Company: AFRM
Filing Date: 2025-05-12
Form Type: DEF 14A
Source: 0001820953-25-000057
Chunk: 9

Company: Affirm Holdings, Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-05-12
Form: DEF 14A
Chunk 9
---
’s breadth of precedent to anticipate the legality of certain corporate affairs and transactions and stockholders’ rights to challenge them, particularly on matters as to which Nevada’s statutes do not provide a clear answer and a Nevada court must make a determination as a matter of first impression.

Certain Differences Between Delaware and Nevada Law

Although our Board believes that the rights of stockholders under the DGCL and the NRS are substantially similar, the DGCL and Delaware case law collectively are different in certain respects than the NRS and existing Nevada case law in ways that may affect the rights of our stockholders. Please see the Company’s summary of certain differences in the section titled “What Changes After Nevada Reincorporation?—Certain Differences in Stockholder Rights under Delaware and Nevada Law.” For instance, as further explained in the Company’s summary below, under the NRS, a stockholder may inspect a Nevada corporation’s articles of incorporation, bylaws and stock ledger, subject to certain limitations, if such stockholder holds at least 5% of the outstanding shares of stock of the Nevada corporation or has been a holder of shares for at least six months. In addition, the NRS provides that a stockholder may inspect the books of account and financial statements of a Nevada corporation if such stockholder holds at least 15% of the outstanding shares of stock of the Nevada corporation; however, these additional inspection rights are generally not available for stockholders of publicly traded companies. The DGCL, by comparison, does not require that a stockholder hold a certain number of shares or hold such shares for a stated period of time prior to exercising their books and records inspection rights. Thus, it is possible that some of our stockholders entitled to make a books and records demand today (as stockholders in a Delaware corporation) will not be able to make a similar demand following the Nevada Reincorporation.

In addition, the NRS expressly permits directors and officers to consider all relevant facts, circumstances, contingencies or constituencies, including approving or taking an action that factors in the interest of stakeholders other than the corporation’s stockholders, such as employees, suppliers and the community. Under Delaware law, by comparison, there is no express statutory authority to consider such interests, and fiduciary duties in most circumstances require directors to seek to maximize the value of the corporation for the long-term benefit of the stockholders unless the corporation is specifically incorporated as a public benefit corporation. As a result, as a Nevada corporation, it is possible that our directors and officers may consider the interests of