Alpha-Centric ESG Research

Kyle Rudden

<ul>
<li>Recent and pending supply-chain deforestation regulations represent a new and ever-growing source of transition risks – <em>financially</em>-material risks with far-reaching ramifications.</li>
<li>Significant developments regarding the European Union's pending forest-risk commodity laws (e.g., inclusion of natural rubber, addition of banks to its purview) inspired this Insight.</li>
<li>This Insight briefly summarises EU and U.K. deforestation regulations, then analyses potential risks and implications for issuers involved in related forest-risk commodity supply chains.</li>
</ul>


Recent and pending supply-chain deforestation regulations represent a new and ever-growing source of transition risks – financially-material risks with far-reaching ramifications.
Significant developments regarding the European Union's pending forest-risk commodity laws (e.g., inclusion of natural rubber, addition of banks to its purview) inspired this Insight.
This Insight briefly summarises EU and U.K. deforestation regulations, then analyses potential risks and implications for issuers involved in related forest-risk commodity supply chains.


Supply-Chain Deforestation Laws as a New and Growing Source of Transition Risk

Index Rebal/Special Situations, Quiddity Advisors

Janaghan Jeyakumar, CFA

Index Rebal/Special Situations

Quiddity Advisors

Pan-Asia Catalysts/Events

Index Rebalance

<ul>
<li>The index changes for DAX, MDAX, SDAX, and TecDAX were announced yesterday.</li>
<li>
<a href="https://www.smartkarma.com/entities/beiersdorf-ag" target="_blank" data-smartkarma-citation="entities:21588:1" rel="noopener">Beiersdorf AG (BEI GR)</a> will move from MDAX to DAX while <a href="https://www.smartkarma.com/entities/delivery-hero-se" target="_blank" data-smartkarma-citation="entities:24416:1" rel="noopener">Delivery Hero SE (DHER GR)</a> will move from DAX to MDAX.</li>
<li>Below is a closer look at the excess volume expectations and historical price and volume performance of the names involved in this Rebalance Event.</li>
</ul>


The index changes for DAX, MDAX, SDAX, and TecDAX were announced yesterday.

Beiersdorf AG (BEI GR) will move from MDAX to DAX while Delivery Hero SE (DHER GR) will move from DAX to MDAX.
Below is a closer look at the excess volume expectations and historical price and volume performance of the names involved in this Rebalance Event.


DAX, MDAX, SDAX, TecDAX June 2022 Rebalance: Encavis & Hensoldt Top Positives; Hypoport Top Negative

European Event-Driven Analyst

Jesus Rodriguez Aguilar

Event-Driven

<ul>
<li>GSK has rejected Unilever's approaches (last at £50 billion) but leaked it would be <strong>ready to accept an offer around £60 billion</strong> (a whopping c. 65% of Unilever's market capitalisation).</li>
<li>The deal would be <strong>transformational</strong> and Unilever's management see it as the way forward to revive the company's performance and the share price.</li>
<li>
<strong>Ballsy, but doable</strong>, with a positive impact on results from FY2024, but negative impact on leverage at 4.9x. I believe that Unilever may make a further approach.</li>
</ul>


GSK has rejected Unilever's approaches (last at £50 billion) but leaked it would be ready to accept an offer around £60 billion (a whopping c. 65% of Unilever's market capitalisation).
The deal would be transformational and Unilever's management see it as the way forward to revive the company's performance and the share price.

Ballsy, but doable, with a positive impact on results from FY2024, but negative impact on leverage at 4.9x. I believe that Unilever may make a further approach.


Unilever/GSK Heathcare: Ballsy, but Doable

Asian Insight Provider - Actionable ideas, CrossASEAN Research

Henry Soediarko

Asian Insight Provider - Actionable ideas

CrossASEAN Research

At CrossASEAN Research we strive to produce unbiased and differentiated on the ground insights on companies across South East Asia. Our Research is produced for the most part after face to face meetings and conversations with company management to dig deep into the long term vision and strategy of the companies we cover. We seek to deliver investable and actionable themes on sectors and markets across SE Asia, often in collaboration with other Insight Providers across the region, pooling the vast experience of the analysts within the Smartkarma Ecosystem. We also offer bespoke work and tailor made trips for our clients. 

Insights across South East Asia

Equity Bottom-Up

<p>It all started with the injury that Chen, the top female badminton player, suffered during China National Games two weeks ago that went viral and fans took it to <a href="https://www.smartkarma.com/entities/weibo-corp-adr" target="_blank" data-smartkarma-citation="entities:3826:1" rel="noopener">Weibo Corp (WB US)</a> . It is unlikely that the injured toe will cause a massive product recall as it is not a life-threatening injury but it definitely warrants some further investigation by the R&amp;D team that may lead to either an increase of R&amp;D cost, an increase in the COGS that will decrease GPM or extra marketing costs as part of giving players more shoes to prevent injuries. </p>
<figure class="editor-figure mceNonEditable"><img src="https://static-prod.smartkarma.com/images/media/000/231/932/original/image?1632657827" class="editor-image img-responsive" data-smartkarma-image-id="231932"></figure>

It all started with the injury that Chen, the top female badminton player, suffered during China National Games two weeks ago that went viral and fans took it to Weibo Corp (WB US) . It is unlikely that the injured toe will cause a massive product recall as it is not a life-threatening injury but it definitely warrants some further investigation by the R&amp;D team that may lead to either an increase of R&amp;D cost, an increase in the COGS that will decrease GPM or extra marketing costs as part of giving players more shoes to prevent injuries. 


Pan-Asia Catalysts/Events, Quiddity Advisors

David Blennerhassett

<p>Back on 29th June 2001, BHP and Billiton merged by way of a dual-headed structure.  Shareholders continued to hold their pre-merger shares in BHP or Billiton, but with the same economic interest in the entire group, and dividends and capital distributions were equalised in accordance with a 1:1 equalisation ratio.</p>
<div>
<figure class="editor-figure mceNonEditable"><img src="https://static-prod.smartkarma.com/images/media/000/224/287/original/image?1629186949" class="editor-image img-responsive" data-smartkarma-image-id="224287"></figure>
</div>
<div>
<ul style="list-style-type: disc;">
<li>This unique structure has faced investor criticism over the years.  Most recently, on the 10 April 2017,  <a href="http://www.elliottadvisors.hk/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Elliott Advisors (HK) Limited</a> issued a number of proposals via an <a href="https://fixingbhp.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/BHP-Letter-to-the-Directors.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">open letter</a> to the board of <a href="https://www.smartkarma.com/entities/147" target="_blank" data-smartkarma-citation="entities:147:1" rel="noopener">BHP Billiton Limited (BHP AU)</a>. This was discussed in greater detail in <em><a href="https://skr.ma/RYqo" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Elliott's Proposals Test BHP's Metal</a></em>.</li>
<li>Elliott argued the DLC structure was obsolete, hinders the ability of BHP to reach its full potential, and creates a long-term trading mismatch between Limited and PLC shares. </li>
<li>A key tenet from the Elliott side was providing greater access to BHP’s franking credits. Elliott proposed under the unified BHP, attaching franking credits to any dividends it makes, enabling all shareholders to participate via fungibility. A similar argument was made for buybacks.</li>
<li>BHP <a href="http://www.bhpbilliton.com/-/media/documents/media/reports-and-presentations/2017/170412_bhpbillitonreviewofelliottproposalpresentation.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">argued</a> the proposal would result in a wastage of franking credits, that unification is not required for off-market buybacks - indeed it would make off-market buybacks less attractive.</li>
<li>Elliott submitted a second letter on the <a href="https://fixingbhp.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/BHP-Press-Release-inc.-Letter-May-2017.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">16 May 2017</a>, reiterating its proposals, and notably singling out BHP's "flawed" unification costs. This letter went unanswered by BHP.</li>
<li>A third letter was issued on the <a href="https://live-fixing-bhp.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Letter-to-Chairman-05.02.18.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">5 February 2018</a>. Using analysis from FTI Consulting, it considered the unification would deliver in excess of US$22bn, with unification costs of US$391mn - against the US$1.3bn estimate from BHP.</li>
<li>Elliott also noted that following the 2015 demerger of South32, Plc no longer generates sufficient income to fund dividends. This resulted in the DLC Dividend share proposal, which was designed to support the matching-dividend policy.  When BHP merged with Billiton, one of the fundamental requirements of the structure was that cash dividends would be equal for both the British and Australian lines, under the matching-dividend policy.</li>
<li>Elliott has not issued a follow-up letter in the past three and a half years - there is a website called <a href="https://fixingbhp.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Fixing BHP</a>. No doubt Elliott were somewhat mollified by BHP selling its US shale oil &amp; gas assets to BP in 2018 - a proposal advocated by Elliott - then announcing on <a href="https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20181101/pdf/43zxbpdqnm2ltl.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">1 November 2018</a> a US$10.4bn (A$14.7bn) return to shareholders through a special dividend (fully franked) and <a href="https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20181108/pdf/440368k1w0qd6n.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">share buyback</a>. </li>
</ul>
</div>
<div>
<h3>But There ARE Fundamental Reasons for BHP’s Premium</h3>
</div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>There exist strong tax arguments supporting a premium in the Australian line relating to dividends and off-market share buyback. The current premium (pre-announcement) is 19.4% (reflected in the ADRs) against a long-term average of 12.5%. </li>
</ul>
</div>
<div>
<figure class="editor-figure mceNonEditable"><img src="https://static-prod.smartkarma.com/images/media/000/224/291/original/image_62648945021629187712421.png?1629187713" class="editor-image img-responsive" data-smartkarma-image-id="224291"></figure>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: left;" class="content-caption">Source: CapIQ</div>
</div>
<div>
<ul style="list-style-type: disc;">
<li>
<strong>42% Dividend Tax Advantage</strong>. Australian investors have a highly tax-advantaged position when investing in the Australian line which provides them with a material advantage over other investors.
<ul style="list-style-type: circle;">
<li>Australian dividends are generally paid with a franking credit attached which can be used to offset the income tax liabilities of an Australian recipient.</li>
<li>The franking credit is equivalent to the corporate tax rate (currently 30%) which has been paid. In general, this means that a dollar received by a domestic investor in the Australian line is worth 42% (1/(1-30%)) more to them than an equivalent holding of the London line.</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div class="content-caption">
<figure class="editor-figure mceNonEditable"><img src="https://static-prod.smartkarma.com/images/media/000/224/302/original/image_96891655851629189775822.png?1629189776" class="editor-image img-responsive" data-smartkarma-image-id="224302"></figure>
<p>Source: <a href="https://live-fixing-bhp.pantheonsite.io/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/FTI-Value-Release-from-Unification-at-BHP-Final.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Elliott</a> </p>
</div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>Theoretically, there is no reason for the BHP/BLT spread to stop widening until it reaches the level of 42% where the most tax-advantaged investors exhaust the excess return - provided sufficient corporate tax has been paid in Australia to cover the franking element on the dividend.</li>
<li>
<strong>The Buyback tax advantage</strong>.  The Australian franking credit system also confers a capital gains tax benefit when BHP carries out off-market tender offers. This is because for tax purposes the transaction is partially treated as a dividend which means some recipients may receive more than the market value of their holding when the franking credits are taken into account.
<ul>
<li>For this reason, BHP can initiate tender offers in Australia struck at large discounts to the market price. In the last tender offer in <a href="https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20181108/pdf/440368k1w0qd6n.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">2018</a>, the discount was capped at the legal maximum level (by the ATO) of 14%.</li>
<li>When the spread blows out to such a level (over 16% premium) as it has now, it compromises the ability to announce further buybacks in Australia as the spread exceeds the maximum legal tender discount level (of 14%). Meaning any Australian buyback would have to be at a premium to the London price. Therefore future buyback proposals will be forced to focus on the London line, in which the franking credits cannot be used.</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<h3>Unilever's DLC Unification</h3>
<ul>
<li>Back on the 11 June 2020, <a href="https://www.smartkarma.com/entities/unilever-nv" target="_blank" data-smartkarma-citation="entities:21141:1" rel="noopener">Unilever NV (UNA NA)</a> / <a href="https://www.smartkarma.com/entities/unilever-plc" target="_blank" data-smartkarma-citation="entities:22197:1" rel="noopener">Unilever PLC (ULVR LN)</a> <a href="https://www.unilever.com/news/press-releases/2020/unification-of-unilever-legal-structure.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">announced</a> it would (finally) unify its dual Anglo-Dutch corporate structure under a single parent company based in London, in an about-face to the 2018 unification attempt with a Dutch-headquartered holding company. This deal was discussed in <em><a href="https://skr.ma/PyquN" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Unilever: When Two Heads Are Not Better Than One. What About BHP's DLC?</a></em>.</li>
<li>This unification again renewed interest in BHP's structure.</li>
</ul>
<h3>The New News</h3>
<ul>
<li>BHP has now <a href="https://cdn-api.markitdigital.com/apiman-gateway/ASX/asx-research/1.0/file/2924-02407981-3A572982?access_token=83ff96335c2d45a094df02a206a39ff4" target="_blank" rel="noopener">announced</a> the unification of its corporate structure to make BHP "<em>simpler and more agile</em>", thus removing the complexity of managing the DLC.</li>
<li>BHP considers now is the appropriate time to unify as there has been a significant reduction in cost indications - US$400-500mn compared to ~US$1.6-1.7bn previously.</li>
<li>More importantly, the unification means no change to the dividend policy and the ability of the company to frank dividends.</li>
<li>BHP Plc shareholders would be entitled to receive one Ltd share for each Plc share they own.</li>
<li>As night follows day, expect the spread between the two lines to narrow.</li>
</ul>
<p>More below the fold.</p>
<p></p>
<p></p>
</div>

Back on 29th June 2001, BHP and Billiton merged by way of a dual-headed structure.  Shareholders continued to hold their pre-merger shares in BHP or Billiton, but with the same economic interest in the entire group, and dividends and capital distributions were equalised in accordance with a 1:1 equalisation ratio.





This unique structure has faced investor criticism over the years.  Most recently, on the 10 April 2017,  Elliott Advisors (HK) Limited issued a number of proposals via an open letter to the board of BHP Billiton Limited (BHP AU). This was discussed in greater detail in Elliott's Proposals Test BHP's Metal.
Elliott argued the DLC structure was obsolete, hinders the ability of BHP to reach its full potential, and creates a long-term trading mismatch between Limited and PLC shares. 
A key tenet from the Elliott side was providing greater access to BHP’s franking credits. Elliott proposed under the unified BHP, attaching franking credits to any dividends it makes, enabling all shareholders to participate via fungibility. A similar argument was made for buybacks.
BHP argued the proposal would result in a wastage of franking credits, that unification is not required for off-market buybacks - indeed it would make off-market buybacks less attractive.
Elliott submitted a second letter on the 16 May 2017, reiterating its proposals, and notably singling out BHP's "flawed" unification costs. This letter went unanswered by BHP.
A third letter was issued on the 5 February 2018. Using analysis from FTI Consulting, it considered the unification would deliver in excess of US$22bn, with unification costs of US$391mn - against the US$1.3bn estimate from BHP.
Elliott also noted that following the 2015 demerger of South32, Plc no longer generates sufficient income to fund dividends. This resulted in the DLC Dividend share proposal, which was designed to support the matching-dividend policy.  When BHP merged with Billiton, one of the fundamental requirements of the structure was that cash dividends would be equal for both the British and Australian lines, under the matching-dividend policy.
Elliott has not issued a follow-up letter in the past three and a half years - there is a website called Fixing BHP. No doubt Elliott were somewhat mollified by BHP selling its US shale oil &amp; gas assets to BP in 2018 - a proposal advocated by Elliott - then announcing on 1 November 2018 a US$10.4bn (A$14.7bn) return to shareholders through a special dividend (fully franked) and share buyback. 



But There ARE Fundamental Reasons for BHP’s Premium



There exist strong tax arguments supporting a premium in the Australian line relating to dividends and off-market share buyback. The current premium (pre-announcement) is 19.4% (reflected in the ADRs) against a long-term average of 12.5%. 






Source: CapIQ




42% Dividend Tax Advantage. Australian investors have a highly tax-advantaged position when investing in the Australian line which provides them with a material advantage over other investors.

Australian dividends are generally paid with a franking credit attached which can be used to offset the income tax liabilities of an Australian recipient.
The franking credit is equivalent to the corporate tax rate (currently 30%) which has been paid. In general, this means that a dollar received by a domestic investor in the Australian line is worth 42% (1/(1-30%)) more to them than an equivalent holding of the London line.






Source: Elliott 



Theoretically, there is no reason for the BHP/BLT spread to stop widening until it reaches the level of 42% where the most tax-advantaged investors exhaust the excess return - provided sufficient corporate tax has been paid in Australia to cover the franking element on the dividend.

The Buyback tax advantage.  The Australian franking credit system also confers a capital gains tax benefit when BHP carries out off-market tender offers. This is because for tax purposes the transaction is partially treated as a dividend which means some recipients may receive more than the market value of their holding when the franking credits are taken into account.

For this reason, BHP can initiate tender offers in Australia struck at large discounts to the market price. In the last tender offer in 2018, the discount was capped at the legal maximum level (by the ATO) of 14%.
When the spread blows out to such a level (over 16% premium) as it has now, it compromises the ability to announce further buybacks in Australia as the spread exceeds the maximum legal tender discount level (of 14%). Meaning any Australian buyback would have to be at a premium to the London price. Therefore future buyback proposals will be forced to focus on the London line, in which the franking credits cannot be used.



Unilever's DLC Unification

Back on the 11 June 2020, Unilever NV (UNA NA) / Unilever PLC (ULVR LN) announced it would (finally) unify its dual Anglo-Dutch corporate structure under a single parent company based in London, in an about-face to the 2018 unification attempt with a Dutch-headquartered holding company. This deal was discussed in Unilever: When Two Heads Are Not Better Than One. What About BHP's DLC?.
This unification again renewed interest in BHP's structure.

The New News

BHP has now announced the unification of its corporate structure to make BHP "simpler and more agile", thus removing the complexity of managing the DLC.
BHP considers now is the appropriate time to unify as there has been a significant reduction in cost indications - US$400-500mn compared to ~US$1.6-1.7bn previously.
More importantly, the unification means no change to the dividend policy and the ability of the company to frank dividends.
BHP Plc shareholders would be entitled to receive one Ltd share for each Plc share they own.
As night follows day, expect the spread between the two lines to narrow.

More below the fold.




United Kingdom

Unilever is a British multinational consumer goods company that manufactures and sells a wide range of products including foods, beverages, cleaning agents, and personal care items. It operates through distinct business groups focusing on Beauty & Wellbeing, Personal Care, Home Care, and Nutrition. The company is headquartered in London, England, and was founded in 1929.

Price Gauge
52-week Range	0.00 - 0.00
Market Cap (USDm)	0.00
P/E	0.00
Dividend (Yield)	0.00

Unilever (ULVR LN)

Supply-Chain Deforestation Laws as a New and Growing Source of Transition Risk

New deforestation and forest-risk commodity regulations are poppoing up around the world, and they are unlike any prior climate regulations. Big...

Kyle Rudden

DAX, MDAX, SDAX, TecDAX June 2022 Rebalance: Encavis & Hensoldt Top Positives; Hypoport Top Negative

A discussion on June 2022 index changes for DAX, MDAX, SDAX, and TecDAX. Enclavis and Hensoldt are names with highest positive impacts and Hypoport...

Janaghan Jeyakumar, CFA

Unilever/GSK Heathcare: Ballsy, but Doable

I believe that a new £60 billion attempt by Unilever is not to be ruled out completely. It is a high price tag, but Unilever could finance the deal.

Jesus Rodriguez Aguilar

Li Ning (2331): Toe Injury

The injured toe will lead to either an increase in R&D cost, an increase in the COGS that will decrease GPM or extra marketing costs as part of...

Henry Soediarko

BHP Limited (BHP AU): DLC Reunification

BHP Plc shareholders will be entitled to receive one Ltd share for each Plc share they own. As night follows day, expect the spread between the two...

David Blennerhassett

Price Gauge

52-week Range

Market Cap (USDm)

P/E

Dividend (Yield)