Company: CAF
Filing Date: 2025-03-06
Form Type: N-CSR
Source: 0001104659-25-021323
Chunk: 126

Company: Morgan Stanley China A Share Fund, Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-03-06
Form: N-CSR
Chunk 126
---
 justifications for a re-pricing, the company's competitive position, whether senior executives and outside directors are excluded, potential cost to shareholders, whether the re-pricing or share exchange is on a value-for-value basis, and whether vesting requirements are extended. Say-on-Pay We consider proposals relating to an advisory vote on remuneration on a case-by-case basis. Considerations include a review of the relationship between executive remuneration and performance based on operating trends and total shareholder return over multiple performance periods. In addition, we review remuneration structures and potential poor pay practices, including relative magnitude of pay, discretionary bonus awards, tax gross ups, change-in-control features, internal pay equity and peer group construction. As long-term investors, we support remuneration policies that align with long-term shareholder returns. I. Social and Environmental Issues Shareholders in the United States and certain other markets submit proposals encouraging changes in company disclosure and practices related to particular social and environmental matters. MSIM believes that relevant social and environmental issues, including principal adverse sustainability impacts, can influence risk and return. Consequently, we consider how to vote on proposals related to social and environmental issues on a case-by-case basis by determining the relevance of social and environmental issues identified in the proposal and their likely impacts on shareholder value. In reviewing proposals on social and environmental issues, we consider a company's current disclosures and our understanding of the company's management of material social and environmental issues in comparison to peers. We seek to balance concerns on reputational and other risks that lie behind a proposal against costs of implementation, while considering appropriate shareholder and management prerogatives. We may abstain from voting on proposals that do not have a readily determinable financial impact on shareholder value and we may oppose proposals that intrude excessively on management prerogatives and/or board discretion. We generally vote against proposals requesting reports or actions that we believe are duplicative, related to matters not material to the business, or that would impose unnecessary or excessive costs. We consider proposals on these sustainability risks, opportunities and impacts on a case-by-case basis but generally support proposals that seek to enhance useful disclosure. We focus on understanding the company's business and commercial context and recognise that there is no one size fits all that can apply to all companies. In assessing and prioritising proposals, we carefully reflect on the materiality of the issues as well as the sector and geography in which the company operates. We also consider the explanation companies provide where they may depart from best practice to assess the adequacy and appropriateness of measures