1792 Insights - 1792 Exchange

As You Sow Misleads Readers about Anti-DEI Proposals

July 31, 2026

Earlier this summer, as the 2025-2026 proxy season came to a close, leading progressive shareholder group As You Sow intentionally misled readers about the success of anti-DEI proposals. As You Sow suggested that voting results on anti-DEI shareholder proposals at 43 companies this season, including Disney, Costco, Visa, and Apple, proved that 99% of investors are opposed to anti-DEI measures. As You Sow claimed that the universal failure of these proposals sends an “unmistakable message” to corporate boards that DEI is a “financial asset” that directors need to prioritize for the needs of the company, labelling anti-DEI efforts as a “political threat.” A 0-43 record for anti-DEI proposals does appear striking at first. However, no ESG proposals won majority support in the 2025-2026 proxy season, which includes pro-DEI proposals at 0-10 with an average support around 13%. According to Broadridge’s 2025 ProxyPulse report, voting by retail investors “declined to 28% of their shares owned in 2025,” which is the lowest level of participation in 9 years. Low retail investor participation is the historical norm, as proxy votes are disproportionately cast by large institutions on their behalf, not by individual investors. As You Sow knows this. Furthermore, for As You Sow to suggest that “[d]iversity is not a liability to be managed, it is a dividend to be captured” when companies like IBM and Nike have recently faced intense scrutiny for their DEI practices is absurd. To learn more about the Myth of Shareholder Democracy, consider reading Stefan Padfield’s piece titled: Proxy Voting and the Myth About Shareholder Democracy.

DEI by Another Name

July 30, 2026

In response to legal, political, consumer, or shareholder pressures, companies are increasingly replacing “DEI” terminology with broader terms such as “Inclusion,” “Culture,” or “Belonging,” while providing little explanation as to whether the changes are substantive or primarily cosmetic. For example, CVS Health renamed its public-facing DEI page to ”Inclusion & Belonging” without issuing a public statement explaining the change. The company also stopped referencing a diversity pay metric for leadership in their annual 10-K filing. Similarly, Home Depot quietly removed its DEI webpage and replaced it with a ”Living Our Values“ section. While these changes alter the public branding, they do not necessarily clarify whether the companies’ underlying policies or priorities have materially changed. From a shareholder perspective, this lack of transparency can create uncertainty about a company’s strategic direction and how it intends to approach politically and socially contentious issues going forward. It is in companies’ best fiduciary interest to clearly communicate whether they are maintaining, modifying, or discontinuing DEI-related initiatives rather than simply changing terminology. Providing that clarity allows shareholders and other stakeholders to better understand the company’s priorities and evaluate whether its policies remain focused on advancing its core business objectives and long-term fiduciary responsibilities. Home Depot’s Previous DEI Page vs Its “Rebranded” Page

Is Corporate America Hostile Toward Christians?

July 7, 2026

In this episode of the Christian Business Leader podcast, Doug Napier, Executive Chairman and CEO of 1792 Exchange, joined host Darren Shearer to discuss the mission of helping businesses get back to business. The conversation explores how corporations can move away from activist pressures and refocus on their primary business objectives. Key Topics Discussed: Napier emphasizes that companies are often pushed into these agendas by external activists and that by providing a clear, risk-mitigated roadmap, the 1792 Exchange is helping them reclaim their focus on business excellence.

Corporate Pride Pullbacks Meet GLAAD Polls: ESG/DEI Studies Deserve Skepticism Amid Replication Crisis

June 12, 2026

As institutional support for ESG and DEI initiatives continues to wane, evidenced by major corporations scaling back or withdrawing sponsorship of Pride events and merchandise, advocacy groups are responding with new polls and studies claiming broad public backing. Multiple reports from 2025–2026 document sharp declines in corporate funding for Pride celebrations, with cities like San Francisco facing $200,000+ shortfalls, New York City down ~20% ($750k), and numerous organizers citing pullbacks from sponsors like Mastercard, Pepsi, Anheuser-Busch, and others due to economic pressures and political risks. In contrast, GLAAD’s 2026 Pride Poll asserts a “supermajority” of Americans support brands participating in Pride, with findings like 68% agreeing companies should show support for the LGBTQ+ community if they choose and 62% comfortable with employee participation in parades. We can expect more such studies touting widespread ESG/DEI support in the coming months, but they should be viewed with skepticism amid the broader replication crisis in social science research. Stephen Soukup highlights how much of the academic foundation for ESG rests on shaky ground. A highly influential 2014 paper by Eccles, Ioannou, and Serafeim, which was widely cited to argue that “high sustainability” companies outperform others and used by policymakers and investors, subsequently failed to replicate. Its causal claims collapsed after scrutiny revealed methodological issues, including a “typo” that inflated significance. This fits a larger …

EEOC Releases National Enforcement Plan for 2025-2029

June 8, 2026

On June 4, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) released its National Enforcement Plan for FY2025–2029, signaling a clear shift toward aggressive enforcement against unlawful DEI initiatives. The plan will shape the agency’s investigations, litigation, and compliance activities through 2029, focusing on practices that discriminate on the basis of race, sex, or national origin. Targeted activities include: Many companies have only trimmed the most visible parts of their DEI programs while leaving the deeper, more legally risky structures in place. Fully rooting out these practices is now both a compliance imperative and a strategic advantage, allowing corporations to refocus on merit-based employment decisions, reduce litigation exposure, and build truly inclusive workplaces grounded in equal opportunity rather than demographic targets.

IBM’s $17 million DEI settlement is a wakeup call for federal contractors

April 28, 2026

The Department of Justice this month announced that IBM has agreed to pay the federal government more than $17 million to resolve allegations that the company engaged in illegal diversity, equity, and inclusion practices while performing billions of dollars in government contracts. The settlement marks the first resolution under the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Fraud Initiative. It sends an unmistakable message: employers (and especially federal contractors) that promote illegal discriminatory practices under the guise of “diversity, equity, and inclusion” over merit-based programs, do so at their own peril. IBM has, in fact, taken meaningful steps toward reform. As we have recorded on 1792 Exchange’s Back to Business Tracker, the company has stopped participating in the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate Equality Index, eliminated DEI considerations from its hiring practices and supply chain, ended its Diversity Council and DEI department, removed diversity goals from executive compensation, and discontinued Allyship training. We applaud these concrete actions, which reflect a welcome shift away from politicized policies and toward greater focus on core business priorities. Even so, this settlement underscores a critical new reality: partial or superficial changes are not enough. Contractors must recognize that merely scaling back the most visible elements of their DEI apparatus will not help them avoid liability …