⁰ These include commitments to sell billions of dollars of high carbon holdings from prominent employee retirement funds in New York City, Maine, and New York state.³¹ The University of California Retirement Savings Program, which holds $168 billion in assets under management, for more than 300,000 participants, has also stated an intent to sell existing holdings and make no future investments in high-carbon industries, citing “long term financial risk” and the expectation that this decision will “have a positive financial and risk-reducing impact on fund performance in the long run.”³² In October 2022, the Chicago Public School Teachers’ Pension & Retirement Fund, which has about 5% of its portfolio invested in fossil fuel industries, announced its plan to sell holdings in high-carbon industries.³³ These plans operate under basically the same fiduciary obligations as does the Board—their decisions to actively manage and mitigate climate risk demonstrates that doing so does not run counter to, but rather promotes, the Plan sponsor’s fiduciary duties.

RESPONSE TO ORACLE’S BOARD OF DIRECTORS’ STATEMENT IN OPPOSITION

The Board’s statement in opposition to the Proposal is unpersuasive.

“…by focusing too narrowly on climate issues, the proposal risks putting undue pressure on the plan fiduciary to prioritize those issues over plan participants’ financial interest.”

The claim that this proposal focuses “too narrowly” on climate issues is misguided. The proposal identifies a gap in Oracle’s current approach to employee benefits. Noticing a blind spot is not focusing too narrowly on the subject. Further, suggesting that addressing this gap is “prioritizing those issues over plan participant’s financial interests” shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the risk that climate change poses to plan participant’s financial interests. As explained above, managing and addressing climate risk is a necessary component of prioritizing participants’ financial interest.

_____________________________

²⁶ https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2699610

²⁷ https://www.asyousow.org/reports/the-impact-of-energy-sector-investments-on-the-financial-value-of-tech-401ks

²⁸ https://stand.earth/press-releases/waterloo-pensions-report-2023/

²⁹ https://ieefa.org/resources/passive-investing-warming-world

³⁰ https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2022-10-20/how-to-purge-fossil-fuel-investments-from-your-401-k-or-ira#xj4y7vzkg

³¹ https://comptroller.nyc.gov/newsroom/comptroller-stringer-and-trustees-announce-successful-3-billion-divestment-from-fossil-fuels/;https://www.reuters.com/business/sustainable-business/new-maine-law-marks-us-first-fossil-fuel-divestment-2021-06-17/; https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/09/nyregion/new-york-pension-fossil-fuels.html

³² https://myucretirement.com/Resource/2312

³³ https://ieefa.org/articles/chicago-teachers-retirement-fund-divest-fossil-fuels-2028

2024 Proxy Memo Oracle Corp | Report on Assessing Systemic Climate Risk from Retirement Plan Options

“Oracle’s 401(k) plan participants are already free to invest in a wide range of investments, including ESG-focused investment options.”

There are no options inside plan that specifically seek to mitigate climate-related financial risk. Additionally, the existence of a self-directed option is irrelevant to the Proposal, which focuses solely on how the Company is protecting Plan beneficiaries, especially younger beneficiaries, from climate risk stemming from the Company’s present-day investments. The existence of a self-directed brokerage window is little more than an ineffective delegation to the Plan’s beneficiaries of the Company’s responsibility to manage the material risks of climate change.

Further, only a small fraction of Plan assets is invested via the self-directed option, while more than 26% of Plan assets are invested in the target date investment option.³⁴ Because high-carbon and deforestation-intensive investments help to create systemic climate risk, automatically investing employees’ money in climate-unsafe alternatives harms even those employees who opt to choose more climate-friendly investment alternatives.

Finally, relying on self-direction can harm participants. The GAO has noted significant misallocation and lack of diversification among self-directed 401(k) investors.³⁵

“The plan fiduciary of our 401(k) plan is legally required to select investment options solely in the interest of plan participants and is not responsible for selecting the underlying investments that comprise such options.”

The Board’s delegation of its fiduciary obligations does not alter the Board’s ability to issue the requested report. Under federal law, the Board is charged with monitoring its appointed Plan fiduciaries “to ensure that their performance has been in compliance with the terms of the plan and statutory standards, and satisfies the needs of the plan,” including the needs of long-term beneficiaries of the Plan.³⁶ Oracle’s 401(k) retirement plan investments are increasingly subject to systemic risk posed by climate change, including physical impacts to infrastructure and supply chains, decreased resource availability, and financial losses associated with stranded assets, transition costs, and inaccurate valuations. A fiduciary’s failure to properly manage climate risk, by mitigating investments in high-carbon industries, constitutes a failure to manage the Plan in the best interest of the full range of the Plan’s beneficiaries. The Board is in a position to, and in fact should, exercise its oversight duties by actively assessing and reporting on the plan fiduciary’s management of climate risk. It is by failing to address climate risk to the Plan’s full range of beneficiaries that the Company exposes itself to potential legal liability, by not addressing this material risk.

_____________________________

³⁴ https://iyv-charts.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/retirement-plans/oracle/oracle-corporation-401k-savings-and-investment-plan-form-5500-filing-and-attachment-2022.pdf As stated earlier, this percentage only includes in the denominator assets invested in plan options. If assets invested in the self-directed option were also included, roughly 24% of plan assets would be in the default target date funds.

³⁵ https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-14-310.pdf

³⁶ https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/29/2509.75-8

2024 Proxy Memo Oracle Corp | Report on Assessing Systemic Climate Risk from Retirement Plan Options

“The proposal is an ineffective means of promoting environmental sustainability.”

Whether this is effective or ineffective at promoting environmental sustainability is secondary to whether this proposal is an effective means of meeting fiduciary duty and mitigating investment risk. Climate change poses financial risks. The Company has a fiduciary duty to manage investments “solely in the best interest of plan participants.” Ignoring the growing impacts of climate change on investments does not serve the best interests of Company employees.

CONCLUSION

The wide-ranging impacts of climate harms will have portfolio-wide consequences to employees saving for retirement. Oracle’s failure to adequately manage climate risk in its retirement plan has the potential to harm beneficiaries, especially younger beneficiaries. This, in turn, may make it more difficult for Oracle to attract and retain top talent, while also undermining the reputational benefits associated with the Company’s efforts to address its operational and supply-chain climate impacts. Failing to address climate risk to the Plan’s full range of beneficiaries also exposes Oracle to potential legal liability, by not addressing this material risk.

Vote “Yes” on this Shareholder Proposal 4.

--

For questions, please contact Grant Bradski, As You Sow, gbradski@asyousow.org

THE FOREGOING INFORMATION MAY BE DISSEMINATED TO SHAREHOLDERS VIA TELEPHONE, U.S. MAIL, E-MAIL, CERTAIN WEBSITES AND CERTAIN SOCIAL MEDIA VENUES, AND SHOULD NOT BE CONSTRUED AS INVESTMENT ADVICE OR AS A SOLICITATION OF AUTHORITY TO VOTE YOUR PROXY. THE COST OF DISSEMINATING THE FOREGOING INFORMATION TO SHAREHOLDERS IS BEING BORNE ENTIRELY BY ONE OR MORE OF THE CO-FILERS. PROXY CARDS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED BY ANY CO-FILER. PLEASE DO NOT SEND YOUR PROXY TO ANY CO-FILER. TO VOTE YOUR PROXY, PLEASE FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS ON YOUR PROXY CARD.

8