Unilever urges changes to UK’s takeover code
Anglo-Dutch group calls on Westminster to safeguard national corporate champions
Unilever has urged the UK government to take steps to safeguard national corporate champions and questioned the strength of the country’s takeover code after Kraft Heinz’s audacious £143bn bid for the consumer goods group last month.
Although the US company has less than half of Unilever’s annual sales of €53bn, the Warren Buffett-backed bid threatened the survival of the century-old group.
The maker of Dove soap and Ben & Jerry’s ice cream said target companies should have more time in which to defend themselves and that takeover rules should be changed to consider the interests of stakeholders beyond shareholders.
Paul Polman, chief executive of Unilever, said on Tuesday: “We’re not talking about protection; we are saying that when you have a situation like this, with a national champion, there should be a level playing field.”
Theresa May, prime minister, has talked tough on foreign takeovers and pushed for a stronger industrial policy to protect UK jobs after the fall in the pound’s value prompted by last year’s Brexit vote. This has raised fears about some UK companies being sold on the cheap, though Unilever holds most of its assets outside the UK.
Mrs May ordered senior officials to examine Kraft Heinz’s proposed takeover to determine whether government intervention was necessary. But it is unclear how far the government would intervene in corporate dealmaking.
The 2002 Enterprise Act only allows ministers to prevent mergers on the basis of three issues: financial stability, media plurality and national security.
Ministers are drawing up proposals for a new framework which could add a fourth criteria, “critical national infrastructure”, including specific areas such as nuclear power.
Government insiders say they had a “lucky escape” when Kraft withdrew its bid for Unilever, because such an enormous deal would have brought huge scrutiny to bear on the gap between Mrs May’s protectionist rhetoric and her relatively modest proposals.
Unilever pointed to the Netherlands, where the group is also listed and where takeovers are subject to a broader stakeholder interest test. In the UK, company boards have a fiduciary duty to shareholders only.
That echoes calls from Sir Vince Cable, former business secretary, who wants a new public interest test to prevent a string of currency-induced takeovers.
The Anglo-Dutch group also said that the 28-day deadline to make a firm takeover offer, known as “put up or shut up”, gives little time for a target company to prepare its defences, whereas a potential acquirer might have spent a year or more preparing its bid.
However, the deadline, also known as the “Pusu”, was one of a series of reforms brought in to protect potential takeover targets after Kraft successfully bought Cadbury, the chocolate maker, in 2010.
Kraft, which later spun off its snack business into Mondelez, pursued Cadbury for five months and the Pusu was introduced to shorten the period of uncertainty hanging over a potential target.
The Takeover Panel, which is a self-governing body, declined to comment.