A Management Decision Process for Corporate Action

Corporate Action namely every action of the issuer that gives equal rights to all shareholders such as Dividends, Right Issues and Stock Splits. Dividend is the distribution of company profits to shareholders based on the percentage of ownership of capital owners. Management decisions in seeking new capital or funds through the stock exchange floor are usually for debt repayment actions, company goals, expansion through product innovation in improving and maintaining company stability for better prospects in the future so as to encourage the government to build a better economy in the next period. Corporate action applies to all companies, not limited to public companies. Several forms of corporate action that are generally carried out by issuers include the distribution of dividends, both cash and shares,

PERAN NOTARIS DALAM MENCEGAH KETERLAMBATAN PELAPORAN MERGER PADA REZIM PERSAINGAN USAHA [THE ROLE OF NOTARIES IN PREVENTING DELAYS IN REPORTING MERGERS IN BUSINESS COMPETITION REGIONS]

<em>In accordance with Law Number 5 of 1999 concerning Competition Law, every corporate action that causes monopoly must be notified to the Business Competition Supervisory Commission (KPPU) in less than 30 (thirty) days. However, not all entrepreneurs are aware of this provision. As consequence of the delay, entrepreneurs are potentially subject to wide range of sanctions starting from warning letter, fines, to the worst scenario which is the cancellation of the corporate action. Law Number 40 of 2007 concerning Company Law governs that all corporate action including mergers, acquisition and consolidation should be drawn in form of notarial deed and the Notary has an access to report such action to the Minister of Law and Human Rights if necessary. While the entrepreneurs appear before the Notary to make merger, acquisition or consolidation deed, the Notary may advise the entrepreneurs to notify KPPU if such merger is potentially fulfill certain condition under Law No.5 of 1999. However, Notary must also be aware that his role is limited by his responsibility to keep private information disclosed by the party before him. In connection with those conditions, this research provides elaboration on how Notary should take a role in merger action and his limitation in it.</em><p><strong>BAHASA INDONESIA ABSTRACT: </strong>Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 tentang Persaingan Usaha mengatur bahwa dalam hal terjadi aksi korporasi yang menyebabkan monopoli, maka pelaku usaha wajib untuk memberikan pemberitahuan atas peristiwa tersebut dalam jangka waktu 30 (tiga puluh) hari kepada Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha (KPPU). Akan tetapi, tidak semua pelaku usaha memahami ketentuan ini. Oleh sebab itu, pada beberapa kasus pelaku usaha dikenai sanksi yang bervariasi, mulai dari surat teguran, denda dalam jumlah besar, hingga pembatalan<em> </em>aksi korporasi tersebut. Sehubungan dengan kondisi ini, Undang-Undang Nomor 40 Tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas mengatur bahwa setiap aksi korporasi yang meliputi penggabungan, peleburan dan pengambilalihan akuisisi harus dituangkan persetujuannya oleh para pemegang saham dalam suatu akta notariil dan dilaporkan oleh Notaris kepada Menteri Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia apabila diperlukan. Sehubungan dengan pengaturan tersebut, maka setiap kali para pelaku usaha hadir di hadapan Notaris untuk membuat akta<em> </em>atas aksi korporasi, Notaris dapat mengambil peran untuk mencegah terjadinya keterlambatan pemberitahuan tersebut melalui pemberian penyuluhan kepada para penghadap. Akan tetapi, Notaris juga harus tahu bahwa perannya tersebut juga terbatas pada kewajibannya untuk menjaga informasi dari para pihak yang menghadapnya. Berkaitan dengan hal tersebut, penelitian ini mencoba untuk mengelaborasi peran Notaris dalam mencegah keterlambatan pemberitahuan tersebut sejauh mana peran yang dapat diambil Notaris sehubungan dengan hal tersebut.</p>

Do Environmental Performance and Disclosure Contribute to the Economic Performance? The Moderating Role of Corporate Action

Objective – The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of environmental performance and environmental disclosure on economic performance of the Indonesian listed manufacturing companies by using corporate action as a moderating variable. Design/methodology – This study used secondary data obtained from the official website of the Indonesia Stock Exchange and the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Indonesia. The sample consisted of manufacturing companies that are listed and follow the Company Performance Rating Assessment Program (Program Penilaian Peringkat Kinerja Perusahaan/PROPER) issued by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry for the period of 2011-2016. The study employed a purposive sampling approach, which includes 22 companies with 132 observations. The multiple linear regression method was used for data analysis. Results – The results indicated that environmental performance has a significant positive effect while environmental disclosure has a significant negative effect on economic performance. The testing of corporate action as a moderating variable demonstrated that it could not strengthen the effect of environmental performance on economic performance. However, it could enhance the effect of environmental disclosure on economic performance.

The Legal Policy of Regulating the Concept of Future Value Amid the Discourse on State Finances in State-Owned Enterprises

<p>The status of state finance is related to the legal consequences which occur and must be borne by the parties. The legal position of state finances will also determine any loss of the state finances which occur as a result of a business decision made by SOE. Business decision made by the Board of Directors of a company has significant impacts on the performance of a Limited Liability Company (LLC) such as revenue and increased value of the company. In order to generate profit, the Board of Directors must be able to take appropriate corporate action. The Board of Directors of LLC often takes future value action by performing risky action which may damage the company in expectation of the highest possible profit for the company in the future. In the context of SOE management is often viewed as detrimental to state finances because it’s considered corporate crime which ends with corruption. Problems occur when performing assessment of state loss as SOE and Law Enforcers have different perspectives. Law Enforcers often can’t see the future value of a corporate action taken by an SOE Persero. The problem in this paper is what is the Legal Policy of Regulating the Concept of Future Value in Determining State Financial Loss? The research method was judicial normative, which is a study that emphasizes the usage of written legal norms which are related to the source’s perception and view. The research result showed that policy related with future value transaction performed by the Board of Directors of SOE (LLC) incorporate action for the future interest of the company should be viewed as an action by the Board of Directors of SOE to realize the vision and mission of SOE, not as state financial loss if the value of the business loss is smaller than the profit generated by SOE and doesn’t affect state capital (state assets) which is deposited to SOE.</p>

Social Justice and Corporate Mission Statements: Analyzing Values in Business Writing

This article describes and reflects on a collaborative, in-class activity that asks students in a business writing course to analyze the intersection of language, values, and social justice through a rhetorical analysis of corporate mission statements. The activity looks at how mission statements, as a genre, work to construct an ethos of civic engagement targeting a specific audience. Students reflect on values embedded in mission statements and compare these values with corporate action. Students then work in groups to create their own mission statements that direct their research and teamwork for their other, collaborative course projects. I offer this activity focused on mission statements as a concrete way to discuss social justice, values, and civic engagement in a business writing course; specifically, students explore how language impacts social justice and structural (in)equality.