This report shows public data only. Is this your organisation? If so, login here to view your full report.

TD Asset Management (TDAM)

PRI reporting framework 2020

Export Public Responses

You are in Direct - Listed Equity Active Ownership » (Proxy) voting and shareholder resolutions

(Proxy) voting and shareholder resolutions

LEA 12. Typical approach to (proxy) voting decisions

12.1. Indicate how you typically make your (proxy) voting decisions.


Based on

12.2. Provide an overview of how you ensure that your agreed-upon voting policy is adhered to, giving details of your approach when exceptions to the policy are made.

Our policy focuses on the best interest of each voting account, so no exceptions are required. The voting process is reviewed regularly by both internal and external reviewers.

12.3. Additional information.[Optional]

LEA 13. Percentage of voting recommendations reviewed

13.1. Of the voting recommendations that your service provider made in the reporting year, indicate the percentage that was reviewed by your organisation, giving the reasons.

Percentage of voting recommendations your organisation reviewed

Reasons for review

other description

          Ordinary oversight of the service provider

13.2. Additional information. [Optional]

We cast approximately 40,000 proxy votes each year. In 2019, we reviewed approximately 18% of the recommendations with a general focus on Canadian companies plus a worldwide focus on environmental and social issues as well as fundamental corporate changes.

LEA 14. Securities lending programme

14.1. Does your organisation have a securities lending programme?

14.3. Indicate how the issue of voting is addressed in your securities lending programme.

14.4. Additional information. [Optional]

LEA 15. Informing companies of the rationale of abstaining/voting against management

15.1. Indicate the proportion of votes participated in within the reporting year in which where you or the service providers acting on your behalf raised concerns with companies ahead of voting.

15.2. Indicate the reasons for raising your concerns with these companies ahead of voting.


          If the company has reached out to us to discuss a particular issue.

15.3. Additional information. [Optional]

We cast approximately 40,000 proxy votes each year. Our service provider does not offer an engagement option, just voting.

LEA 16. Informing companies of the rationale of abstaining/voting against management

16.1. Indicate the proportion of votes where you, and/or the service provider(s) acting on your behalf, communicated the rationale to companies for abstaining or voting against management recommendations. Indicate this as a percentage out of all eligible votes.

16.2. Indicate the reasons why your organisation would communicate to companies, the rationale for abstaining or voting against management recommendations.


          If the company has sought our opinion on a particular issue.

16.3. In cases where your organisation does communicate the rationale for abstaining or voting against management recommendations, indicate whether this rationale is made public.

16.4. Additional information. [Optional]

LEA 17. Percentage of (proxy) votes cast

17.1. For listed equities in which you or your service provider have the mandate to issue (proxy) voting instructions, indicate the percentage of votes cast during the reporting year.

Votes cast (to the nearest 1%)

99 %

Specify the basis on which this percentage is calculated

17.2. Explain your reason(s) for not voting on certain holdings

17.3. Additional information. [Optional]

In respect of conflicts of interest, we do not vote at meetings of our parent company The Toronto-Dominion Bank.

LEA 18. Proportion of ballot items that were for/against/abstentions

18.1. Indicate whether you track the voting instructions that you or your service provider on your behalf have issued.

18.4. Additional information. [Optional]

As part of the approximately 40,000 proxy votes cast each year, we track that we have voted.

We do not track the percentages of for votes, against votes and where we abstained from voting.

LEA 19. Proportion of ballot items that were for/against/abstentions

19.1. Indicate whether your organisation has a formal escalation strategy following unsuccessful voting.

19.3. Additional information. [Optional]

We do not have a formal escalation strategy given the approximately 40,000 votes cast each year. We respect shareholder democracy and do not believe that each item requires escalation if the outcome was different than how we voted.

LEA 20. Shareholder resolutions

20.1. Indicate whether your organisation, directly or through a service provider, filed or co-filed any ESG shareholder resolutions during the reporting year.

20.7. Additional information. [Optional]

We internally review resolutions of Canadian companies and some resolutions outside Canada. All resolutions that we do not review are reviewed on our behalf by our service provider.

LEA 21. Examples of (proxy) voting activities

21.1. Provide examples of the (proxy) voting activities that your organisation and/or service provider carried out during the reporting year.

ESG Topic
Executive Remuneration|Climate Change|Human rights|Pollution|General ESG|Diversity|Health and Safety|Sustainability reporting|Water risks|Labour practices and supply chain management|Cyber security|Political spending / lobbying|Plastics
Conducted by

To support good shareholder proposals on environmental and social topics.



Scope and Process

In 2019, we supported 135 shareholder proposals on a wide range of environmental and social topics.

ESG Topic
Executive Remuneration
Conducted by

Align CEO pay with shareholder performance.


Scope and Process

In addition to voting against any say on pay, we also voted against the election of 383 compensation committee members who had allowed a disconnect between CEO pay and shareholder performance.



21.2. Additional information. [Optional]