Company: AFRM
Filing Date: 2025-05-12
Form Type: DEF 14A
Source: 0001820953-25-000057
Chunk: 7

Company: Affirm Holdings, Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-05-12
Form: DEF 14A
Chunk 7
---
 our stockholders approve the Nevada Reincorporation (including the Plan of Conversion, Nevada Charter and Nevada Bylaws) and adopt the Nevada Reincorporation Resolution. Pursuant to Section 266 of the DGCL, the Nevada Reincorporation Resolution is hereby submitted for adoption by the stockholders of the Company, with the recommendation of the Board that stockholders vote for the Nevada Reincorporation Resolution.

#### Reasons for the Nevada Reincorporation
Our Board believes that there are several reasons the Nevada Reincorporation is in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders.

We have observed that the legal environment in Delaware has changed, with a greater frequency of litigation activity brought by well-funded firms who frequently have a significant financial interest in the outcome of the litigation. This has resulted in a less predictable and less stable landscape and body of case law in Delaware, particularly for companies, like ours, with an executive who is also a significant stockholder. Like many companies, we exist in a competitive environment and remain focused on positioning the Company to make business decisions in an agile and nimble manner. The ongoing threat of unmeritorious, but expensive and protracted, litigation over business decisions is inconsistent with that focus. That type of litigation also reallocates value and resources from the Company and its stockholders to litigation and those involved in litigation.

We have considered the amendments to the DGCL that took effect on March 25, 2025 concerning transactions involving a conflict of interest on the part of directors, officers or controlling stockholders and stockholders’ inspection rights. We have also considered the related Senate Concurrent Resolution requesting evaluation of the approach to plaintiffs’ attorneys fee awards in Delaware, the outcome of which is not yet known. Delaware law could continue to evolve and adapt in a way that addresses some of the concerns we have identified, but the effect of these developments is not yet known and the amendments will be subject to judicial interpretation.

By comparison, we believe that based on the law as it exists today Nevada can offer more predictability and certainty in decision-making because of its statutory regime. As we look to our historic growth and strategic decisions and plan for the years to come, removing judicial ambiguity can offer our Board and management clearer guideposts for action that will benefit the Company and our stockholders. Chapter 78 of the NRS is generally recognized as a comprehensive and thoughtfully maintained state corporate statute. Unlike in Delaware, where corporate law regarding fiduciary duties is significantly driven by the Delaware common law as developed by the courts