| |
|
|
| |
Date and Time
November 5, 2026
11:00 a.m. CT |
|
| |
Location
MARRIOTT DALLAS
UPTOWN
3033 Fairmount Street
Dallas, Texas 75201 |
|
| |
1
|
| | |
To elect nine (9) members of the Company’s Board of Directors to
serve until the 2027 annual meeting of stockholders. |
|
| |
2
|
| | |
To approve, by non-binding advisory vote, the executive compensation paid to our named executive officers.
|
|
| |
3
|
| | |
To ratify the appointment of Deloitte & Touche LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2026.
|
|
| |
4
|
| | |
To approve the redomestication of the Company from Delaware to Texas by conversion.
|
|
| |
IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING THE AVAILABILITY OF PROXY MATERIALS FOR THE ANNUAL MEETING TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 5, 2026
|
|
| | | | | | 1 | | | |
| | | | | | 2 | | | |
| | | | | | 8 | | | |
| | | | | | 8 | | | |
| | | | | | 18 | | | |
| | | | | | 19 | | | |
| | | | | | 20 | | | |
| | | | | | 60 | | | |
| | | | | | 61 | | | |
| | | | | | 61 | | | |
| | | | | | 62 | | | |
| | | | | | 65 | | | |
| | | | | | 66 | | | |
| | | | | | 70 | | | |
| | | | | | 70 | | | |
| | | | | | 71 | | | |
| | | | | | 71 | | | |
| | | | | | 73 | | | |
| | | | | | 73 | | | |
| | | | | | 73 | | | |
| | | | | | 74 | | | |
| | | | | | 74 | | | |
| | | | | | 75 | | | |
| | | | | | 75 | | | |
| | | | | | 75 | | | |
| | | | | | 77 | | | |
| | | | | | 78 | | | |
| | | | | | 83 | | | |
| | | | | | 84 | | | |
| | | | | | 85 | | | |
| | | | | | 86 | | | |
| | | | | | 87 | | | |
| | | | | | 88 | | | |
| | | | | | 88 | | | |
| | | | | | 88 | | | |
| | | | | | 91 | | | |
| | | | | | 93 | | | |
| | | | | | 94 | | |
| | | | | | 95 | | | |
| | | | | | 99 | | | |
| | | | | | 102 | | | |
| | | | | | 103 | | | |
| | | | | | 104 | | | |
| | | | | | 104 | | | |
| | | | | | A-1 | | | |
| | | | | | B-1 | | | |
| | | | | | C-1 | | | |
| | | | | | D-1 | | | |
| | | | | | E-1 | | |
| |
Date and Time
November 5, 2026
11:00 a.m. CT |
|
| |
Location
MARRIOTT DALLAS
UPTOWN
3033 Fairmount Street
Dallas, Texas 75201 |
|
| |
THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE “QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS” FORMAT BELOW IS FOR YOUR CONVENIENCE AND INCLUDES ONLY A SUMMARY OF CERTAIN INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS PROXY STATEMENT. YOU SHOULD READ THIS ENTIRE PROXY STATEMENT CAREFULLY.
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
1
|
|
| |
Proposals
|
| | | | |
Board’s
Recommendation |
| |
More
Information |
|
| |
Proposal 1
|
| | Election of nine (9) members of the Board to serve until the 2027 annual meeting of stockholders. | | |
FOR each
Nominee |
| |
Page 8
|
|
| |
Proposal 2
|
| | Approval, by non-binding advisory vote, of the executive compensation paid to our Named Executive Officers (as defined herein). | | |
FOR
|
| |
Page 18
|
|
| |
Proposal 3
|
| | Ratification of the appointment of Deloitte & Touche LLP (“Deloitte”) as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2026. | | |
FOR
|
| |
Page 19
|
|
| |
Proposal 4
|
| | Approval of the redomestication of the Company from Delaware to Texas by conversion. | | |
FOR
|
| |
Page 20
|
|
| | 2 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
3
|
|
| | 4 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
5
|
|
| | 6 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
7
|
|
| |
Name
|
| |
Age
|
| |
Position
|
|
| | Rhys J. Best | | |
80
|
| |
Director, Chair
|
|
| | General Donald G. Cook, USAF (Ret.) | | |
80
|
| |
Director
|
|
| | Peter Doyle | | |
64
|
| |
Director
|
|
| | Barbara J. Duganier | | |
68
|
| |
Director
|
|
| | Donna E. Epps | | |
62
|
| |
Director
|
|
| | Tyler Glover | | |
41
|
| |
President, CEO & Director
|
|
| | Karl F. Kurz | | |
65
|
| |
Director
|
|
| | Robert Roosa | | |
56
|
| |
Director
|
|
| | Marguerite Woung-Chapman | | |
61
|
| |
Director
|
|
| | 8 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
9
|
|
| | | | |
Best
|
| |
Cook
|
| |
Doyle
|
| |
Duganier
|
| |
Epps
|
| |
Glover
|
| |
Kurz
|
| |
Roosa
|
| |
Woung-
Chapman |
| |
Total
|
|
| |
Public Company CEO or COO Experience
|
| |
✓
|
| | | | |
✓
|
| | | | | | | |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| | | | |
5 of 9
|
|
| |
Financial Oversight/Accounting
Senior executive level experience in financial accounting and reporting, auditing, corporate financing and/or internal controls or experience in the financial services industry |
| |
✓
|
| | | | | | | |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| | | | |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| | | | |
5 of 9
|
|
| |
Industry Experience
Experience as an executive or director in, or in other leadership positions working with the oil and gas industry and knowledge of the risks related to the industry |
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| | | | |
✓
|
| | | | |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
7 of 9
|
|
| |
Public Policy/Regulatory
Experience in or a strong understanding of the regulatory issues facing the oil and gas industry and public policy on a local, state and national level |
| |
✓
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
5 of 9
|
|
| |
HES Experience
Experience with direct control or accountability for health, environmental, safety and social responsibility management |
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| | | | |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| | | | |
✓
|
| |
7 of 9
|
|
| |
Risk Management
Executive experience evaluating significant risks and providing effective oversight of risk management processes, including cyber security risk and financial risk |
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
9 of 9
|
|
| |
Independence
Satisfies the independence requirements of the NYSE and SEC |
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| | | | |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
8 of 9
|
|
| |
Public Company Board Experience
Including corporate governance experience |
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
✓
|
| |
9 of 9
|
|
| |
Gender
|
| |
Female
|
| |
Male
|
|
| | | | |
3
|
| |
6
|
|
| | Demographics | | | | | | | |
| | African American or Black | | | | | | | |
| | Native American | | | | | | | |
| | Asian | | | | | | | |
| | Hispanic or Latino | | | | | | | |
| |
Caucasian
|
| |
2
|
| |
6
|
|
| | Two or More Races or Ethnicities | | |
1
|
| | | |
| | 10 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
RHYS J.
BEST
Director, Chair
AGE: 80
DIRECTOR SINCE:
April 2022 |
| | |
Mr. Best serves as non-executive Chair of the Board (the “Chair”) and has been a member of the Board since April 15, 2022. Mr. Best currently serves on the board of Arcosa Inc. (NYSE: ACA) (since 2018), where he serves as the non-executive chairman of the board, and as a Trustee of the Texas Capital Funds Trust (NYSE Arca: TXS) (since 2026). Mr. Best previously served on the board of directors of Cabot Oil and Gas Corp. (from 2008 to 2021, including serving as lead director in 2021), his term ending after the company merged with Cimarex Energy in 2021 to form Coterra Energy (NYSE: CTRA). Mr. Best also previously served on the boards of directors of Commercial Metals Company (NYSE: CMC) (from 2010 to 2022), Crosstex Energy, LP, an integrated, multi-commodity midstream enterprise (NASDAQ: XTEX) (from 2004 to 2014, including serving as chairman of the board from 2009 to 2014), MRC Global, Inc., a pipe, valve and fitting distribution business (NYSE: MRC) (from 2008 to 2022, including serving as chairman of the board from 2016 to 2022), Trinity Industries, Inc. (NYSE: TRN) (from 2005 to 2018), and Austin Industries, an employee-owned construction company (from 2007 to 2018, including serving as chairman of the board from 2013 to 2018). Mr. Best is the former Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Lone Star Technologies, Inc., an energy services and supply company, a role he retired from in 2007 after the successful merger with United States Steel Company (NYSE: X). In 2014, Mr. Best was recognized as Director of the Year by the National Association of Corporate Directors.
QUALIFICATIONS
Mr. Best’s qualifications to serve as a director include his extensive business experience, including as a senior executive at leading companies in the oil and gas industry, and his public company board and corporate governance experience.
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
11
|
|
| |
DONALD G.
COOK
Director
AGE: 80
DIRECTOR SINCE:
January 2021 |
| | |
General Cook has been a member of the Board since January 11, 2021. General Cook previously served on the board of directors of Crane Co. (NYSE: CR) (from 2005 to 2022), USAA Federal Savings Bank (from 2007 to 2018), U.S. Security Associates Inc., a Goldman Sachs portfolio company (from 2011 to 2018), and Hawker Beechcraft Inc., another Goldman Sachs portfolio company (from 2007 to 2014). General Cook served on the board of directors of Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad for almost five years until it was sold to Berkshire Hathaway in 2010 in a transaction valued at $44 billion. He is a former senior consultant for Lockheed Martin Corporation. General Cook also serves as a senior advisor to Portage Point Partners and served as a senior advisor to Alvest, a private French aviation firm, from 2022 to 2023. In addition to his extensive corporate governance experience, General Cook was the former Chairman of the San Antonio advisory board of the NACD Texas TriCities Chapter, a group recognized as the authority on leading boardroom practices. General Cook had numerous command and high-level staff assignments during his 36-year career with the U.S. Air Force and retired as a four-star General. He commanded a flying training wing and two space wings, the 20th Air Force (the nation’s nuclear Intercontinental Ballistic Missile force) and was interim Commander of Air Combat Command during the September 11 attacks. General Cook served as the Chief of the Senate Liaison Office and on the staff of the House Armed Services Committee in the U.S. House of Representatives. Prior to his retirement from the Air Force in August 2005, General Cook’s culminating assignment was Commander, Air Education and Training Command at Randolph Air Force Base in Texas, where he was responsible for executing the $8 billion annual budget to recruit, train and educate Air Force personnel, safely implementing the 500,000-hour annual flying hour program and providing for the leadership, welfare, and oversight of 90,000 military and civilian personnel in the command. He was twice awarded the Distinguished Service Medal for exceptional leadership.
General Cook serves on the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee, and the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee.
QUALIFICATIONS
General Cook’s qualifications to serve as a director include his extensive experience on multiple public company boards and with corporate governance and executive compensation, as well as his senior leadership experience resulting from his tenure of command in the U.S. Air Force.
|
|
| | 12 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
PETER
DOYLE
Director
AGE: 64
DIRECTOR SINCE:
May 2026 |
| | |
Mr. Doyle has been a member of the Board since May 5, 2026. Mr. Doyle is a Co-Founder and the Co-Chief Executive Officer of Horizon Kinetics, which is a passive investor in certain of TPL’s direct and indirect competitors. He is a senior member of the Horizon Kinetics research team, and a member of the Investment Committee and the Board of Directors. Mr. Doyle has worked for Horizon Kinetics since its founding in 1994. Mr. Doyle is also the President of Kinetics Mutual Funds, Inc., a series of investment companies managed by the Horizon Kinetics. Mr. Doyle is a Co-Portfolio Manager for several registered investment companies, private funds, and separately managed accounts. Mr. Doyle is also the Co-Chief Executive Officer of FRMO Corp., an affiliated publicly traded company. Previously, Mr. Doyle was with Bankers Trust Company as a Senior Investment Officer, where he also served on the Finance, Utility and REIT Research sub-group teams. Mr. Doyle received a BS from St. John’s University and an MBA from Fordham University.
Mr. Doyle serves on the Strategic Acquisitions Committee.
QUALIFICATIONS
Mr. Doyle’s qualifications to serve as a director include his over 40 years of investment experience, including in the energy and minerals space.
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
13
|
|
| |
BARBARA J.
DUGANIER
Director
AGE: 68
DIRECTOR SINCE:
January 2021 |
| | |
Ms. Duganier has been a member of the Board since January 11, 2021. Ms. Duganier currently serves on the board of directors of CenterPoint Energy (NYSE: CNP), an electric transmission and distribution, natural gas distribution and energy services company, where she chairs the audit committee and serves on the safety and operations committee, and Arcadis NV (Euronext: ARCADIS), where she serves on the sustainability committee and the audit and risk committee. Ms. Duganier also serves on the board of directors of two private companies: McDermott International, Ltd. (since 2020), a fully integrated provider of engineering and construction solutions to the energy industry; and Pattern Energy Group LP (since 2021), a private renewable energy company focused on wind, solar, transmission and storage. Ms. Duganier previously served on the board of directors of the general partner of Buckeye Partners, L.P. (NYSE: BPL), a midstream oil and gas master limited partnership, where she chaired the audit committee until the company’s sale in November 2019; of Noble Energy (NASDAQ: NBL), an exploration and production company, until the company’s sale in October 2020; of West Monroe Partners, a management and technology consulting firm, where she was the lead independent director until the sale of the company in November 2021; and of MRC Global Inc. (NYSE: MRC) (2015-2024), an industrial distributor of pipes, valves and other related products and services to the energy industry, where, during her term, she chaired the ESG and enterprise risk committee and audit committee. From 2004 to 2013, Ms. Duganier was a Managing Director at Accenture, a multinational professional services company that provides services in strategy, consulting, digital technology, and operations. She held various leadership and management positions in Accenture’s outsourcing business, including Global Chief Strategy Officer and Global Growth and Offering Development Lead. A year prior to joining Accenture, she served as an independent consultant to Duke Energy North America. From 1979 to 2002, Ms. Duganier, who is a licensed certified public accountant in the State of Texas, worked at Arthur Andersen LLP, where she served as an auditor and financial consultant, as well as in various leadership and management roles, including Global Chief Financial Officer of Andersen Worldwide. Ms. Duganier is the former chairperson of the National Association of Corporate Directors Texas TriCities (NACD TTC) board of directors. Ms. Duganier holds the NACD Director Certification, is an NACD Leadership Fellow, and holds the CERT Cybersecurity Oversight Certification and Effective AI Oversight for Directors Certification from Carnegie Mellon University.
Ms. Duganier serves on and is the chair of the Compensation Committee and serves on the Audit Committee and the Strategic Acquisitions Committee.
QUALIFICATIONS
Ms. Duganier’s extensive executive experience overseeing large organizations, her diverse public company board experience (including in the energy industry), and her training and experience as a certified public accountant make her well-qualified to serve on the Board.
|
|
| | 14 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
DONNA E.
EPPS
Director
AGE: 62
DIRECTOR SINCE:
January 2021 |
| | |
Ms. Epps has been a member of the Board since January 11, 2021. Ms. Epps currently serves on the board of directors of Saia, Inc. (NASDAQ: SAIA) (since 2019), where she serves on the audit committee and the nominating and governance committee, and on the board of directors of Texas Roadhouse, Inc. (NASDAQ: TXRH), where she serves as chair of the audit committee, and as a member of the nominating and governance committee. Ms. Epps was with Deloitte LLP, a multinational professional services network, for over 30 years. Ms. Epps served as an attest Partner of Deloitte LLP from 1998 through 2003 and as a Risk and Financial Advisory Partner of Deloitte LLP from 2004 until her retirement in 2017. During her time at Deloitte LLP, Ms. Epps helped companies develop and implement proactive enterprise risk and compliance programs, focusing on value protection and creation, and provided attest services and financial advisory services in governance, risk and compliance matters to private and public companies across multiple industries. Ms. Epps is currently a licensed certified public accountant in the State of Texas and a member of the North Texas Chapter of the National Association of Corporate Directors Board. Ms. Epps has served as chair of the Girl Scouts of Northeast Texas Board since April 2021.
Ms. Epps serves on and is the chair of the Audit Committee and serves on the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee.
QUALIFICATIONS
Ms. Epps’s significant audit, governance, risk, and compliance experience as a provider of attest, financial advisory and other consulting services to private and public companies across multiple industries makes her well-qualified to serve on the Board.
|
|
| |
TYLER
GLOVER
President, CEO & Director
|
| | |
Mr. Glover has been a member of the Board and served as TPL’s President and Chief Executive Officer since January 11, 2021. Mr. Glover served as Chief Executive Officer, Co-General Agent and Secretary of the Trust from November 2016 to January 11, 2021. Mr. Glover also currently serves as President and Chief Executive Officer of Texas Pacific Water Resources LLC (“TPWR”), a wholly owned subsidiary of TPL, in which capacity he has acted since its formation in June 2017. Mr. Glover previously served as Assistant General Agent of the Trust from December 2014 to November 2016 and has over 17 years of energy services and land management experience.
QUALIFICATIONS
Mr. Glover’s qualifications to serve as a director include his extensive energy industry and land management expertise and his deep knowledge of TPL gained through his experience as an officer at the Company, including at the Trust.
|
|
| |
AGE: 41
DIRECTOR SINCE:
January 2021 |
| | | ||
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
15
|
|
| |
KARL F.
KURZ
Director
AGE: 65
DIRECTOR SINCE:
April 2022 |
| | |
Mr. Kurz has been a member of the Board since April 15, 2022. Mr. Kurz is currently a non-executive chairman of the board of directors at American Water Works Co., Inc. (NYSE: AWK) and a member of the board of directors at Devon Energy Corporation (NYSE: DVN) where he serves on the compensation committee and governance, environmental & public policy committee and chairs the reserves committee. Mr. Kurz previously served on the board of directors of SemGroup Corporation (NYSE: SEMG), Western Gas Partners LP (NYSE: WES), WPX Energy Inc. (NYSE: WPX) and Global Geophysical Services Inc. (NYSE: GGS). Mr. Kurz has served on multiple for profit and non-profit boards of directors.
Mr. Kurz also has extensive private equity experience that includes serving as an operating advisor at Ares Capital and a partner at CCMP Capital Advisors, where he focused on investments in the oil and gas upstream and midstream sectors. He spent nine years at Anadarko Petroleum Corporation, where he held roles as Chief Operating Officer, Senior Vice President of Northern America Operations and Vice President of Midstream and Marketing.
Mr. Kurz serves on and is the chair of the Strategic Acquisitions Committee and serves on the Compensation Committee.
QUALIFICATIONS
Mr. Kurz’s qualifications to serve as a director include his extensive business experience, including as an accomplished senior oil and gas industry executive, and his public company board experience in the utility, energy and infrastructure space.
|
|
| |
ROBERT
ROOSA
Director
AGE: 56
DIRECTOR SINCE:
November 2023 |
| | |
Mr. Roosa has been a member of the Board since November 10, 2023. Mr. Roosa is a Partner in Brigham Royalties and has served as its Chief Executive Officer since January 2023. Mr. Roosa previously served as President of Brigham Minerals, Inc. (NYSE: MNRL) (“Brigham”) from its inception in November 2012 and as its Chief Executive Officer from July 2017 until its acquisition by Sitio Royalties Corp. in December 2022. Mr. Roosa also served as a director of Brigham from May 2018 until 2022. Mr. Roosa served as the President of Anthem Ventures, LLC, a family office, between January 2012 and January 2017. Mr. Roosa held various roles, including Director of Finance and Investor Relations, while at Brigham Exploration Company from 2006 until its sale to Statoil ASA in December 2011. From 2000 to 2006, Mr. Roosa held a series of positions at Exxon Mobil Corporation (NYSE: XOM), an oil and gas company, in the Corporate Treasurer’s Department. Prior to 2000, Mr. Roosa worked for Cooper Industries, an electrical products manufacturing company, in its Corporate Controllers and Audit Groups and with the accounting firm Deloitte & Touche LLP in its audit function. Mr. Roosa graduated from Southern Methodist University with a Master of Business Administration and from the University of Texas at Austin with a Bachelor of Business Administration.
Mr. Roosa serves on the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee and the Strategic Acquisitions Committee.
QUALIFICATIONS
Mr. Roosa brings extensive knowledge of the mineral royalty acquisitions industry and executive experience to the Board.
|
|
| | 16 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
MARGUERITE
WOUNG- CHAPMAN
Director
AGE: 61
DIRECTOR SINCE:
November 2023 |
| | |
Ms. Woung-Chapman has been a member of the Board since November 10, 2023. Ms. Woung-Chapman also serves on the board of directors of Chord Energy Corporation (NASDAQ: CHRD), a scaled unconventional U.S. oil producer with a premier Williston Basin acreage position, and serves on the compensation and human resources committee, and as chair of the nominating and governance committee. Ms. Woung-Chapman previously served as a director of Summit Midstream Corporation (NYSE: SMC), a value-driven corporation focused on developing, owning and operating midstream energy infrastructure assets located in unconventional resource basins, primarily shale formations, in the continental United States, where she served as chair of their nominating, governance and sustainability committee and as a member of their compensation committee. Ms. Woung-Chapman retired from the SMC board of directors effective March 15, 2026. She was also previously a member of the board directors of Oasis Petroleum, Inc. and chair of the board of directors and President of the Council of the Girl Scouts of San Jacinto Council. Ms. Woung-Chapman began her career as a corporate attorney with El Paso Corporation (including its predecessors) and during her tenure from 1991 until 2012, served as Vice President, Legal Shared Services, Corporate Secretary and Chief Governance Officer, among other positions. From 2012 to 2017, Ms. Woung-Chapman served in various capacities at EP Energy Corporation, a private company that subsequently became an NYSE-listed independent oil and gas exploration and production company, including, among others, Senior Vice President, Land Administration, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary. In 2018, Ms. Woung-Chapman served as Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary of Energy XXI Gulf Coast, Inc., an independent exploration and production company that was engaged in the development, exploitation and acquisition of oil and natural gas properties in the U.S. Gulf Coast region until its acquisition by Cox Oil. Ms. Woung-Chapman holds a Bachelor of Science in Linguistics from Georgetown University and a J.D. from the Georgetown University Law Center.
Ms. Woung-Chapman serves and is the chair of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and also serves on the Audit Committee.
QUALIFICATIONS
Ms. Woung-Chapman’s qualifications to serve as director include her valuable expertise in all aspects of management and strategic direction of publicly traded energy companies and her unique combination of experience in corporate governance, regulatory, compliance, corporate and asset transactions, legal and business administration.
|
|
| | THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” THE ELECTION OF THE DIRECTOR NOMINEES. | |
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
17
|
|
| | THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” PROPOSAL 2. | |
| | 18 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| | THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” PROPOSAL 3. | |
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
19
|
|
| | 20 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
21
|
|
| | 22 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
23
|
|
| | 24 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
25
|
|
| | 26 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
27
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware Charter
|
| |
Texas Certificate of Formation
|
|
| |
Stockholder Voting Threshold (Acts requiring stockholder approval by a majority or more of voting stock)
|
| |
Under the DGCL, certain matters subject to a stockholder vote, including certain business transactions including, without limitation, mergers, conversions, sales of substantially all assets, require a default vote of the holders of a majority of the outstanding shares entitled to vote thereon, unless the charter specifies a higher voting threshold. The Delaware Charter does not include a higher voting threshold so the default voting standard for such business transactions applies.
|
| |
Under the TBOC, certain matters subject to a shareholder vote, including “fundamental actions” and “fundamental business transactions” such as mergers, sales of substantially all assets, and other transactions, require a default vote of 2/3 of the shareholders of each class, unless the charter specifies a lower voting threshold. The proposed Texas Certificate of Formation contains language setting the default voting thresholds at a majority of the voting power of all outstanding shares entitled to vote thereon, voting together as a single class, unless a different standard is specified elsewhere in the Texas Certificate of Formation, in order to mirror the DGCL and the absence of special provisions in the Delaware Charter.
|
|
| |
Cumulative Voting
|
| |
Under the DGCL, cumulative voting for the election of directors is allowed only as provided in the corporation’s certificate of incorporation. The Delaware Charter provides that stockholders of the Company shall not be permitted to cumulate their votes for the election of directors.
|
| |
Under the TBOC, in order to vote cumulatively in a board of directors election, cumulative voting must be authorized by the corporation’s certificate of formation. The proposed Texas Certificate of Formation re-affirms that shareholders do not have a right to cumulative voting in the election of directors.
|
|
| |
Board of Directors Vacancies
|
| |
The Delaware Charter provides that, subject to applicable law and the rights of the holders of any series of preferred stock, any vacancy on the Board shall be filled solely by the affirmative vote of a majority of the directors then in office, even if less than a quorum, and shall not be filled by the stockholders.
|
| |
The proposed Texas Certificate of Formation does not itself address vacancies on the board of directors, and instead the proposed Texas Bylaws include a vacancies provision that tracks the TBOC requirements, which permits a vacancy to be filled either by the affirmative vote of a majority of the remaining directors or by election of the shareholders at an annual or special meeting called for that purpose.
|
|
| |
Director and Officer Liability
|
| |
The Delaware Charter eliminates the personal liability of directors for monetary damages for any breach of fiduciary duties as a director, to the fullest extent permitted by the DGCL.
|
| |
The proposed Texas Certificate of Formation eliminates the personal liability of directors and officers for monetary damages for an act or omission by a director or officer in such person’s capacity as a director or officer, as applicable, to the fullest extent permitted by the TBOC.
|
|
| |
Action by Written Consent
|
| |
The Delaware Charter provides that any action required or permitted to be taken by the stockholders of the Company may be taken by consent in writing of such stockholders only pursuant to a resolution of and at the direction of the Board.
|
| |
The proposed Texas Certificate of Formation provides that shareholders may act only by unanimous written consent in lieu of a meeting.
|
|
| | 28 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware Charter
|
| |
Texas Certificate of Formation
|
|
| |
Calling of Special Stockholder Meetings
|
| |
The Delaware Charter provides that special meetings of stockholders may be called by the Board pursuant to a resolution or upon the written request of stockholders of record representing at least twenty-five percent (25%) of the Company’s outstanding shares of common stock.
|
| |
The proposed Texas Certificate of Formation provides that special meetings of shareholders may be called by the President or by the Board pursuant to a resolution or upon the written request of shareholders of record representing at least twenty-five percent (25%) of the Company’s outstanding shares of common stock.
|
|
| |
Indemnification
|
| |
The Delaware Charter does not contain any provisions relating to indemnification.
|
| |
The proposed Texas Certificate of Formation authorizes the indemnification of directors, officers and other persons to the fullest extent permitted by the TBOC. Detailed procedural rules and related provisions are included in the proposed Texas Bylaws (See discussion of the Texas Bylaws below).
|
|
| |
Required Ownership to Institute a Derivative Proceeding
|
| |
The Delaware Charter does not contain any provisions relating to a threshold for individual stockholders or groups of stockholders to institute or maintain a derivative proceeding.
|
| |
Under the TBOC and the Texas Law Amendments, public Texas corporations may adopt a minimum share ownership percentage for individual shareholders or groups of shareholders to own in order to institute or maintain a derivative proceeding. The threshold may not exceed 3% of a corporation’s outstanding shares.
Neither the proposed Texas Certificate of Formation nor the proposed Texas Bylaws include a minimum ownership threshold in order to institute or maintain a derivative proceeding. As of the date of this Proxy Statement, no stockholder has ever instituted a derivative proceeding on behalf of the Company, and the Board did not consider the provisions of the TBOC permitting minimum share ownership percentage for shareholders instituting or maintaining a derivative proceeding to be relevant to its determination that the redomestication from Delaware to Texas is in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders.
|
|
| |
Waiver of Jury Trial
|
| |
Neither the Delaware Charter nor the Delaware Bylaws contain any provisions relating to a waiver of jury trial.
If a stockholder were to file suit in the Delaware Court, the court in which stockholder suits relating to the internal affairs of the Delaware Corporation are typically filed, there would be no right to a jury trial as the Delaware Court, a court of equity, does not conduct jury trials.
|
| |
Under Texas law, in civil cases, a party generally has a right to a jury trial to determine questions of fact if the party timely demands a jury and pays the jury fee. The Texas Law Amendments allow a corporation to include a waiver of jury trial in its governing documents for proceedings arising out of, or relating to, any “internal entity claim,” as defined in the TBOC, and that such waiver will constitute an intentional consent to waiver if enforced against a party approving the charter or bylaws, or acquiring a security after such provisions are adopted, continuing to hold a security of a public company after such provisions are adopted, or by other methods permitted under law.
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
29
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware Charter
|
| |
Texas Certificate of Formation
|
|
| | | | | | | |
The proposed Texas Certificate of Formation includes a provision providing for a waiver of jury trial in proceedings arising out of, or relating to, any “internal entity claim,” as defined in the TBOC.
|
|
| |
Exclusive Forum
|
| |
The Delaware Charter provides that, unless the Company consents in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the sole and exclusive forum for any stockholder (including a beneficial owner) to bring certain matters relating to the internal affairs of the corporation shall be, the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (or, if such court does not have jurisdiction, any state or federal court residing with the State of Delaware) or the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas in Dallas, Texas (or, if such court does not have jurisdiction, any district court of Dallas County in the State of Texas).
In addition, the Delaware Charter provides that, unless the Company consents in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the federal district courts of the United States of America shall be the exclusive forum for the resolution of any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”).
|
| |
Under the TBOC, a corporation may include provisions in its governing documents relating to the exclusive forum for certain proceedings.
The proposed Texas Certificate of Formation provides that the sole and exclusive forum for certain matters relating to the internal affairs of the corporation and other matters shall be, first, the First Business Court Division (or, if the First Business Court Division determines that it lacks jurisdiction, the federal district court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, or if the federal court does not have jurisdiction, a Texas state district court in Dallas County, Texas). As discussed below, this forum selection provision does not apply to any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act.
In addition, the proposed Texas Certificate of Formation provides that, unless the Company consents in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the federal district courts of the United States of America shall be the exclusive forum for the resolution of any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
Any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring or holding any interest in shares of stock of the Company shall be deemed to have notice of, and have consented to, these forum selection provisions. Furthermore, investors cannot waive compliance with the federal securities laws and rules and regulations promulgated thereunder.
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware Bylaws
|
| |
Texas Bylaws
|
|
| |
Calling of Special Stockholder Meetings
|
| |
The current Delaware Bylaws provide that special meetings of stockholders may be called by the Board pursuant to a resolution or upon the written request of stockholders of record representing at least twenty-five percent (25%) of the Company’s outstanding shares of common stock.
|
| |
The proposed Texas Bylaws provide that special meetings of shareholders may be called by the President, by the Board pursuant to a resolution or upon the written request of shareholders of record representing at least twenty-five percent (25%) of the Company’s outstanding shares of common stock.
|
|
| | 30 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware Bylaws
|
| |
Texas Bylaws
|
|
| |
Proxies
|
| |
The current Delaware Bylaws provide that no proxy authorized by a stockholder is valid after one year from the date of its execution, unless the proxy provides for a longer period.
|
| |
Under the TBOC, a proxy is not valid for more than 11 months after the date the proxy is executed, unless otherwise provided by the proxy, and so the proposed Texas Bylaws provide that no proxy shall be voted or acted upon after 11 months from its date, unless the proxy provides for a longer period.
|
|
| |
Board of Directors Committees
|
| |
The current Delaware Bylaws provide that, to the extent permitted by applicable law, each committee shall have and may exercise all the powers and authority of the Board in the management of the business and affairs of the Company as may be delegated to such committee by the Board.
Pursuant to the DGCL, no committee of directors shall have the authority with regard to amending the Delaware Charter, adopting an agreement of merger or consolidation, recommending to the stockholders the sale, lease or exchange of all or substantially all of the Company’s property and assets, recommending to the stockholders a dissolution of the Company or a revocation of a dissolution of the Company, or amending the Delaware Bylaws.
|
| |
The proposed Texas Bylaws provide that, to the extent permitted by applicable law, each committee shall have and may exercise all the powers and authority of the Board in the management of the business and affairs of the Company as may be delegated to such committee by the Board.
The proposed Texas Bylaws, by reference to applicable law, acknowledge that, under the TBOC, a committee of directors is prohibited from taking certain actions. The TBOC provides that a committee of the board of directors may not:
(1) amend the certificate of formation, except to: (A) establish a series of shares; (B) increase or decrease the number of shares in a series; or (C) eliminate a series of shares established by the board of directors;
(2) propose a reduction of stated capital;
(3) approve a plan of merger, share exchange, or conversion of the corporation;
(4) recommend to shareholders the sale, lease, or exchange of all or substantially all of the property and assets of the corporation not made in the usual and regular course of its business;
(5) recommend to the shareholders a voluntary winding up and termination or revocation of a voluntary winding up and termination;
(6) amend, alter, or repeal the bylaws or adopt new bylaws;
(7) fill vacancies on the board of directors;
(8) fill vacancies on or designate alternate members of a committee of the board of directors;
(9) fill a vacancy to be filled because of an increase in the number of directors;
(10) elect or remove officers of the corporation or members or alternate members of a committee of the board of directors;
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
31
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware Bylaws
|
| |
Texas Bylaws
|
|
| | | | | | | |
(11) set the compensation of the members or alternate members of a committee of the board of directors; or
(12) alter or repeal a resolution of the board of directors that states that it may not be amended or repealed by a committee of the board of directors.
|
|
| |
Notice to Shareholders
|
| |
The Delaware Bylaws provide that unless required by law or the Delaware Charter, written notice, stating the place, if any, date and time of the meeting, shall be given, not less than ten (10) days nor more than sixty (60) days before the date of the meeting, to each stockholder of record entitled to vote at such meeting.
The DGCL permits the Company to deliver a single written notice to stockholders who share an address (unless a stockholder objects). The DGCL also provides that notice is not required where giving such notice would be unlawful.
The Delaware Bylaws also permit notice to be given by electronic transmission to a stockholder’s electronic mail address in accordance with the DGCL.
|
| |
The proposed Texas Bylaws, like the Delaware Bylaws, provide that unless required by law or the proposed Texas Certificate of Formation, written notice, stating the place, if any, date and time of the meeting, shall be given, not less than ten (10) days nor more than sixty (60) days before the date of the meeting, to each shareholder of record entitled to vote at such meeting.
In addition, the proposed Texas Bylaws provide that notwithstanding the foregoing, notice of a shareholder meeting regarding a “fundamental business transaction” (as defined in the TBOC) must (a) be given to each shareholder not later than twenty-one (21) days prior to the meeting, regardless of whether the shareholder is entitled to vote on the matter, and (b) state that the purpose, or one of the purposes, of the meeting is to consider a fundamental business transaction.
The TBOC does not currently contain provisions allowing for a single notice to be delivered to multiple shareholders at the same address or allowing the corporation not to deliver notice where such notice would be unlawful, and, accordingly, the Texas Bylaws do not contain such provisions.
Under the TBOC, shareholders must give affirmative consent to receive electronic transmissions. The Texas Bylaws reflect this requirement.
|
|
| |
Advance Notice Procedures
|
| |
The current Delaware Bylaws provide certain advance notice and procedural requirements as it relates to stockholder proposals and nomination.
|
| |
The proposed Texas Bylaws maintain the advance notice and procedural requirements under Delaware Bylaws.
The TBOC permits certain threshold qualifications which a shareholder must satisfy before becoming eligible to submit a shareholder proposal or make a nomination. A Texas corporation that is “nationally listed” must affirmatively elect in its governing documents to be governed by the TBOC’s shareholder proposal rules. Neither the proposed Texas Certificate of Formation nor the proposed Texas Bylaws include an affirmative election to be governed by the TBOC’s shareholder proposal rules.
|
|
| | 32 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware Bylaws
|
| |
Texas Bylaws
|
|
| | | | | | | |
The Company did not receive any shareholder proposals or nominations for inclusion in this Proxy Statement, and the Board did not consider the provisions of the TBOC permitting certain threshold qualification for shareholder proposals to be relevant to its determination that the redomestication from Delaware to Texas is in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders.
|
|
| |
Advancement of Expenses
|
| |
The current Delaware Bylaws provide that expenses incurred by an officer or director in connection with any legal proceedings may be advanced by the Company upon the Company’s receipt of an undertaking by the person to repay such amounts if it is ultimately determined that the person is not entitled to indemnification.
|
| |
Under the TBOC, before a corporation can advance expenses incurred by a director or delegate in connection with any legal proceedings, a director or delegate is required to provide: (1) a written affirmation by the person of the person’s good faith belief that the person has met the standard of conduct necessary for indemnification under the TBOC; and (2) a written undertaking by or on behalf of the person to repay the amount paid or reimbursed if the final determination is that the person has not met that standard necessary for indemnification under the TBOC. In addition, a corporation may advance expenses to a person who is not a director, including an officer, employee or agent, as provided by: (1) the corporation’s governing documents; (2) general or specific action of the corporation’s board; (3) resolution of the shareholders; (4) contract; or (5) common law, and such person may seek advancement of expenses from the corporation to the same extent as a director. A corporation may also pay or reimburse, in advance of the final disposition of a proceeding and on terms the corporation considers appropriate, reasonable expenses incurred by a present or former officer, employee, or agent who is not a present director or delegate, without receiving the written affirmation and undertaking described above.
The Texas Bylaws provide that expenses incurred by a director or officer in defending a proceeding may be advanced prior to the final disposition of such proceeding in the event the director or officer provides the affirmation and undertaking required by the TBOC as described above.
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
33
|
|
| | 34 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware
|
| |
Texas
|
|
| |
Fiduciary Duties
|
| |
In Delaware, fiduciary duties are generally developed by case law. In general, directors and officers owe fiduciary duties of care and loyalty (which further include the duties of good faith, oversight, and disclosure) to the corporation and its stockholders.
The duty of care requires a director to perform his or her duties with such care as an ordinarily prudent man would use in similar circumstances. The duty of care requires directors not to act with gross negligence, including, depending on the facts and circumstances, by being well-informed and gathering and considering reasonably available relevant information.
The duty of loyalty requires directors to act in good faith and under the belief that their actions will be best for the corporation and its stockholders.
Directors are “fully protected” if they rely in good faith upon the records of the corporation and upon such information, opinions, reports or statements presented to the corporation by any of the corporation’s officers or employees, or committees of the board of directors, or by any other person as to matters the director reasonably believes are within such other person’s professional or expert competence and who has been selected with reasonable care by or on behalf of the corporation.
|
| |
In Texas, fiduciary duties are generally developed by case law. Directors and officers owe fiduciary duties of loyalty, due care, and obedience (i.e., duty to follow the law) to the corporation.
The duty of loyalty dictates that a corporate officer or director must act in good faith and must not allow his or her personal interest to prevail over the interest of the corporation. The duty of care requires the director to handle his or her duties with such care as an ordinarily prudent man would use under similar circumstances. In performing this obligation, the director must be diligent and informed and exercise honest and unbiased business judgment in pursuit of corporate interests.
Directors and officers may rely on information, opinions, reports, or statements, including financial statements and other financial data, prepared or presented by an officer or employee of the entity, legal counsel, a certified public accountant, an investment banker, a person who the director or officer reasonably believes possesses professional expertise in the matter, or a committee of the corporation on which the director or officer does not serve.
Under the Texas Law Amendments, directors and officers, in exercising their powers with respect to the entity, may (but are not required to) consider the laws and judicial decisions of other states and the practices observed by entities formed in those other states.
|
|
| |
Business Judgment Rule
|
| |
Under Delaware law, directors and officers are generally protected by the business judgment rule, which is a presumption that in making a business decision the directors of a corporation acted on an informed basis, in good faith and in the honest belief that the action taken was in the best interests of the company. Under the business judgment rule, a court will generally not second-guess directors’ decisions unless the business judgment rule’s presumptions have been rebutted for a majority of directors who made the challenged decision. If the business judgment rule’s presumptions have been rebutted for a majority of directors, directors will not be personally liable absent a finding of non-exculpated fiduciary misconduct. Personal liability for breach of the duty of care cannot occur unless (1) the director acted with gross negligence and
|
| |
Under Texas law, directors and officers are generally protected by the business judgment rule, which protects directors and officers from liability for decisions that may be considered negligent, unwise, inexpedient or imprudent if made in good faith and within their discretion in furtherance of the corporation’s interests. Texas courts have typically not imposed liability on disinterested directors unless the conduct involves fraud or an ultra vires act, although Texas case law is not clear as to whether “gross negligence” will support a breach of the duty of loyalty and therefore impose liability.
The Texas Law Amendments codify the business judgment rule for corporations that (1) have a class or series of voting shares listed on a national securities exchange or
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
35
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware
|
| |
Texas
|
|
| | | | |
(2) the certificate of incorporation lacks an applicable exculpation provision.
Delaware courts apply enhanced scrutiny in certain scenarios involving the adoption of defensive measures, certain change of control transactions, and certain scenarios involving interference with stockholders’ voting rights. If enhanced scrutiny applies, the court generally reviews directors’ actions for reasonableness. Delaware courts apply the entire fairness standard of review where either (1) a majority of directors who made the challenged decision were interested or lacked independence or (2) the transaction involved a conflicted controlling stockholder. However, the DGCL provides that if a statutory safe harbor applies, the act or transaction cannot be the subject of equitable relief or give rise to an award of money damages against directors, officers, or controlling stockholders.
|
| |
(2) include in their governing documents a statement affirmatively electing to be governed by such section, and establish a presumption that directors and officers of such corporations, in deciding upon matters of business, are presumed to act in good faith, on an informed basis, in furtherance of the interests of the corporation, and in obedience to the law and the corporation’s governing documents.
The presumptions contained in the Texas Law Amendments (1) are in addition to any legal presumption arising under common law or the TBOC, (2) do not abrogate or lessen any other presumption, defense or privilege under other constitutional, statutory, case or common law in favor of the director or officer, and (3) do not limit the applicability of a provision contained in the certificate of formation limiting monetary liability of a director or officer.
|
|
| |
Limitation of Personal Liability of Directors and Officers
|
| |
Under the DGCL, a Delaware corporation is permitted to adopt a provision in its certificate of incorporation eliminating or limiting the personal liability of a director or officer to the corporation or its stockholders for monetary damages for breach of fiduciary duty as a director or officer, provided that such provision does not eliminate or limit the liability of: (i) a director or officer breaching the duty of loyalty to the corporation or its stockholders; (ii) a director or officer failing to act in good faith, engaging in intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of law; (iii) a director declaring an illegal dividend or approving an illegal stock purchase or redemption; (iv) a director or officer obtaining an improper personal benefit from the corporation; or (v) an officer in any action by or in the right of a Delaware corporation.
|
| |
Under the TBOC, a Texas corporation is permitted to provide that a managerial official (i.e., a director or officer) is not liable, or is liable only to the extent provided by the certificate of formation, to the corporation or its shareholders for monetary damages for an act or omission by the person in the person’s capacity as a managerial official.
The TBOC does not, however, permit any limitation of the liability of a managerial official for: (i) a breach of the duty of loyalty, if any, to the corporation or its shareholders; (ii) an act or omission not in good faith that constitutes a breach of duty of the person to the corporation or involves intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of law; (iii) a transaction from which the person receives an improper benefit, regardless of whether the benefit resulted from an action taken within the scope of the person’s duties; or (iv) an act or omission for which the liability of a director is expressly provided by an applicable statute (such as wrongful distributions).
|
|
| |
Number of Directors
|
| |
Under the DGCL, the number of directors shall be fixed by, or in the manner provided in, the bylaws, unless the certificate of incorporation fixes the number of directors. If the certificate of incorporation fixes the number of directors, then a change in the number of directors shall be made only by amendment of the certificate of incorporation.
|
| |
Under the TBOC, the number of directors shall be set by, or in the manner provided by, the governing documents, except that the number of directors on the initial board of directors must be set by the certificate of formation.
The number of directors may be increased or decreased by amendment to, or as provided by, the governing documents.
|
|
| | 36 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware
|
| |
Texas
|
|
| | | | | | | |
If the governing documents do not set the number constituting the board of directors or provide for the manner in which the number of directors must be determined, the number of directors is the same as the number constituting the initial board of directors as set by the certificate of formation.
|
|
| |
Procedures for Filling Vacant Directorships
|
| |
Under the DGCL, unless otherwise provided in the governing documents: (1) vacancies and newly created directorships resulting from any increase in the authorized number of directors elected by all of the stockholders having the right to vote as a single class may be filled by a majority of the directors then in office, although less than a quorum, or by a sole remaining director; and (2) whenever the holders of any class or classes of stock or series thereof are entitled to elect 1 or more directors by the certificate of incorporation, vacancies and newly created directorships of such class or classes or series may be filled by a majority of the directors elected by such class or classes or series thereof then in office, or by a sole remaining director so elected.
In the case of a Delaware corporation the directors of which are divided into classes, any directors chosen by (1) or (2) of the above shall hold office until the next election of the class for which such directors shall have been chosen, and until their successors shall be elected and qualified.
|
| |
Under the TBOC, except as provided below with respect to class voting, vacancies may be filled by the affirmative vote of the majority of the remaining directors, even if less than a quorum, or by the election at an annual or special meeting of shareholders called for that purpose.
The term of a director elected to fill a vacancy occurring in the board of directors is the unexpired term of the director’s predecessor in office.
Except as provided below with respect to class voting, a directorship to be filled because of an increase in the number of directors may be filled by the shareholders or by the board of directors for a term of office continuing only until the next election of one or more directors by the shareholders. The board of directors may not fill more than two such directorships during the period between any two successive annual meetings of shareholders.
Unless otherwise authorized by the corporation’s certificate of formation, a vacancy or a newly created vacancy in a director position that the certificate of formation entitles the holders of a class or series of shares or group of classes or series of shares to elect may be filled only: (1) by the affirmative vote of the majority of the directors then in office elected by the class, series, or group; (2) by the sole remaining director elected in that manner; or (3) by the affirmative vote of the holders of the outstanding shares of the class, series, or group.
|
|
| |
Removal of Directors
|
| |
Under the DGCL, subject to the exceptions discussed below, holders of a majority of shares then entitled to vote at an election of directors may remove a director or the entire board of directors with or without cause.
If a Delaware corporation uses cumulative voting and less than the entire board is to be removed, a director may not be removed without cause if the votes cast against his or her removal would be sufficient to elect him
|
| |
Under the TBOC, subject to the exceptions discussed below or as otherwise provided by the governing documents, the holders of a majority of shares then entitled to vote at an election of directors may remove a director or the entire board of directors with or without cause at a meeting of shareholders called for that purpose.
If the certificate of formation permits cumulative voting and less than the entire
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
37
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware
|
| |
Texas
|
|
| | | | |
or her if then cumulatively voted at an election of the entire board of directors or, if the board of directors is classified, at an election of the class of directors of which such director is a part.
Where the certificate of incorporation provides that separate classes or series of stockholders are entitled, as such a class or series, to elect separate directors, in calculating the sufficiency of votes for removal without cause of such a director, only the votes of the holders of such a class or series are considered.
|
| |
board is to be removed, a director may not be removed if the votes cast against the removal would be sufficient to elect him or her if cumulatively voted at an election of the entire board of directors, or if there are classes of directors, at an election of the class of directors of which the director is a part.
Where the certificate of formation provides that separate classes or series of shareholders are entitled, as such a class or series, to elect separate directors, in calculating the sufficiency of votes for removal of such a director, only the votes of the holders of such a class or series are considered.
|
|
| |
Action by Written Consent of Directors
|
| |
Under the DGCL, unless otherwise restricted by the governing documents, the board of directors of a Delaware corporation may act without a meeting if all of the directors consent in writing.
|
| |
Under the TBOC, unless otherwise provided by the governing documents, a written consent stating the action taken and signed by all members of the board of directors is also an act of the board of directors.
|
|
| |
Action by Written Consent of Stockholders
|
| |
Under the DGCL, unless otherwise provided in the certificate of incorporation, stockholders may act without a meeting, without prior notice and without a vote, with the written consent of the stockholders having not less than the minimum number of votes that would be necessary to authorize or take such action at a meeting at which all shares entitled to vote thereon were present and voted. If less than unanimous written consent is given, the corporation must give prompt notice of the action taken to the non-consenting stockholders.
|
| |
Under the TBOC, shareholders may act without a meeting, without prior notice and without a vote, with the written consent of (1) all shareholders or (2) if authorized by the certificate of formation, the shareholders having at least the minimum number of votes that would be necessary to take the action that is the subject of the consent at a meeting, in which each owner or member entitled to vote on the action is present and votes. If less than unanimous written consent is given, the corporation must give prompt notice of the action taken to the non-consenting shareholders.
|
|
| |
Special Meetings of the Stockholders
|
| |
Under the DGCL, the board of directors, or any other one or more persons authorized in the governing documents, may call a special meeting. Stockholders do not have a statutory right to call a special meeting, but the governing documents for the corporation may provide for such right.
|
| |
Under the TBOC, special meetings of the shareholders of a corporation may be called by: (1) the president, the board of directors, or any other person authorized to call special meetings by the governing documents; or (2) the holders of the percentage of shares specified in the certificate of formation, not to exceed 50% of the shares entitled to vote or, if no percentage is specified, at least 10% of all of the shares of the corporation entitled to vote at the proposed special meeting.
Under the TBOC, a corporation cannot prohibit its shareholders from calling a special meeting of shareholders.
|
|
| |
Adjournment of Stockholder Meetings
|
| |
Under the DGCL, unless the bylaws provide otherwise, a meeting of stockholders may be adjourned to another time or place without notice if the time, place, if any, and the means of remote communications, if any, by which stockholders and proxy holders may be
|
| |
Under the TBOC, unless the governing documents provide otherwise, a meeting of shareholders may be adjourned due to lack of quorum until the time and to the place as may be determined by a vote of the holders of the majority of the shares who are present
|
|
| | 38 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware
|
| |
Texas
|
|
| | | | |
deemed to be present in person and vote at such adjourned meeting are: (1) announced at the meeting at which the adjournment is taken; (2) displayed, during the time scheduled for the meeting, on the same electronic network used to enable stockholders and proxy holders to participate in the meeting by means of remote communication; or (3) set forth in the notice of meeting.
Under the DGCL, if a meeting of stockholders is adjourned for more than 30 days, or if after the adjournment a new record date for stockholders entitled to vote is fixed for the adjourned meeting, notice of the adjourned meeting must be given to each stockholder of record entitled to vote at the meeting, or each stockholder of record entitled to vote at the adjourned meeting as of the new record date set for notice of the adjourned meeting, respectively.
At the adjourned meeting the corporation may transact any business that might have been transacted at the original meeting.
|
| |
or represented by proxy at the meeting.
The TBOC does not have a specific provision on the notice for an adjourned meeting or the business that may be transacted at an adjourned meeting.
Generally, under the TBOC, the only business that may be conducted at a special meeting of the shareholders is business that is within the purposes described in the notice.
|
|
| |
Voting by Proxy
|
| |
Under the DGCL, a stockholder may authorize another person or persons to act for such stockholder by proxy. A proxy is valid for three years from its date unless a longer period is provided in the proxy.
|
| |
Under the TBOC, a shareholder may authorize another person or persons to act for such shareholder by proxy. A proxy is valid for 11 months from its date of execution unless otherwise provided in the proxy.
|
|
| |
Quorum
|
| |
Under the DGCL, the governing documents may specify the number of shares and/or the amount of other securities having voting power the holders of which must be present or represented by proxy at any meeting in order to constitute a quorum for, and the votes that shall be necessary for, the transaction of any business, but in no event shall a quorum consist of less than one-third of the shares entitled to vote at the meeting, except that, where a separate vote by a class or series or classes or series is required, a quorum shall consist of no less than one-third of the shares of such class or series or classes or series.
|
| |
Under the TBOC, subject to the following sentence, the holders of the majority of the shares entitled to vote at a meeting of the shareholders that are present or represented by proxy at the meeting are a quorum for the consideration of a matter to be presented at that meeting. The certificate of formation may provide that a quorum is present only if: (1) the holders of a specified portion of the shares that is greater than the majority of the shares entitled to vote are represented at the meeting in person or by proxy; or (2) the holders of a specified portion of the shares that is less than the majority but not less than one-third of the shares entitled to vote are represented at the meeting in person or by proxy.
|
|
| |
Required Vote for Election of Directors
|
| |
Under the DGCL, in the absence of such specification in the governing documents, directors shall be elected by a plurality of the votes of the shares present in person or represented by proxy at the meeting and entitled to vote on the election of directors.
A bylaw amendment adopted by stockholders which specifies the votes that
|
| |
Under the TBOC, subject to the following sentence, directors shall be elected by a plurality of the votes cast by the holders of shares entitled to vote in the election of directors at a meeting of shareholders at which a quorum is present.
The governing documents may provide that a director of a corporation shall be elected
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
39
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware
|
| |
Texas
|
|
| | | | |
shall be necessary for the election of directors shall not be further amended or repealed by the board of directors.
|
| |
only if the director receives: (1) the vote of the holders of a specified portion, but not less than the majority, of the shares entitled to vote in the election of directors; (2) the vote of the holders of a specified portion, but not less than the majority, of the shares entitled to vote in the election of directors and represented in person or by proxy at a meeting of shareholders at which a quorum is present; or (3) the vote of the holders of a specified portion, but not less than the majority, of the votes cast by the holders of shares entitled to vote in the election of directors at a meeting of shareholders at which a quorum is present.
|
|
| |
Required Vote for Matters Other than the Election of Directors (and as provided below)
|
| |
Under the DGCL, in the absence of such specification in the governing documents:
(1) in all matters other than the election of directors, the affirmative vote of the majority of shares present in person or represented by proxy at the meeting and entitled to vote on the subject matter shall be the act of the stockholders; and
(2) where a separate vote by a class or series or classes or series is required, a majority of the outstanding shares of such class or series or classes or series, present in person or represented by proxy, shall constitute a quorum entitled to take action with respect to that vote on that matter and, in all matters other than the election of directors, the affirmative vote of the majority of shares of such class or series or classes or series present in person or represented by proxy at the meeting shall be the act of such class or series or classes or series.
|
| |
Under the TBOC, subject to the following sentence, with respect to a matter other than the election of directors or a matter for which the affirmative vote of the holders of a specified portion of the shares entitled to vote is required by the TBOC, the affirmative vote of the holders of the majority of the shares entitled to vote on, and who voted for, against, or expressly abstained with respect to, the matter at a shareholders’ meeting of a corporation at which a quorum is present is the act of the shareholders.
With respect to a matter other than the election of directors or a matter for which the affirmative vote of the holders of a specified portion of the shares entitled to vote is required by the TBOC, the governing documents may provide that the act of the shareholders is: (1) the affirmative vote of the holders of a specified portion, but not less than the majority, of the shares entitled to vote on that matter; (2) the affirmative vote of the holders of a specified portion, but not less than the majority, of the shares entitled to vote on that matter and represented in person or by proxy at a shareholders’ meeting at which a quorum is present; (3) the affirmative vote of the holders of a specified portion, but not less than the majority, of the shares entitled to vote on, and who voted for or against, the matter at a shareholders’ meeting at which a quorum is present; or (4) the affirmative vote of the holders of a specified portion, but not less than the majority, of the shares entitled to vote on, and who voted for, against, or expressly abstained with respect to, the matter at a shareholders’ meeting at which a quorum is present.
|
|
| | 40 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware
|
| |
Texas
|
|
| |
Stockholder Vote for Fundamental Business Transactions
|
| |
Under the DGCL, a majority of the outstanding stock of the corporation entitled to vote thereon generally must approve fundamental changes, such as: (1) certain mergers or consolidations; (2) a sale, lease, or exchange of all or substantially all of the corporation’s assets (provided that no stockholder authorization or consent is required (A) to mortgage or pledge the corporation’s property and assets unless the certificate of incorporation so requires or (B) where the property or assets in the sale, lease or exchange is collateral that secures a mortgage or is pledged to a secured party and certain additional conditions are met); (3) dissolution; (4) conversion of a domestic corporation to other entities; and (5) transfer, domestication or continuance of a domestic corporation to a foreign jurisdiction. The certificate of incorporation may contain provisions requiring for any corporate action the vote of a larger portion of the stock or of any class or series thereof than is required by the DGCL.
|
| |
Under the TBOC, unless otherwise provided for in the TBOC or the certificate of formation, shareholders holding at least two-thirds of the outstanding shares of a class entitled to vote on the matter must typically approve fundamental business transactions such as: (1) a merger; (2) an interest exchange; (3) a conversion; or (4) a sale of all or substantially all of the corporation’s assets that is not made in the usual and regular course of the corporation’s business. The certificate of formation can provide for a different threshold of approval, but not less than a majority of the shares entitled to vote.
The proposed Texas Certificate of Formation contains language setting the default voting thresholds at a majority of the voting power of all outstanding shares entitled to vote thereon, voting together as a single class, unless a different standard is specified elsewhere in the Texas Certificate of Formation, in order to mirror the DGCL and the absence of special provisions in the Delaware Charter.
|
|
| |
Stockholder Vote for Sales, Leases, Exchanges or Other Dispositions
|
| |
Under the DGCL, a Delaware corporation may sell, lease or exchange all or substantially all of its property and assets when and as authorized by a majority of the outstanding stock of the corporation entitled to vote thereon.
No such approval is required, however, if the assets being sold, leased or exchanged are not all or substantially all of the corporation’s assets. There is no necessary quantifying percentage for determining whether assets constitute substantially all of a Delaware corporation’s assets. Only if the sale is of assets quantitatively and qualitatively vital to the business of the corporation is stockholder authorization mandated.
|
| |
Under the TBOC, generally the sale, lease, exchange or other disposition of all, or substantially all, of the property and assets of a Texas corporation requires the approval of the holders of at least two-thirds of the outstanding shares of the corporation entitled to vote, unless the corporation’s certificate of formation sets a lower threshold (which may not be less than a majority of the voting shares).
No such approval is required, however, if the transaction is made in the usual and regular course of a Texas corporation’s business. Under Texas law, even the transfer of substantially all of a corporation’s assets in such a manner that the corporation continues directly or indirectly to engage in one or more businesses is deemed not to be a transaction requiring shareholder approval under the TBOC.
|
|
| |
Affiliated Business Combinations Statute
|
| |
Under the DGCL, unless a Delaware corporation’s certificate of incorporation or bylaws (original, or approved by stockholders) provide otherwise, Delaware corporations that have a class of voting stock listed on a national securities exchange or held of record by 2,000 or more persons are prohibited from entering into any “business combination” with any “interested stockholder” for a period of three years
|
| |
Under the TBOC, an “issuing public corporation” is generally prohibited from, directly or indirectly, entering into (i) mergers, share exchanges or conversions with an affiliated shareholder or other entity that after such transaction would be an affiliate or associate of an affiliated shareholder, and certain other entities, (ii) sales, leases, exchanges, mortgages, pledges, transfers or other dispositions of
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
41
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware
|
| |
Texas
|
|
| | | | |
following the time that such stockholder became an interested stockholder. The DGCL generally defines a “business combination” as (i) certain mergers and consolidations; (ii) sales, leases, exchanges, mortgages, pledges, transfers or other dispositions of assets having an aggregate market value of 10% or more of either the consolidated assets or the outstanding stock of a company; (iii) certain transactions that would result in the issuance or transfer of stock of the corporation to an interested stockholder; (iv) certain transactions that have the effect, directly or indirectly, of increasing the proportionate share of stock of the corporation which is owned by the interested stockholder, subject to exceptions; and (v) any receipt by the interested stockholder of the benefit, directly or indirectly, of any loans, advances, guarantees, pledges or other financial benefits provided by or through the corporation, subject to certain exceptions.
“Interested stockholder” is generally defined as a person (including the affiliates and associates of such person) that is directly or indirectly a beneficial owner of 15% or more of the outstanding voting stock of a Delaware corporation or is an affiliate or associate of the corporation and was the owner of 15% or more of the outstanding voting stock of the corporation at any time within the 3-year period before the date on which it is sought to be determined whether such person is an interested stockholder, and the affiliates and associates of such person, in each case subject to certain exceptions.
The DGCL provides an exception to this prohibition if: (i) the corporation’s board of directors approved either the business combination or the transaction in which the stockholder became an interested stockholder prior to the date the stockholder became an interested stockholder; (ii) the interested stockholder acquired at least 85% of the voting stock of that company (excluding shares owned by persons who are directors and also officers, and employee stock plans in which participants do not have the right to determine whether shares will be tendered in a tender or exchange offer) in the transaction in which it became an interested stockholder; or (iii) the business combination is approved by the board of directors and the affirmative vote of at least
|
| |
assets having an aggregate market value of 10% or more of (a) the aggregate market value of the consolidated assets of such Texas public corporation, (b) the aggregate market value of the outstanding voting stock of such Texas public corporation or (c) the earning power or net income of such Texas public corporation on a consolidated basis, (iii) certain transactions that would result in the issuance or transfer of shares of such Texas public corporation to an affiliated shareholder or an affiliate or associate, (iv) liquidation or dissolution plans or proposals with an affiliated shareholder or an associate or an affiliate of an associate of an affiliated shareholder, (v) certain transactions, including reclassifications of securities or other share distributions or recapitalizations, that have the effect, directly or indirectly, of increasing the proportionate ownership percentage of the outstanding shares of a class or series of voting shares or securities convertible into voting shares of the issuing public corporation that is beneficially owned by the affiliated shareholder or an affiliate or associate of the affiliated shareholder, except as a result of immaterial changes due to fractional share adjustments or (vi) loans, advances, guarantees, pledges, or other financial assistance or a tax credit or other tax advantages the recipient of which is an affiliated shareholder or an affiliate or associate of an affiliated shareholder, in each case, with an “affiliated shareholder” or any affiliate or associate of the “affiliated shareholder” for a period of three years after the date the shareholder obtained “affiliated shareholder” status.
“Affiliated shareholder” is generally broadly defined as a person who beneficially owns (or has owned within the preceding three-year period) 20% or more of the outstanding voting stock of a Texas public corporation.
“Issuing public corporation” means a Texas corporation that has: (i) 100 or more shareholders of record as shown by the share transfer records of the corporation; (ii) a class or series of the corporation’s voting shares registered under the Exchange Act; or (iii) a class or series of the corporation’s voting shares qualified for trading on a national securities exchange.
The TBOC provides an exception to this prohibition if: (i) the board of directors of the
|
|
| | 42 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware
|
| |
Texas
|
|
| | | | |
two-thirds of the votes entitled to be cast by disinterested stockholders at an annual or special meeting (and not by written consent).
A corporation may expressly elect in its certificate of incorporation to not be governed by this statute.
|
| |
corporation approves the transaction or the acquisition of shares by the affiliated shareholder prior to the affiliated shareholder becoming an affiliated shareholder; or (ii) the holders of at least two-thirds of the outstanding voting shares not beneficially owned by the affiliated shareholder or an affiliate or associate of the affiliated shareholder approve the transaction at a meeting held no earlier than six months after the shareholder acquires such ownership. The TBOC expressly provides that the foregoing shareholder approval may not be by written consent.
A corporation may expressly elect in its certificate of formation to not be governed by this statute.
|
|
| |
Interested Party Transaction Approvals
|
| |
The DGCL provides that certain interested party transactions may not be the subject of equitable relief, or give rise to an award of damages against a director or officer, in a suit asserting a claim for breach of fiduciary duty by reason of the fact that the transaction is between the corporation and one or more of its directors or officers, or between the corporation and an entity in which one or more of its directors or officers has a financial interest, if any of the following conditions is satisfied: (1) the material facts as to the director’s or officer’s relationship or interest and as to the transaction are disclosed or known to all members of the board of directors or a committee thereof acting on the matter, and the transaction is authorized in good faith and without gross negligence by the affirmative votes of a majority of the disinterested directors then serving on the board or such committee, even though the disinterested directors be less than a quorum (provided that, if a majority of the directors are not disinterested, the transaction must be approved by a committee consisting of two or more disinterested directors); (2) the transaction is approved or ratified by an informed, uncoerced, affirmative vote of a majority of the votes cast by the disinterested stockholders entitled to vote thereon; or (3) the transaction is fair as to the corporation and its stockholders.
The DGCL also provides similar safe harbors for transactions between the corporation and a controlling stockholder or control group, or from which a controller receives a benefit not shared with stockholders
|
| |
The TBOC provides that an otherwise valid and enforceable contract or transaction between a corporation and (1) one or more directors or officers, or one or more affiliates or associates of one or more directors or officers, of the corporation; or (2) an entity or other organization in which one or more directors or officers, or one or more affiliates or associates of one or more directors or officers, of the corporation: (A) is a managerial official; or (B) has a financial interest is valid and enforceable, and is not void or voidable, notwithstanding such relationship or interest if any one of the following conditions is satisfied: (1) the material facts as to the applicable relationship or interest and as to the contract or transaction are disclosed to or known by: (A) the corporation’s board of directors or a committee of the board of directors, and the board of directors or committee in good faith authorizes the contract or transaction by the approval of the majority of the disinterested directors or committee members, regardless of whether the disinterested directors or committee members constitute a quorum; or (B) the shareholders entitled to vote on the authorization of the contract or transaction, and the contract or transaction is specifically approved in good faith by a vote of the shareholders; or (2) the contract or transaction is fair to the corporation when the contract or transaction is authorized, approved, or ratified by the board of directors, a committee of the board of directors, or the shareholders.
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
43
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware
|
| |
Texas
|
|
| | | | |
generally. Such a transaction (other than a going-private transaction) qualifies if it is (1) approved (or recommended for board approval) in good faith and without gross negligence by a committee of two or more disinterested directors expressly delegated authority to negotiate and reject the transaction, with the material facts disclosed or known to the committee; (2) conditioned on, and approved or ratified by, an informed, uncoerced, affirmative vote of a majority of the votes cast by the disinterested stockholders; or (3) fair as to the corporation and its stockholders. A going-private transaction involving a controller must satisfy both the committee and disinterested stockholder approval conditions, or be fair as to the corporation and its stockholders.
The amendments to the DGCL in 2025 codified presumptions regarding director disinterestedness.
|
| |
The TBOC differs from the DGCL’s interested party transaction statute in that it expressly provides that if at least one of the above conditions is satisfied, neither the corporation nor any of the corporation’s shareholders will have a cause of action against any of the corporation’s directors or officers for breach of duty with respect to the making, authorization, or performance of the contract or transaction because the person had an applicable relationship or interest.
The TBOC has a procedure for a corporation to obtain a prospective court ruling that special committee members are sufficiently independent and disinterested to consider a particular transaction.
|
|
| |
Charter Amendments
|
| |
Under the DGCL, subject to limited exceptions, an amendment to the certificate of incorporation must be approved by (i) the board of directors and (ii) the holders of a majority of the corporation’s outstanding stock entitled to vote thereon, unless the certificate of incorporation provides for a greater number.
Whether or not entitled to vote by the certificate of incorporation, the holders of the outstanding shares of a class are entitled to vote as a class on a proposed amendment, if the amendment would (1) increase or decrease the aggregate number of authorized shares of such class; (2) increase or decrease the par value of the shares of such class; or (3) alter or change the powers, preferences, or special rights of the shares of such class so as to affect them adversely. However, the DGCL permits corporations to provide in their certificate of incorporation that no separate class vote(s) shall be required to increase or decrease the aggregate number of authorized shares of such class, in which case a share increase/decrease amendment would instead be approved by the holders of all outstanding shares, voting together as a single class.
In addition, unless otherwise expressly required by the certificate of incorporation: (1) no meeting or vote of stockholders is required to adopt an amendment that reclassifies by subdividing the issued shares of a class of stock into a greater number of
|
| |
Under the TBOC, subject to limited exceptions, an amendment to the certificate of formation requires the approval of (i) the board of directors and (ii) the holders of at least two-thirds of the outstanding shares of a Texas corporation entitled to vote thereon, unless a different threshold, not less than a majority, is specified in the certificate of formation.
If a class or series of shares is entitled to vote as a class or series on an amendment to the certificate of formation, the affirmative vote of the holders of at least two-thirds (unless a different threshold, not less than a majority, is specified in the certificate of formation) of the outstanding shares in each such class or series of shares entitled to vote on the amendment as a class or series is also required to approve an amendment to the certificate of formation, although the TBOC allows corporations to provide in their certificate of formation that all shares vote as a single class for such an amendment. In addition, the TBOC allows corporations to provide in their certificate of formation that no separate class vote(s) shall be required to increase or decrease the aggregate number of authorized shares of a class, in which case a share increase/decrease amendment would instead be approved by the holders of a majority of all outstanding shares entitled to vote thereon, voting together as a single class.
|
|
| | 44 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware
|
| |
Texas
|
|
| | | | |
issued shares of the same class of stock (and, in connection therewith, such amendment may increase the number of authorized shares of such class of stock up to an amount proportionate to the subdivision), provided the corporation has only one class of stock outstanding and such class is not divided into series; and (2) an amendment to increase or decrease the authorized number of shares of a class of capital stock or an amendment to reclassify by combining the issued shares of a class of capital stock into a lesser number of issued shares of the same class of stock may be made and effected, without obtaining the vote or votes of stockholders otherwise required if: (A) the shares of such class are listed on a national securities exchange immediately before such amendment becomes effective and meet the listing requirements of such national securities exchange relating to the minimum number of holders immediately after such amendment becomes effective, (B) at a properly called meeting, a vote of the stockholders entitled to vote thereon, voting as a single class, is taken for and against the proposed amendment, and the votes cast for the amendment exceed the votes cast against the amendment, and (C) if the amendment increases or decreases the authorized number of shares of a class of capital stock for which no provision in the certificate of incorporation has been made in accordance with the DGCL, the votes cast for the amendment by the holders of such class exceed the votes cast against the amendment by the holders of such class.
|
| | | |
| |
Bylaw Amendments
|
| |
Under the DGCL, stockholders entitled to vote have the right to amend, repeal or adopt the bylaws. If the corporation’s certificate of incorporation so provides, the Delaware corporation’s board of directors may also have the right to amend, repeal or adopt the bylaws.
|
| |
Generally, under the TBOC, the board of directors may amend, repeal or adopt a Texas corporation’s bylaws. However, (i) the shareholders may amend, repeal or adopt bylaws even if the directors also have that power and (ii) the certificate of formation may wholly or partly reserve the power to amend, repeal or adopt bylaws exclusively to the shareholders. Similarly, the shareholders, in amending, repealing or adopting a particular bylaw, may expressly provide that the board of directors may not amend, readopt or repeal that particular bylaw.
|
|
| |
Dividends and Distributions
|
| |
Under the DGCL, a Delaware corporation may, subject to any restrictions contained in its certificate of incorporation, pay dividends out of surplus or, if there is no surplus, out of net profits for the current and/or the preceding fiscal year, unless the capital of
|
| |
Under the TBOC, a distribution is defined as a transfer of cash or other property (except a corporation’s own shares or rights to acquire its shares or a split-up or division of the issued shares of a class of a corporation into a larger number of shares within the same
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
45
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware
|
| |
Texas
|
|
| | | | |
the corporation is less than the capital represented by issued and outstanding stock having preferences on asset distributions.
|
| |
class that does not increase the stated capital of the corporation), or an issuance of debt, by a corporation to its shareholders in the form of: (i) a dividend on any class or series of a Texas corporation’s outstanding shares; (ii) a purchase or redemption, directly or indirectly, of its shares; or (iii) a payment in liquidation of all or a portion of its assets.
Under the TBOC, a corporation may not make a distribution if such distribution violates its certificate of formation, if the corporation’s surplus is less than the amount of the corporation’s stated capital (as determined by the TBOC) or, unless the corporation is in receivership or the distribution is made in connection with the winding up and termination of the corporation, if it either renders the corporation unable to pay its debts as they become due in the course of its business or affairs, or exceeds, depending on the type of distribution, either the net assets or the surplus of the corporation, or, subject to certain exceptions, if the distribution will be made to shareholders of another class or series.
|
|
| |
Stock Redemption and Repurchase
|
| |
Under the DGCL, a Delaware corporation may purchase or redeem shares of any class except when its capital is impaired or would be impaired by such purchase or redemption. A Delaware corporation may, however, purchase or redeem out of capital, shares that are entitled upon any distribution of its assets to a preference over another class or series of its stock, or, if no shares entitled to such a preference are outstanding, any of its own shares, if such shares are to be retired and the capital reduced. However, a corporation may not purchase redeemable shares for a price greater than that at which they would be redeemed.
|
| |
As noted above, under the TBOC, the purchase or redemption by a Texas corporation of its shares constitutes a distribution. Accordingly, the discussion above relating to distributions is applicable to stock redemptions and repurchases.
|
|
| | | | |
In addition, a Delaware corporation may not effect a repurchase or redemption if doing so would render the corporation insolvent in the sense that it could not pay its debts as they come due or continue as a going concern.
|
| | | |
| |
Increasing or Decreasing Authorized Capital Stock, Including Number of Unissued Shares of a Series of Preferred Stock
|
| |
The DGCL has no provision for increasing or decreasing authorized capital stock by unilateral board action without stockholder approval, although if the increase in the number of authorized shares is in connection with a forward stock split (up to an amount proportionate to the subdivision), no
|
| |
Under the TBOC, once stock has been issued, the board cannot unilaterally increase or decrease the amount of authorized capital stock without shareholder approval unless (i) the increase in the number of authorized shares is in connection with a forward stock split, in which case the number of authorized
|
|
| | 46 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware
|
| |
Texas
|
|
| | | | |
stockholder approval is required provided that the corporation only has one class of stock outstanding and such class is not divided into series (unless stockholder approval is expressly required by the certificate of incorporation).
|
| |
shares can be increased to an amount proportionate to the same multiple by which the number of issued shares is subdivided as a result of the forward stock split without shareholder approval, or (ii) the decrease is in connection with a reverse stock split primarily for the purpose of maintaining the listing eligibility of the class of shares on any applicable national securities exchange, in which case the number of authorized shares can be decreased to an amount proportionate to the same multiple by which the number of issued shares is combined as a result of the reverse stock split without shareholder approval, provided in both cases that the corporation only has one class of stock outstanding and such class is not divided into series (unless shareholder approval is expressly required by the certificate of formation).
With respect to a series of shares of preferred stock established by the board of directors if authorized by the corporation’s certificate of formation (and subject thereto), unless the certificate of formation expressly restricts the board of directors from increasing or decreasing the number of unissued shares of a series to be established by the board of directors, the board of directors may increase or decrease the number of shares in each series to be established, except that the board of directors may not decrease the number of shares in a particular series to a number that is less than the number of shares in that series that are issued at the time of the decrease.
|
|
| |
Ratification
|
| |
Under the DGCL, there is a codified ratification process for defective corporate actions.
The board of directors must adopt a resolution ratifying the defective corporate action and, if stockholder approval would have been required for the defective corporate action to have been taken, the defective corporate action must be submitted to stockholders for approval.
In addition to the foregoing, under the DGCL, the corporation, any successor entity to the corporation, any director, or certain stockholders can apply to the Delaware Court for an order determining the validity and effectiveness of defective corporate acts, including without limitation to confirm whether a prior ratification was effective,
|
| |
Under the TBOC, there is a codified ratification process for defective corporate acts.
The board of directors must adopt a resolution and then submit the ratified defective corporate act for shareholder approval (shareholder approval is subject to certain exceptions). In the absence of actual fraud in the transaction, the judgment of the board of directors that shares of the Texas corporation are valid shares or putative shares is conclusive, unless otherwise determined by a Texas district court or a division of the Texas Business Court.
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
47
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware
|
| |
Texas
|
|
| | | | |
whether a defective corporate act can be validated even if not previously ratified. In connection with such applications, the Delaware Court has broad discretion to fashion appropriate relief, including without limitation declaring ratifications effective, validating and declaring effective any defective corporate act, and making such other orders regarding such matters as it deems proper under the circumstances.
|
| | | |
| |
Inspection of Books and Records
|
| |
Under the DGCL, any stockholder may inspect, and make copies and extracts from, a corporation’s books and records during normal business hours for any proper purpose (defined to mean a purpose reasonably related to the stockholder’s interest as a stockholder) upon written demand under oath stating the purpose of the inspection. The DGCL defines “books and records” to mean a specific set of materials that includes, without limitation, the governing documents, certain agreements with stockholders, minutes of certain board and stockholder meetings, certain communications with stockholders generally, certain actions by written consent of the board and stockholders, annual financial statements for the past three years, and director independence questionnaires. The stockholder may only inspect books and records if the stockholder’s demand is made in good faith, is for a proper purpose, and describes with reasonable particularity the stockholder’s purpose and the books and records sought.
The DGCL provides that the corporation may impose reasonable restrictions on the confidentiality, use, and distribution of books and records and may require the stockholder to stipulate that any books and records received are deemed incorporated by reference in any follow-on complaint in a plenary action relating to the subject matter of the demand.
If a Delaware corporation refuses to permit inspection or does not reply to the demand within five business days after the demand has been made, the stockholder may apply to the Delaware Court for an order to compel such inspection.
The Delaware Court may not order inspection of any documents beyond those defined as “books and records” unless either of two exceptions applies. First, if the corporation does not have certain materials
|
| |
Under the TBOC, a shareholder may inspect a corporation’s books and records during normal business hours upon written demand stating a proper purpose if such shareholder holds at least 5% of the outstanding shares of stock of the corporation or has been a holder of shares for at least six months prior to such demand.
If a corporation refuses to allow a person to examine and make copies of account records, minutes, and share transfer records under the TBOC, the corporation is liable to the shareholder for any cost or expense, including attorney’s fees, incurred in enforcing the shareholder’s rights under the TBOC to examine such materials.
A corporation may defend against an inspection action by establishing that the shareholder: (1) has, within the two years preceding the date the action is brought, sold or offered for sale a list of shareholders or of holders of voting trust certificates for shares of the corporation or any other corporation; (2) has aided or abetted a person in procuring a list of shareholders or of holders of voting trust certificates for the purposes of selling or offering such list for sale; (3) has improperly used information obtained through prior examination of the books, account records, minutes, or share transfer records of the corporation or any other corporation; or (4) was not acting in good faith or for a proper purpose in making the request.
The Texas Law Amendments (i) clarify that emails, text messages, and social media information are not considered corporate records unless effectuating a corporate action and (ii) prohibit shareholders from inspecting corporate records related to active or pending derivative suits or litigation involving the corporation as an adversarial party.
|
|
| | 48 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware
|
| |
Texas
|
|
| | | | |
defined as “books and records,” the Delaware Court may order the production of their functional equivalent only if and to the extent the stockholder has met other requirements of the books and records statute and only to the extent necessary and essential to fulfill the stockholder’s proper purpose.
Second, the Delaware Court may order production of additional materials only if (i) the stockholder has met other requirements of the books and records statute, (ii) the stockholder made a showing of compelling need for such materials, and (iii) the stockholder has demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that such materials are necessary and essential to further their proper purpose.
Generally, the stockholder bears the burden of demonstrating a proper purpose. However, when a stockholder seeks to inspect a corporation’s list of stockholders or stock ledger, the burden of proof is on the corporation to establish that the inspection is for an improper purpose.
|
| | | |
| |
Insurance
|
| |
Under the DGCL, a Delaware corporation is allowed to purchase and maintain insurance on behalf of any person who is or was a director, officer, employee or agent of the corporation, or is or was serving at the request of the corporation as a director, officer, employee or agent of another corporation, partnership, joint venture, trust, or other enterprise against any liability asserted against such person and incurred by such person in any such capacity, or arising out of such person’s status as such, whether or not the corporation would have the power to indemnify such person against such liability under the DGCL.
|
| |
Under the TBOC, a Texas corporation is allowed to purchase or procure or establish and maintain insurance or another arrangement to indemnify or hold harmless an existing or former governing person, delegate, officer, employee, or agent against any liability: (1) asserted against and incurred by the person in that capacity or (2) arising out of the person’s status in that capacity. The insurance or other arrangement established may insure or indemnify against the liability described above without regard to whether the corporation otherwise would have had the power to indemnify the person against that liability under the TBOC.
Under the TBOC, for the benefit of persons to be indemnified by the enterprise, an enterprise may, in addition to purchasing or procuring or establishing and maintaining insurance or another arrangement: (1) create a trust fund; (2) establish any form of self-insurance, including a contract to indemnify; (3) secure the enterprise’s indemnity obligation by grant of a security interest or other lien on the assets of the enterprise; or (4) establish a letter of credit, guaranty, or surety arrangement.
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
49
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware
|
| |
Texas
|
|
| |
Limitation of Liability of Stockholders
|
| |
Under the DGCL, unless the certificate of incorporation otherwise provides, the stockholders of a corporation shall not be personally liable for the payment of the corporation’s debts except as they may be liable by reason of their own conduct or acts.
|
| |
Under the TBOC, subject to certain exceptions, a shareholder is not personally liable for the obligations of the corporation, and a shareholder’s liability with respect to its shares is limited to the obligation to pay the full consideration for which the shares were or are to be issued.
|
|
| |
Considerations by Directors Permitted by Statute
|
| |
Except for corporations that have opted to become public benefit corporations, directors of Delaware corporations do not have any express statutory authority to consider other constituencies. Delaware case law provides that fiduciary duties in most circumstances require directors to seek to maximize the value of the corporation for the long-term benefit of the stockholders and that directors can consider the interests of other constituencies so long as doing so serves the ultimate goal of value maximization.
|
| |
In discharging the duties of a director or officer under the TBOC or otherwise, a director or officer of a corporation is entitled to consider any social purpose specified in the corporation’s certificate of formation. In addition, the TBOC provides that nothing in the applicable section thereof prohibits or limits a director or officer of a corporation that does not have a social purpose specified as a purpose in the corporation’s certificate of formation from considering, approving, or taking an action that promotes or has the effect of promoting a social, charitable, or environmental purpose.
|
|
| |
Business Opportunities
|
| |
Under Delaware law, the corporate opportunity doctrine holds that a corporate officer or director may not generally and unilaterally take a business opportunity for his or her own. Factors to be considered include: (i) whether the corporation is financially able to exploit the opportunity; (ii) if the opportunity is within the corporation’s line of business; (iii) whether the corporation has an interest or expectancy in the opportunity; and (iv) whether by taking the opportunity for his or her own, the corporate fiduciary will thereby be placed in a position inimical to his duties to the corporation.
The DGCL permits a Delaware corporation to renounce, in its certificate of incorporation or by action of the board of directors, any interest or expectancy of the corporation in, or being offered an opportunity to participate in, specified business opportunities or specified classes or categories of business opportunities that are presented to the corporation or one or more of its officers, directors or stockholders.
|
| |
Texas law generally follows the Delaware corporate opportunity doctrine.
The TBOC permits a Texas corporation to renounce, in its certificate of formation or by action of its board of directors, an interest or expectancy of the entity in, or an interest or expectancy of the entity in being offered an opportunity to participate in, specified business opportunities or a specified class or category of business opportunities presented to the entity or one or more of its managerial officials or owners.
|
|
| |
Indemnification of Directors and Officers
|
| |
Under the DGCL, a corporation is permitted to indemnify any person who is a director, officer, employee, or agent of the corporation, or is or was serving at the request of the corporation as a director, officer, employee or agent of another corporation, partnership, joint venture, trust or other enterprise, against expenses (including attorneys’ fees), judgments, fines
|
| |
Under the TBOC, a corporation is permitted to indemnify a director, former director, or delegate who was, is, or is threatened to be made a respondent in a proceeding, against (i) judgments and (ii) expenses (other than a judgment) reasonably and actually incurred by the person in connection with a proceeding if the person: (a) acted in good faith; (b) reasonably believed, in the case of
|
|
| | 50 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware
|
| |
Texas
|
|
| | | | |
and amounts paid in settlement actually and reasonably incurred by the person in connection with any threatened, pending or completed action, suit or proceeding, other than an action by or in the right of the corporation, to which such director, officer, employee or agent may be a party or threatened to be made a party, provided such person acted in good faith and in a manner the person reasonably believed was in or not opposed to the best interests of the corporation, and in the case of a criminal proceeding, that he or she had no reasonable cause to believe his or her conduct was unlawful.
In connection with any threatened, pending or completed action by or in the right of the corporation involving a person who is or was a director, officer, employee or agent, or is or was serving at the request of the corporation as a director, officer, employee or agent of another corporation, partnership, joint venture, trust or other enterprise, the corporation has the power to indemnify such a person who is a party or is threatened to be made a party for expenses (including attorneys’ fees) actually and reasonably incurred in connection with the defense or settlement of such action or suit: (i) if such person acted in good faith and in a manner the person reasonably believed to be in or not opposed to the best interests of the corporation; and (ii) if such person is found liable to the corporation, only to the extent the Delaware Court or the court in which such action or suit was brought determined that in view of all the circumstances of the case, such person is fairly and reasonably entitled to indemnity for such expenses which the Delaware Court or such other court shall deem proper. This is not exclusive of any other indemnification rights, which may be granted by a Delaware corporation to its directors, officers, employees or agents.
|
| |
conduct in the person’s official capacity, that the person’s conduct was in the corporation’s best interests, and in any other case, that the person’s conduct was not opposed to the corporation’s best interests; and (c) in the case of a criminal proceeding, did not have a reasonable cause to believe the person’s conduct was unlawful. In addition, the TBOC permits indemnification of other persons as described in the section entitled “Persons Covered” below.
If, however, the person is found liable to the corporation, or is found liable on the basis he or she received an improper personal benefit, then indemnification under the TBOC is limited to the reimbursement of reasonable expenses actually incurred in connection with the proceeding, and which excludes a judgment, a penalty, a fine, and an excise or similar tax, including an excise tax assessed against the person with respect to an employee benefit plan. Furthermore, no indemnification will be available if the person is found liable for: (i) willful or intentional misconduct in the performance of the person’s duty to the corporation; (ii) breach of the person’s duty of loyalty owed to the corporation; or (iii) an act or omission not committed in good faith that constitutes a breach of a duty owed by the person to the corporation.
|
|
| |
Advancement of Expenses
|
| |
Expenses (including attorneys’ fees) incurred by an officer or director of the corporation in defending any civil, criminal, administrative or investigative action, suit or proceeding may be paid by the corporation in advance of the final disposition of such action, suit or proceeding upon receipt of an undertaking by or on behalf of such director or officer to repay such amount if it shall ultimately be determined that such person is not entitled to be indemnified by the corporation as authorized in Section 145 of the DGCL.
|
| |
A corporation may pay or reimburse reasonable expenses incurred by a present director or delegate who was, is, or is threatened to be made a respondent in a proceeding in advance of the final disposition of the proceeding without making the determinations required for permissive indemnification after the corporation receives: (1) a written affirmation by the person of the person’s good faith belief that the person has met the standard of conduct necessary for indemnification;
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
51
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware
|
| |
Texas
|
|
| | | | | | | |
and (2) a written undertaking by or on behalf of the person to repay the amount paid or reimbursed if the final determination is that the person has not met that standard or that indemnification is prohibited by the TBOC.
In addition, a corporation may advance expenses to a person who is not a director, including an officer, employee or agent, as provided by: (1) the corporation’s governing documents; (2) general or specific action of the corporation’s board; (3) resolution of the shareholders; (4) contract; or (5) common law, and such person may seek advancement of expenses from the corporation to the same extent as a director. A corporation may also pay or reimburse, in advance of the final disposition of a proceeding and on terms the corporation considers appropriate, reasonable expenses incurred by a present or former officer, employee, or agent who is not a present director or delegate, without receiving the written affirmation and undertaking described above.
|
|
| |
Procedure for Indemnification
|
| |
Under the DGCL, a determination that indemnification of a director or officer is appropriate generally must be made: (i) by a majority vote of directors who are not party to the proceeding, even though less than a quorum; (ii) by a committee of such directors designated by majority vote of such directors, even though less than a quorum; (iii) if there are no such directors or if such directors so direct, by independent legal counsel in a written opinion; or (iv) by stockholder vote.
|
| |
Under the TBOC, a determination that indemnification is appropriate generally must be made: (i) by a majority vote of the directors who, at the time of the vote, are disinterested and independent, regardless of whether such directors constitute a quorum; (ii) by a majority vote of a special committee of the board of directors if the committee is designated by a majority vote of the directors who at the time of the vote are disinterested and independent, regardless of whether such directors constitute a quorum, and is composed solely of one or more directors who are disinterested and independent; (iii) by special legal counsel selected by majority vote under (i) or (ii) above; (iv) by the shareholders in a vote that excludes those shares held by directors who, at the time of the vote, are not disinterested and independent; or (v) by a unanimous vote of the shareholders of the corporation.
|
|
| |
Mandatory Indemnification
|
| |
The DGCL requires indemnification for expenses (including attorneys’ fees) actually and reasonably incurred with respect to any claim, issue or matter on which the director or “officer” (as defined for the purposes of Section 145(c) of the DGCL) is successful on the merits or otherwise, in the defense of the proceeding.
|
| |
The TBOC requires indemnification for reasonable expenses actually incurred only if the director is wholly successful on the merits or otherwise, in the defense of the proceeding.
|
|
| | 52 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware
|
| |
Texas
|
|
| |
Indemnification: Persons Covered
|
| |
Under the DGCL, directors and officers, but not employees and agents, are entitled to mandatory indemnification for expenses incurred when successful on the merits or otherwise in defense of litigation. Other than in that instance, the DGCL provides the same indemnification rights to officers, employees and agents that it provides for directors.
|
| |
The TBOC generally provides that a corporation may indemnify and advance expenses to a person who is not a director, including an officer, employee or agent, as provided by: (1) the corporation’ s governing documents; (2) general or specific action of the corporation’s board of directors; (3) resolution of the shareholders; (4) contract; or (5) common law. A corporation must indemnify an officer to the same extent that indemnification is required under the TBOC for a director. A determination of indemnification for a person who is not a director of a corporation, including an officer, employee, or agent, is not required to be made in accordance with the procedures set out in the relevant sections of the TBOC.
|
|
| |
Stockholder Rights Plans
|
| |
Delaware has established case law permitting the adoption of stockholder rights plans. However, the adoption of stockholder rights plans is viewed as a defensive action and is subject to enhanced scrutiny by the Delaware courts, with the burden initially on the board of directors to demonstrate that the adoption of the rights plan is reasonable in response to a reasonably identified threat posed.
|
| |
Texas case law regarding shareholder rights plans is limited, particularly following the adoption of the Texas Law Amendments, including the codified business judgment rule.
In addition, the TBOC expressly permits directors to look to the “long-term” benefit to shareholders in taking action.
|
|
| |
Selection of Forum
|
| |
Under the DGCL, a corporation’s governing documents may require, consistent with applicable jurisdictional requirements, that any or all internal corporate claims shall be brought solely and exclusively in any or all of the courts in Delaware, and no provision of a Delaware corporation’s certificate of incorporation or bylaws may prohibit bringing such claims in the courts of Delaware.
“Internal corporate claims” means claims, including claims in the right of the corporation, (i) that are based upon a violation of a duty by a current or former director or officer or stockholder in such capacity; or (ii) as to which Delaware law confers jurisdiction upon the Delaware Court.
With respect to claims that are not internal corporate claims, the certificate of incorporation or bylaws may require stockholders, when acting in their capacity as stockholders or in the right of the corporation, to bring any or all such claims only in one or more prescribed forums or venues, if such claims relate to the business of the corporation, the conduct of its affairs,
|
| |
Under the TBOC, the governing documents may require, consistent with applicable state and federal jurisdictional requirements, that any internal entity claims shall be brought only in a court in Texas. Pursuant to the Texas Law Amendments, Texas corporations may specify in their governing documents a particular court in Texas as its sole venue, subject to jurisdictional limits.
“Internal entity claim” means a claim of any nature, including a derivative claim in the right of an entity, that is based on, arises from, or relates to the internal affairs of the entity. Internal affairs include the rights, powers, and duties of the entity’s governing persons, officers, owners, and members, and matters relating to the entity’s membership or ownership interests.
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
53
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware
|
| |
Texas
|
|
| | | | |
or the rights or powers of the corporation or its stockholders, directors or officers; provided that such requirement is consistent with applicable jurisdictional requirements and allows a stockholder to bring such claims in at least one court in Delaware that has jurisdiction over such claims.
|
| | | |
| |
Pre-Suit Demand in Derivative Suits
|
| |
Under Delaware court rules and case law, in order for a stockholder to commence a derivative action on behalf of the corporation, the stockholder must: (1) make a demand on the company’s board of directors; or (2) show that demand would be futile. Demand will be deemed futile if at least half the members of the board: (1) received a material personal benefit from the alleged misconduct that is the subject of the litigation demand; (2) faces a substantial likelihood of liability on any of the claims that would be the subject of the litigation demand; or (3) lacks independence from someone who received a material personal benefit from the alleged misconduct that would be the subject of the litigation demand or who would face a substantial likelihood of liability on any of the claims that are the subject of the litigation demand.
|
| |
Texas is a universal demand jurisdiction. Under the TBOC, the focus is on harm to the corporation rather than the Delaware standard of futility. A shareholder may not institute a derivative proceeding until the 91st day after the date a written demand is filed with the corporation stating with particularity the act, omission, or other matter that is the subject of the claim or challenge and requesting that the corporation take suitable action.
The foregoing waiting period is not required or, if applicable, shall terminate if: (1) the shareholder has been notified that the demand has been rejected by the corporation; (2) the corporation is suffering irreparable injury; or (3) irreparable injury to the corporation would result by waiting for the expiration of the 90-day period.
|
|
| |
Stock Ownership Requirement for Derivative Suits
|
| |
Under the DGCL, subject to limited exceptions, a stockholder may not institute or maintain a derivative suit unless the plaintiff was a stockholder of the corporation at the time of the transaction of which such stockholder complains or that such stockholder’s stock thereafter devolved upon such stockholder by operation of law and the plaintiff maintains such ownership throughout the litigation. A limited number of Delaware corporations may have included an ownership threshold for derivative claims in their bylaws; however, Delaware courts have not opined on the enforceability of these provisions.
|
| |
Under the TBOC, a shareholder may not institute or maintain a derivative proceeding unless: (1) the shareholder was a shareholder of the corporation at the time of the transaction in question, or became a shareholder by operation of law originating from a person that was a shareholder at the time of the transaction in question; and (2) the shareholder fairly and adequately represents the interests of the corporation in enforcing the right of the corporation.
Under the Texas Law Amendments, a public Texas corporation may in its governing documents include a threshold of ownership (not to exceed three percent of the outstanding shares of the corporation) for an individual or group of individuals to institute or maintain a derivative proceeding brought on behalf of the corporation.
|
|
| |
Judicial Deference to Derivative Suit Determinations
|
| |
Delaware does not have an analogous statute. Under Delaware law, a stockholder’s right to bring a derivative suit is a judicially created doctrine.
|
| |
Under the TBOC, any determination regarding how to proceed with allegations asserted in a derivative proceeding must be made by an affirmative vote of a majority of: (1) all independent and disinterested directors of the corporation, whether or not they constitute a quorum of the board; (2) a committee of one or more independent directors appointed by an affirmative vote of
|
|
| | 54 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware
|
| |
Texas
|
|
| | | | | | | |
a majority of the independent and disinterested directors, whether or not those directors constitute a quorum of the board; or (3) a panel of one or more independent, disinterested, and qualified individuals appointed by the court upon the corporation’s motion. If the decision-makers described above determine in good faith, after a reasonable inquiry and based on factors they deem appropriate under the circumstances, that continuation of the derivative proceeding is not in the corporation’s best interests, the court shall dismiss the proceeding upon the corporation’s motion.
|
|
| |
Judicial Certification of Committees and Panels
|
| |
Delaware does not have an analogous statute.
|
| |
The TBOC permits corporations to request a court, at the start of a transaction or investigation of a derivative claim, to judicially determine the independence and disinterestedness of directors on special committees reviewing transactions or individuals on panels reviewing derivative claims. Future challenges to independence or disinterestedness would require new facts.
|
|
| |
Jury Trials
|
| |
Jury trials are generally not available in the Delaware Court, which is the Court in which stockholder suits relating to the internal affairs of a Delaware corporation are typically filed.
|
| |
Under Texas law, in civil cases, a party generally has a right to a jury trial to determine questions of fact if the party timely demands a jury and pays the jury fee.
Under the Texas Law Amendments, a Texas corporation may, in its governing documents, adopt a waiver of jury trials for internal entity claims, as defined in the TBOC. Such waiver will constitute a knowing waiver if enforced against a party approving the certificate of formation or bylaws or acquiring a security after the adoption of such certificate of formation or bylaws, continuing to hold a security of a public company after such certificate of formation or bylaws are adopted or by other methods permitted under law.
|
|
| |
Dissent and Appraisal Rights
|
| |
Under the DGCL, a stockholder or beneficial owner of a corporation that is a constituent in a merger, consolidation, conversion, domestication, transfer, or continuance may, under certain circumstances, be entitled to appraisal rights pursuant to which the stockholder may receive cash in the amount of the fair value of their shares as determined by the Delaware Court.
Under the DGCL, stockholders have no appraisal rights in the event of a merger, consolidation, conversion, domestication,
|
| |
Under the TBOC, except for the limited classes of mergers, consolidations, sales and asset dispositions for which no shareholder approval is required under Texas law, shareholders of Texas corporations with voting rights have dissenters’ rights in the event of a merger, consolidation, interest exchange, conversion, sale, lease, exchange or other disposition of all, or substantially all, the property and assets of the corporation.
However, a shareholder of a Texas corporation has no dissenters’ rights with
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
55
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware
|
| |
Texas
|
|
| | | | |
transfer or continuance if (i) prior to the effective time of the transaction the stock of the corporation is listed on a national securities exchange or is held of record by more than 2,000 stockholders, and (ii) in the merger, consolidation conversion, domestication, transfer or continuance they receive solely shares of stock of the surviving corporation or entity or of any other corporation which shares at the effective date of the merger or consolidation will be either listed on a national securities exchange or held of record by more than 2,000 stockholders.
|
| |
respect to any plan of merger or conversion in which there is a single surviving or new domestic or foreign corporation, or with respect to any plan of exchange if: (1) the ownership interest, or a depository receipt in respect of the ownership interest, held by the owner is part of a class or series of ownership interests, or depository receipts in respect of ownership interests, that are, on the record date set for purposes of determining which owners are entitled to vote on the plan of merger, conversion, or exchange, as appropriate: (A) listed on a national securities exchange; or (B) held of record by at least 2,000 owners; (2) the owner is not required by the terms of the plan of merger, conversion, or exchange, as appropriate, to accept for the owner’s ownership interest any consideration that is different from the consideration to be provided to any other holder of an ownership interest of the same class or series as the ownership interest held by the owner, other than cash instead of fractional shares or interests the owner would otherwise be entitled to receive; and (3) the owner is not required by the terms of the plan of merger, conversion, or exchange, as appropriate, to accept for the owner’s ownership interest any consideration other than: (A) ownership interests, or depository receipts in respect of ownership interests, of another entity of the same general organizational type that, immediately after the effective date of the merger, conversion, or exchange, as appropriate, will be part of a class or series of ownership interests, or depository receipts in respect of ownership interests, that are: (i) listed on a national securities exchange or authorized for listing on the exchange on official notice of issuance; or (ii) held of record by at least 2,000 owners; (B) cash instead of fractional ownership interests the owner would otherwise be entitled to receive; or (C) any combination of the ownership interests and cash above.
Under the TBOC, an owner of an ownership interest in a Texas domestic entity subject to dissenters’ rights is entitled to dissent from an amendment to a Texas for-profit corporation’s certificate of formation to add required provisions to elect to be a public benefit corporation or delete required provisions, which in effect cancels the corporation’s election to be a public benefit corporation if the owner owns shares that
|
|
| | 56 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Issue
|
| |
Delaware
|
| |
Texas
|
|
| | | | | | | |
were entitled to vote on the amendment; except if the shares held by the owner are part of a class or series of shares listed on a national securities exchange; or held of record by at least 2,000 owners.
|
|
| |
Independence of Corporate Statute
|
| |
Delaware does not have an analogous statute.
|
| |
The TBOC prohibits the plain meaning of the statutes under the TBOC from being supplanted, contravened, or modified by the laws or judicial decisions of any other jurisdiction.
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
57
|
|
| | 58 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| | THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” PROPOSAL 4. | |
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
59
|
|
| | 60 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
61
|
|
| | 62 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Name
|
| |
Audit Committee
|
| |
Compensation
Committee |
| |
Nominating and
Corporate Governance Committee |
| |
Strategic
Acquisitions Committee |
|
| | Rhys J. Best | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
Donald G. Cook
|
| |
•
|
| |
•
|
| |
•
|
| | | |
| |
Peter Doyle
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
•
|
|
| |
Barbara J. Duganier
|
| |
•
|
| |
▲
|
| | | | |
•
|
|
| |
Donna E. Epps
|
| |
▲
|
| | | | |
•
|
| | | |
| | Tyler Glover | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
Karl F. Kurz
|
| | | | |
•
|
| | | | |
▲
|
|
| |
Robert Roosa
|
| |
•
|
| |
•
|
| | | | |
•
|
|
| |
Marguerite Woung-Chapman
|
| |
•
|
| | | | |
▲
|
| | | |
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
63
|
|
| | 64 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
65
|
|
| | 66 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
67
|
|
| | 68 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
69
|
|
| |
Name and Address of Beneficial Owner
|
| |
Number of Securities
Beneficially Owned(1) |
| |
Percent
of Class |
| |||
| |
Horizon Kinetics Holding Corporation(2)
470 Park Avenue South, 8th Floor South New York, New York 10016 |
| | | | 10,109,933 | | | |
14.7%
|
|
| |
BlackRock, Inc.(3)
50 Hudson Yards New York, New York 10001 |
| | | | 5,445,993 | | | |
7.9%
|
|
| |
Vanguard Capital Management LLC(4)
100 Vanguard Blvd. Malvern, Pennsylvania 19355 |
| | | | 4,348,379 | | | |
6.3%
|
|
| |
State Street Corporation(5)
One Congress Street, Suite 1 Boston, Massachusetts 02114 |
| | | | 3,508,116 | | | |
5.1%
|
|
| | 70 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Name of Beneficial Owner
|
| |
Number of
Securities Beneficially Owned(1) |
| |
Percent
of Class |
| ||||||
| | Directors and Named Executive Officers: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
Rhys J. Best
|
| | | | 3,299 | | | | | | * | | |
| |
Donald G. Cook
|
| | | | 3,086 | | | | | | * | | |
| |
Peter Doyle
|
| | | | 160,027(2) | | | | | | * | | |
| |
Barbara J. Duganier
|
| | | | 2,921 | | | | | | * | | |
| |
Donna E. Epps
|
| | | | 2,921 | | | | | | * | | |
| |
Karl F. Kurz
|
| | | | 2,624 | | | | | | * | | |
| |
Robert Roosa
|
| | | | 4,469(3) | | | | | | * | | |
| |
Marguerite Woung-Chapman
|
| | | | 1,769 | | | | | | * | | |
| |
Tyler Glover
|
| | | | 44,171 | | | | | | * | | |
| |
Chris Steddum
|
| | | | 12,040 | | | | | | * | | |
| |
Micheal W. Dobbs
|
| | | | 7,845 | | | | | | * | | |
| |
All Directors and Executive Officers as a Group (11 persons)
|
| | | | 245,172 | | | | | | * | | |
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
71
|
|
| | 72 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
73
|
|
| |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
|
| |
TYLER GLOVER
President and Chief
Executive Officer |
| | |
CHRIS STEDDUM
Chief Financial Officer
|
| | |
MICHEAL W. DOBBS
Senior Vice President, Secretary,
and General Counsel |
|
| | 74 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Net income of
$481.4m
or $6.97 per share (diluted)
|
| | |
Revenues of
$798.2m
|
| | |
Adjusted EBITDA(2) of
$687.4m
|
| | |
Free cash flow(2) of
$498.3m
|
|
| |
Royalty production of
34.6k
barrels of oil equivalent per day
|
| | |
Total cash dividends of
$2.13 per share
paid during 2025
|
| | |
Water sales revenue of
$169.7m
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
75
|
|
| |
Key Compensation
Component |
| |
Purpose
|
| |
Philosophy
|
|
| | Base Salary | | |
•
Provide a competitive level of fixed compensation
|
| |
•
Set at a competitive level annually by the Compensation Committee and the Board, as applicable
•
Based on evaluation of executive officers’ performance, contributions and competitive market data
|
|
| |
Annual Cash Incentive
|
| |
•
Align executive officer pay with performance
•
Reward for achievement of annual goals, both financial and non-financial
•
Establish strategic priorities for the year through the strategic portion of the award
|
| |
•
Individual target levels set at a competitive level based on competitive market data and executive officers’ contribution level
•
Payouts heavily influenced by performance against pre-set goals
•
Portion of award earned through achievements against strategic priorities
|
|
| | Long-Term Incentives | | |
•
Align executive pay with long-term stockholder value creation through share ownership
•
Encourage long-term retention through extended vesting periods
•
Tie executive pay outcomes to long-term performance through performance-based awards
|
| |
•
Individual awards set at a competitive level based on competitive market data and executive officers’ contribution level
•
At least 50% of each executive officer’s awards are performance-based
•
Performance tied to long-term share price and financial performance, based on pre-set goals
|
|
| | 76 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
77
|
|
| |
Royalty/Non-Op Companies
|
| |
Midstream/Water Companies
|
| |
E&P Companies
|
|
| | Black Stone Minerals, L.P. | | | Aris Water Solutions, Inc.(1) | | | Civitas Resources, Inc. | |
| | Freehold Royalties Ltd. | | | DT Midstream, Inc. | | | Matador Resources Co | |
| | Kimbell Royalty Partners, LP | | | EnLink Midstream, LLC(1) | | | Ovintiv, Inc. | |
| | Northern Oil & Gas, Inc. | | | Kinetik Holdings, Inc. | | |
Permian Resources Corp
|
|
| | PrairieSky Royalty Ltd | | | Select Water Solutions, Inc. | | | Range Resources Corp | |
| | Sitio Royalties Corp(1) | | | Western Midstream Partners, L.P. | | | SM Energy Co | |
| |
Named Executive Officer
|
| |
Base Salary as of
December 31, 2025 |
| |||
| | Tyler Glover | | | | $ | 850,000 | | |
| | Chris Steddum | | | | $ | 545,000 | | |
| | Micheal W. Dobbs | | | | $ | 455,000 | | |
| |
Named Executive Officer
|
| |
2025 Target Bonus
as a % of Salary |
|
| | Tyler Glover | | |
110%
|
|
| | Chris Steddum | | |
100%
|
|
| | Micheal W. Dobbs | | |
80%
|
|
| | 78 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Metric
|
| |
Weight
|
| |
Rationale
|
|
| | FCF per Fully Diluted Share(1) | | |
50%
|
| | Generating FCF is a high priority for TPL, which enables greater returns to stockholders in the form of dividends and share repurchases. Measuring FCF on a per share basis ensures that any share dilution is appropriately used to increase FCF. | |
| | Adjusted EBITDA | | |
25%
|
| | Generating Adjusted EBITDA is a high priority for TPL and represents a strong indicator of business performance. | |
| | Strategic Objectives | | |
25%
|
| | These objectives were established based on key strategic priorities to ensure long-term success, such as safety and environmental performance, increasing use of TPL’s land, SLEM, and water services, leveraging TPL’s land to explore other non-oil and gas revenue streams, increased operational enhancements through integrated technology solutions, and generating an appropriate return on new capital spend. | |
| |
Metric
|
| |
Weighting
|
| |
Threshold
|
| |
Target
|
| |
Maximum
|
| |
Actual Results
|
|
| | FCF per Fully Diluted Share(1) | | |
50.0%
|
| |
$4.33
|
| |
$6.67
|
| |
$9.00
|
| |
$7.22
|
|
| | Adjusted EBITDA | | |
25.0%
|
| |
$435,000,000
|
| |
$635,000,000
|
| |
$835,000,000
|
| |
$687,369,000
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
79
|
|
| |
Strategic Objectives
|
| |
Results
|
|
| | Safety: Maintain a total recordable incident rate (“TRIR”) score at or below the industry average | | | No reported safety incidents; TRIR score is zero | |
| | ESG: Remain below FY21 Scope 1 Emissions level (assuming no significant acquisitions) | | | Scope 1 emissions declined 17% compared to 2021 levels resulting from electrification of water facilities | |
| |
Environmental: Zero produced water spills
|
| | Zero spills | |
| | Growth: Increase out of basin disposal volumes by 100% and execute one additional long-term agreement | | | Exceeded disposal volume increase of 100%; Executed contract with an 8-year term. | |
| | Growth: Transmissive Phase 2B 65% operational capacity | | | Transmissive Phase 2B construction paused to allow testing and potential incorporation of additional desalination equipment. Construction completion expected in first half of 2026. | |
| | Technology: Develop and implement integrated solutions to improve the efficiency of manual tasks, streamline data collection and workflows, and enhance revenue management, achieving a 20% reduction in manual effort | | | Accomplishments include, but are not limited to: (i) water treatment data collection and analysis — automated 90% of manual steps, saving an estimated 10-20 hours per week; (ii) developed integrated source water application, saving an estimated eight plus days per month of manual processing; and (iii) other improvements to mineral and surface data management. | |
| | Capital Returns: For minerals/royalties, achieve 12% pre-tax cash flow yield for acquired minerals and royalties portfolio; for surface and water assets, achieve 8% ROIC for acquisitions closed since 2023 | | |
Royalties/minerals portfolio generated 16% pre-tax cash flow yield for 2025.
Surface/water acquisitions generated a 9% ROIC for 2025 including acquisitions closed since 2023.
|
|
| |
Named Executive Officer
|
| |
Actual Bonus for 2025
|
| |||
| | Tyler Glover | | | | $ | 1,150,050 | | |
| | Chris Steddum | | | | $ | 670,350 | | |
| | Micheal W. Dobbs | | | | $ | 447,720 | | |
| | 80 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Vehicle
|
| |
Weight
|
| |
Rationale
|
|
| | PSUs Tied to Relative Total Stockholder Return (“RTSR”) against the SPDR S&P Oil & Gas Exploration & Production ETF (“XOP”) Index | | |
25%
|
| | Earned if TPL performs well against a broad group of energy companies included in the XOP index. The maximum amount can only be earned if TPL is in the top 10% of this index. | |
| | PSUs Tied to Three-Year Cumulative FCF per Fully Diluted Share | | |
25%
|
| | Earned if TPL meets pre-established goals for generating FCF over the three-year performance period. Generating FCF enables greater returns to stockholders in the form of dividends and share repurchases. | |
| | Time-Based Restricted Stock Units (RSUs) | | |
50%
|
| | Increases alignment between executives’ interests and stockholders through share ownership of our executive team. Encourages continuity of the management team due to long-term (three-year) vesting provisions. | |
| |
Percentile Rank
|
| |
Shares Earned as a % of Target(1)
|
|
| |
90th or above
|
| |
200%
|
|
| |
70th
|
| |
150%
|
|
| |
50th
|
| |
100%
|
|
| |
25th
|
| |
25%
|
|
| |
< 25th
|
| |
—%
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
81
|
|
| |
Performance Level
|
| |
Cumulative 3-Year
FCF/Diluted Share(1) |
| |
Shares Earned as a % of Target(2)
|
|
| |
Maximum
|
| |
$28.33/Share
|
| |
200%
|
|
| |
Target
|
| |
$21.67/Share
|
| |
100%
|
|
| |
Threshold
|
| |
$15.00/Share
|
| |
25%
|
|
| |
Below Threshold
|
| |
<$15.00/Share
|
| |
—%
|
|
| |
Name
|
| |
Base Salary
|
| |
Target LTI as
Percentage of Base Salary |
| |
Target LTI
Dollar Amount(1) |
| |
Number of
PSUs (at Target)(2) |
| |
Number of RSUs(2)
|
| ||||||||||||
| | Tyler Glover | | | | $ | 850,000 | | | |
525%
|
| | | $ | 4,462,500 | | | | | | 4,878 | | | | | | 4,878 | | |
| | Chris Steddum | | | | $ | 545,000 | | | |
400%
|
| | | $ | 2,180,000 | | | | | | 2,388 | | | | | | 2,385 | | |
| | Micheal W. Dobbs | | | | $ | 455,000 | | | |
275%
|
| | | $ | 1,251,250 | | | | | | 1,368 | | | | | | 1,368 | | |
| |
PSUs
|
| |
Threshold (25%
Payout) |
| |
Target (100%
Payout) |
| |
Maximum (200%
Payout) |
| |
Actual Results
|
| |
Percentage of
Targeted Shares Earned |
|
| | RTSR PSUs | | |
25th percentile
|
| |
50th percentile
|
| |
90th percentile
|
| |
78th percentile
|
| |
171%
|
|
| | FCF PSUs(1) | | |
$12.78/share
|
| |
$17.22/share
|
| |
$21.67/share
|
| |
$20.06/share
|
| |
164%
|
|
| | 82 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
83
|
|
| | 84 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Name and Position
|
| |
Year
|
| |
Salary
|
| |
Stock
Awards(1) |
| |
Non-Equity
Incentive Plan Compensation(2) |
| |
Change in
Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings(3) |
| |
All Other
Compensation(4)(5) |
| |
Total
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| |
Tyler Glover
President and Chief Executive Officer |
| | | | 2025 | | | | | $ | 850,000 | | | | | $ | 5,026,856(6) | | | | | $ | 1,150,050 | | | | | $ | 10,210 | | | | | $ | 35,400 | | | | | $ | 7,072,516 | | |
| | | | 2024 | | | | | $ | 850,000 | | | | | $ | 4,756,794 | | | | | $ | 1,771,181 | | | | | $ | — | | | | | $ | 35,100 | | | | | $ | 7,413,075 | | | |||
| | | | 2023 | | | | | $ | 850,000 | | | | | $ | 3,771,255 | | | | | $ | 1,412,785 | | | | | $ | 40,477 | | | | | $ | 34,200 | | | | | $ | 6,108,717 | | | |||
| |
Chris Steddum
Chief Financial Officer |
| | | | 2025 | | | | | $ | 545,000 | | | | | $ | 2,459,499(6) | | | | | $ | 670,350 | | | | | $ | 6,023 | | | | | $ | 21,000 | | | | | $ | 3,701,872 | | |
| | | | 2024 | | | | | $ | 525,000 | | | | | $ | 2,595,979 | | | | | $ | 895,062 | | | | | $ | 13,148 | | | | | $ | 20,700 | | | | | $ | 4,049,889 | | | |||
| | | | 2023 | | | | | $ | 500,000 | | | | | $ | 1,806,913 | | | | | $ | 679,950 | | | | | $ | 26,724 | | | | | $ | 19,800 | | | | | $ | 3,033,387 | | | |||
| |
Micheal W. Dobbs
Senior Vice President, Secretary and General Counsel |
| | | | 2025 | | | | | $ | 455,000 | | | | | $ | 1,409,746(6) | | | | | $ | 447,720 | | | | | $ | 10,719 | | | | | $ | 20,763 | | | | | $ | 2,343,948 | | |
| | | | 2024 | | | | | $ | 440,000 | | | | | $ | 1,508,069 | | | | | $ | 625,123 | | | | | $ | 23,226 | | | | | $ | 20,700 | | | | | $ | 2,617,118 | | | |||
| | | | 2023 | | | | | $ | 420,000 | | | | | $ | 1,166,994 | | | | | $ | 475,965 | | | | | $ | 31,869 | | | | | $ | 19,800 | | | | | $ | 2,114,628 | | | |||
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
85
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Estimated Future Payouts Under
Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards |
| |
Estimated Future Payouts Under
Equity Incentive Plan Awards |
| |
All Other
Stock Awards: Number of Shares of Stock or Units(2) |
| |
Grant
Date Fair Value of Stock Awards ($)(3) |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |
Name
|
| |
Award Type
|
| |
Grant Date
|
| |
Threshold
($) |
| |
Target
($) |
| |
Maximum
($) |
| |
Threshold
(in units)(1) |
| |
Target
(in units)(1) |
| |
Maximum
(in units)(1) |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | Tyler Glover | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||
| | | | | Bonus(4) | | | | | | | $ | 467,500 | | | | | $ | 935,000 | | | | | $ | 1,870,000 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | RTSR PSU | | |
February 15,
2025 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 610 | | | | | | 2,439 | | | | | | 4,878 | | | | | | | | | | | $ | 1,556,814 | | |
| | | | | FCF PSU | | |
February 15,
2025 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 610 | | | | | | 2,439 | | | | | | 4,878 | | | | | | | | | | | $ | 1,238,504 | | |
| | | | | RSU | | |
February 15,
2025 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 4,878 | | | | | $ | 2,231,538 | | |
| | Chris Steddum | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||
| | | | | Bonus(4) | | | | | | | $ | 272,500 | | | | | $ | 545,000 | | | | | $ | 1,090,000 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | RTSR PSU | | |
February 15,
2025 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 299 | | | | | | 1,194 | | | | | | 2,388 | | | | | | | | | | | $ | 762,130 | | |
| | | | | FCF PSU | | |
February 15,
2025 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 299 | | | | | | 1,194 | | | | | | 2,388 | | | | | | | | | | | $ | 606,303 | | |
| | | | | RSU | | |
February 15,
2025 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2,385 | | | | | $ | 1,091,066 | | |
| | Micheal W. Dobbs | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||
| | | | | Bonus(4) | | | | | | | $ | 182,000 | | | | | $ | 364,000 | | | | | $ | 728,000 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | RTSR PSU | | |
February 15,
2025 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 171 | | | | | | 684 | | | | | | 1,368 | | | | | | | | | | | $ | 436,597 | | |
| | | | | FCF PSU | | |
February 15,
2025 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 171 | | | | | | 684 | | | | | | 1,368 | | | | | | | | | | | $ | 347,330 | | |
| | | | | RSU | | |
February 15,
2025 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1,368 | | | | | $ | 625,819 | | |
| | 86 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| | | | |
Outstanding Equity Awards at December 31, 2025
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | |
Stock Awards
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |
Name
|
| |
Award Type
|
| |
Number of Shares
or Units of Stock that have Not Vested (#)(1) |
| |
Market Value
of Shares or Units of Stock that have Not Vested ($)(2) |
| |
Equity Incentive Plan
Awards: Number of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights that have Not Vested (#) |
| |
Equity Incentive Plan
Awards: Market or Payout Value of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights that have Not Vested ($)(3) |
| ||||||||||||
| | Tyler Glover | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||
| | | | | RSU | | | | | 15,156 | | | | | $ | 4,353,106 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | RTSR PSU | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 12,123(4) | | | | | $ | 3,481,968 | | |
| | | | | FCF PSU | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 20,684(5) | | | | | $ | 5,940,858 | | |
| | Chris Steddum | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||
| | | | | RSU | | | | | 7,812 | | | | | $ | 2,243,763 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | RTSR PSU | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 6,216(4) | | | | | $ | 1,785,360 | | |
| | | | | FCF PSU | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 10,703(5) | | | | | $ | 3,074,116 | | |
| | Micheal W. Dobbs | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||
| | | | | RSU | | | | | 4,599 | | | | | $ | 1,320,925 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | RTSR PSU | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 3,726(4) | | | | | $ | 1,070,182 | | |
| | | | | FCF PSU | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 6,413(5) | | | | | $ | 1,841,942 | | |
| | | | |
February 10,
2026 |
| |
February 13,
2026 |
| |
February 15,
2026 |
| |
February 13,
2027 |
| |
February 15,
2027 |
| |
February 15,
2028 |
| ||||||||||||||||||
| | Tyler Glover | | | | | 2,664 | | | | | | 3,807 | | | | | | 1,626 | | | | | | 3,807 | | | | | | 1,626 | | | | | | 1,626 | | |
| | Chris Steddum | | | | | 1,269 | | | | | | 2,079 | | | | | | 795 | | | | | | 2,079 | | | | | | 795 | | | | | | 795 | | |
| | Micheal W. Dobbs | | | | | 819 | | | | | | 1,206 | | | | | | 456 | | | | | | 1,206 | | | | | | 456 | | | | | | 456 | | |
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
87
|
|
| | | | |
Stock Awards Vested During Year Ended
December 31, 2025 |
| ||||||||||||
| |
Name
|
| |
Award Type
|
| |
Number of Shares
Acquired on Vesting |
| |
Value Realized on
Vesting(1) |
| ||||||
| | Tyler Glover | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | RSU | | | | | 10,206 | | | | | $ | 4,641,963 | | |
| | | | | RTSR PSU | | | | | 11,250 | | | | | | 5,115,488 | | |
| | | | | FCF PSU | | | | | 11,250 | | | | | | 5,115,488 | | |
| | | | | | | | | | 32,706 | | | | | $ | 14,872,939 | | |
| | Chris Steddum | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | RSU | | | | | 4,887 | | | | | $ | 2,221,833 | | |
| | | | | RTSR PSU | | | | | 4,644 | | | | | | 2,111,673 | | |
| | | | | FCF PSU | | | | | 4,644 | | | | | | 2,111,673 | | |
| | | | | | | | | | 14,175 | | | | | $ | 6,445,179 | | |
| | Micheal W. Dobbs | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | RSU | | | | | 2,988 | | | | | $ | 1,358,932 | | |
| | | | | RTSR PSU | | | | | 2,862 | | | | | | 1,301,380 | | |
| | | | | FCF PSU | | | | | 2,862 | | | | | | 1,301,380 | | |
| | | | | | | | | | 8,712 | | | | | $ | 3,961,692 | | |
| | 88 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
89
|
|
| | 90 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Name
|
| |
Benefit
|
| |
Death/
Disability ($) |
| |
Change in
Control ($) |
| |
Termination
without Cause or by NEO for Good Reason within 24 Months of a Change in Control ($) |
| |
Termination
without Cause or by NEO for Good Reason ($) |
| ||||||||||||
| | Tyler Glover | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | |
Cash severance payment(1)
|
| | | $ | — | | | | | $ | — | | | | | $ | 6,861,069(2) | | | | | $ | 4,589,344(3) | | |
| | | | |
Annual incentive plan
bonus unpaid at end of year |
| | | | 1,150,050(4) | | | | | | — | | | | | | 1,150,050(4) | | | | | | 1,150,050(4) | | |
| | | | | Continuation of benefits | | | | | — | | | | | | — | | | | | | 53,101(5) | | | | | | 53,101(5) | | |
| | | | | Vesting of 2023 RSUs(6) | | | | | 788,091 | | | | | | —(7) | | | | | | 788,091(7) | | | | | | 788,091 | | |
| | | | | Vesting of 2023 PSUs | | | | | 2,353,623(8) | | | | | | 2,222,867(9) | | | | | | 130,757(8)(10) | | | | | | 2,353,623(8) | | |
| | | | | Vesting of 2024 RSUs(6) | | | | | 2,241,485 | | | | | | —(7) | | | | | | 2,241,485(7) | | | | | | 2,241,485 | | |
| | | | | Vesting of 2024 PSUs | | | | | 3,359,579(8) | | | | | | 2,053,076(9) | | | | | | 1,306,503(8)(10) | | | | | | 3,359,579(8) | | |
| | | | | Vesting of 2025 RSUs(6) | | | | | 1,411,449 | | | | | | —(7) | | | | | | 1,411,449(7) | | | | | | 1,411,449 | | |
| | | | | Vesting of 2025 PSUs | | | | | 1,411,449(8) | | | | | | 392,359(9) | | | | | | 1,019,091(8)(10) | | | | | | 1,411,449 | | |
| | | | | Other | | | | | — | | | | | | — | | | | | | 60,000(11) | | | | | | — | | |
| | | | | Total | | | | $ | 12,715,726 | | | | | $ | 4,668,302 | | | | | $ | 15,021,596 | | | | | $ | 17,358,171 | | |
| | Chris Steddum | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | |
Cash severance payment(1)
|
| | | $ | — | | | | | $ | — | | | | | $ | 3,802,644(2) | | | | | $ | 2,543,575(3) | | |
| | | | |
Annual incentive plan
bonus unpaid at end of year |
| | | | 670,350(4) | | | | | | — | | | | | | 670,350(4) | | | | | | 670,350(4) | | |
| | | | | Continuation of benefits | | | | | — | | | | | | — | | | | | | 53,101(5) | | | | | | 53,101(5) | | |
| | | | | Vesting of 2023 RSUs(6) | | | | | 375,408 | | | | | | —(7) | | | | | | 375,408(7) | | | | | | 375,408 | | |
| | | | | Vesting of 2023 PSUs | | | | | 1,128,887(8) | | | | | | 1,066,171(9) | | | | | | 62,716(8)(10) | | | | | | 1,128,887(8) | | |
| | | | | Vesting of 2024 RSUs(6) | | | | | 1,224,074 | | | | | | —(7) | | | | | | 1,224,074(7) | | | | | | 1,224,074 | | |
| | | | | Vesting of 2024 PSUs | | | | | 1,833,461(8) | | | | | | 1,120,448(9) | | | | | | 713,013(8)(10) | | | | | | 1,833,461(8) | | |
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
91
|
|
| |
Name
|
| |
Benefit
|
| |
Death/
Disability ($) |
| |
Change in
Control ($) |
| |
Termination
without Cause or by NEO for Good Reason within 24 Months of a Change in Control ($) |
| |
Termination
without Cause or by NEO for Good Reason ($) |
| | | | | ||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | Vesting of 2025 RSUs(6) | | | | | 690,100 | | | | | | —(7) | | | | | | 690,100(7) | | | | | | 690,100 | | | | | | | ||||||||
| | | | | Vesting of 2025 PSUs | | | | | 690,968(8) | | | | | | 192,128(9) | | | | | | 498,839(8)(10) | | | | | | 690,968 | | | | | | | ||||||||
| | | | | Other | | | | | — | | | | | | — | | | | | | 60,000(11) | | | | | | — | | | | | | | ||||||||
| | | | | Total | | | | $ | 6,613,248 | | | | | $ | 2,378,747 | | | | | $ | 8,150,245 | | | | | $ | 9,209,924 | | | | | | | ||||||||
| |
Micheal W. Dobbs
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ||||||||
| | | | |
Cash severance payment(1)
|
| | | $ | — | | | | | $ | — | | | | | $ | 2,854,262(2) | | | | | $ | 1,909,205(3) | | | | | | | ||||||||
| | | | |
Annual incentive plan
bonus unpaid at end of year |
| | | | 447,720(4) | | | | | | — | | | | | | 447,720(4) | | | | | | 447,720(4) | | | | | | | ||||||||
| | | | | Continuation of benefits | | | | | — | | | | | | — | | | | | | 53,101(5) | | | | | | 53,101(5) | | | | | | | ||||||||
| | | | | Vesting of 2023 RSUs(6) | | | | | 242,285 | | | | | | —(7) | | | | | | 242,285(7) | | | | | | 242,285 | | | | | | | ||||||||
| | | | | Vesting of 2023 PSUs | | | | | 729,517(8) | | | | | | 689,284(9) | | | | | | 40,233(8)(10) | | | | | | 729,517(8) | | | | | | | ||||||||
| | | | | Vesting of 2024 RSUs(6) | | | | | 710,069 | | | | | | —(7) | | | | | | 710,069(7) | | | | | | 710,069 | | | | | | | ||||||||
| | | | | Vesting of 2024 PSUs | | | | | 1,065,103(8) | | | | | | 651,191(9) | | | | | | 413,912(8)(10) | | | | | | 1,065,103(8) | | | | | | | ||||||||
| | | | | Vesting of 2025 RSUs(6) | | | | | 395,831 | | | | | | —(7) | | | | | | 395,831(7) | | | | | | 395,831 | | | | | | | ||||||||
| | | | | Vesting of 2025 PSUs | | | | | 395,831(8) | | | | | | 109,953(9) | | | | | | 285,878(8)(10) | | | | | | 395,831 | | | | | | | ||||||||
| | | | | Other | | | | | — | | | | | | — | | | | | | 60,000(11) | | | | | | — | | | | | | | ||||||||
| | | | | Total | | | | $ | 3,986,356 | | | | | $ | 1,450,428 | | | | | $ | 5,503,291 | | | | | $ | 5,948,662 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | 92 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Name
|
| |
Plan Name
|
| |
Number of Years
Credited Service |
| |
Present Value of
Accumulated Benefit |
| |
Payments During
Last Fiscal Year |
| |||||||||
| | Tyler Glover | | |
Restated Texas Pacific Land
Corporation Employees’ Pension Plan |
| | | | 12.0 | | | | | $ | 168,556 | | | | | $ | — | | |
| | Chris Steddum | | |
Restated Texas Pacific Land
Corporation Employees’ Pension Plan |
| | | | 4.5 | | | | | $ | 87,714 | | | | | $ | — | | |
| | Micheal W. Dobbs | | |
Restated Texas Pacific Land
Corporation Employees’ Pension Plan |
| | | | 3.0 | | | | | $ | 90,099 | | | | | $ | — | | |
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
93
|
|
| |
Plan
|
| |
Number of
shares of Common Stock issuable upon exercise of outstanding options, warrants and rights |
| |
Weighted
average exercise price of outstanding options, warrants and rights |
| |
Number of shares of
Common Stock remaining available for future issuance |
| |||||||||
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation 2021 Incentive
Plan approved by stockholders(1) |
| | | | 105,936 | | | | | | — | | | | | | 366,381 | | |
| | Texas Pacific Land Corporation 2021 Director Stock and Deferred Compensation Plan approved by stockholders | | | | | — | | | | | | — | | | | | | 69,093 | | |
| | Equity compensation plans not approved by stockholders | | | | | — | | | | | | — | | | | | | — | | |
| | 94 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | Average Summary Compensation Table Total for Non-PEO NEOs | | | | | | Value of Initial Fixed $100 Investment Based on:(4) | | | | | | Company Selected Performance Measure(5) | | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | Year(1) | | | Summary Compensation Table Total for PEO | | | CAP to PEO(2) | | | Average CAP to Non-PEO NEOs(3) | | | Total Shareholder Return | | | Peer Group Total Shareholder Return | | | Net Income (in thousands) | | | EBITDA (in thousands) | | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | 2025 | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | ||||||||
| | 2024 | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | ||||||||
| | 2023 | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | ||||||||
| | 2022 | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | ||||||||
| | 2021 | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | ||||||||
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
95
|
|
| | 2025 | | | 2024 | | | 2023 | | | 2022 | | | 2021 | | |||||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | Total Compensation as reported in the Summary Compensation Table (“SCT”) | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | |||||
| | Subtract | | | Pension values reported in SCT for covered fiscal year | | | | | ( | | | | | | | | | | | ( | | | | | | | | | | | ( | | | ||
| | Subtract | | | Fair value of equity awards granted during covered fiscal year | | | | | ( | | | | | | ( | | | | | | ( | | | | | | ( | | | | | | ( | | |
| | Add | | | Pension value attributable to covered fiscal year’s service and any change in pension value attributable to plan amendments made in the covered year | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||||
| | Add | | | Fair value at year end of equity awards granted in covered fiscal year and that are unvested at end of such covered fiscal year — valued at year-end | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||||
| | Add | | | Fair value of equity awards granted in covered fiscal year that vested during such covered fiscal year — valued on date of vesting | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||||
| | Add | | | Dividends or other earnings paid on stock awards in the covered fiscal year prior to the vesting date that are not otherwise included in the total compensation for the covered fiscal year | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||||
| | Add/(Subtract) | | | Change in fair value from end of prior fiscal year to end of covered fiscal year for awards made in prior fiscal years that were unvested at end of current fiscal year | | | | | ( | | | | | | | | | | | ( | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||
| | Add/(Subtract) | | | Change in fair value from end of prior fiscal year to vesting date for awards made in prior fiscal years that vested during covered fiscal year | | | | | | | | | | ( | | | | | | ( | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||
| | 96 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| | 2025 | | | 2024 | | | 2023 | | | 2022 | | | 2021 | | |||||||||||||||||||||
| | Subtract | | | Fair value of awards forfeited in current fiscal year determined at end of prior fiscal year | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||||
| | Equals | | | CAP to PEO | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | |||||
| | | | | 2025 | | | 2024 | | | 2023 | | | 2022 | | | 2021 | | ||||||||||||||||||
| | | | | Total Compensation as reported in the SCT | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | |||||
| | Subtract | | | Pension values reported in SCT for covered fiscal year | | | | | ( | | | | | | ( | | | | | | ( | | | | | | ( | | | | | | ( | | |
| | Subtract | | | Fair value of equity awards granted during covered fiscal year | | | | | ( | | | | | | ( | | | | | | ( | | | | | | ( | | | | | | ( | | |
| | Add | | | Pension value attributable to covered fiscal year’s service and any change in pension value attributable to plan amendments made in the covered year | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||||
| | Add | | | Fair value at year end of equity awards granted in covered fiscal year and that are unvested at end of such covered fiscal year — valued at year-end | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||||
| | Add | | | Fair value of equity awards granted in covered fiscal year that vested during such covered fiscal year — valued on date of vesting | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||||
| | Add | | | Dividends or other earnings paid on stock awards in the covered fiscal year prior to the vesting date that are not otherwise included in the total compensation for the covered fiscal year | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||||
| | Add/ (Subtract) | | | Change in fair value from end of prior fiscal year to end of covered fiscal year for awards made in prior fiscal years that were unvested at end of current fiscal year | | | | | ( | | | | | | | | | | | ( | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
97
|
|
| | | | | 2025 | | | 2024 | | | 2023 | | | 2022 | | | 2021 | | ||||||||||||||||||
| | Add/ (Subtract) | | | Change in fair value from end of prior fiscal year to vesting date for awards made in prior fiscal years that vested during covered fiscal year | | | | | | | | | | ( | | | | | | ( | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||
| | Subtract | | | Fair value of awards forfeited in current fiscal year determined at end of prior fiscal year | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||||
| | Equals | | | Average CAP to non-PEO NEOs | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | | | $ | | | |||||
![[MISSING IMAGE: bc_capvstsr-pn.jpg]](bc_capvstsr-pn.jpg)
| | 98 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
99
|
|
| |
Name
|
| |
Fees Earned or
Paid in Cash(1) |
| |
Stock
Awards(2) |
| |
Total
|
| |||||||||
| | Rhys J. Best | | | | $ | 235,000 | | | | | $ | 145,987 | | | | | $ | 380,987 | | |
| | Donald G. Cook | | | | $ | 135,000 | | | | | $ | 145,987 | | | | | $ | 280,987 | | |
| | Barbara J. Duganier | | | | $ | 145,000 | | | | | $ | 145,987 | | | | | $ | 290,987 | | |
| | Donna E. Epps | | | | $ | 140,000 | | | | | $ | 145,987 | | | | | $ | 285,987 | | |
| | Karl F. Kurz | | | | $ | 130,000 | | | | | $ | 145,987 | | | | | $ | 275,987 | | |
| | Eric L. Oliver(3) | | | | $ | 97,624 | | | | | $ | 145,987 | | | | | $ | 243,611 | | |
| | Robert Roosa | | | | $ | 135,000 | | | | | $ | 145,987 | | | | | $ | 280,987 | | |
| | Murray Stahl(4) | | | | $ | 125,000 | | | | | $ | 145,987 | | | | | $ | 270,987 | | |
| | Marguerite Woung-Chapman | | | | $ | 125,000 | | | | | $ | 145,987 | | | | | $ | 270,987 | | |
| | | | |
2025
|
| |
2026
|
| ||||||
| | Annual base retainer: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
Cash
|
| | | $ | 105,000 | | | | | $ | 105,000 | | |
| |
Shares of common stock(1)
|
| | | | 145,000 | | | | | | 165,000 | | |
| | Total base retainer | | | | $ | 250,000 | | | | | $ | 270,000 | | |
| | Committee service (per committee) | | | | $ | 10,000 | | | | | $ | 10,000 | | |
| | Chair Fees: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
Board Chair
|
| | | $ | 130,000 | | | | | $ | 130,000 | | |
| |
Audit Committee Chair
|
| | | $ | 15,000 | | | | | $ | 15,000 | | |
| |
Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee Chair
|
| | | $ | 10,000 | | | | | $ | 10,000 | | |
| |
Compensation Committee Chair
|
| | | $ | 10,000 | | | | | $ | 10,000 | | |
| |
Strategic Acquisitions Committee Chair
|
| | | $ | 5,000 | | | | | $ | 5,000 | | |
| | 100 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
101
|
|
| | 102 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| | | | |
Years Ended December 31,
|
| |||||||||
| | | | |
2025
|
| |
2024
|
| ||||||
| | Type of Fees: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
Audit fees
|
| | | $ | 1,047,769 | | | | | $ | 975,132 | | |
| |
Audit-related fees
|
| | | | — | | | | | | — | | |
| |
Tax fees
|
| | | | — | | | | | | — | | |
| |
All other fees(1)
|
| | | | 2,051 | | | | | | 2,051 | | |
| | Total | | | | $ | 1,049,820 | | | | | $ | 977,183 | | |
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
103
|
|
| | 104 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| | | | |
Years Ended December 31,
|
| |||||||||
| | | | |
2025
|
| |
2024
|
| ||||||
| | Net income | | | | $ | 481,376 | | | | | $ | 453,960 | | |
| | Add: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
Interest expense
|
| | | | 690 | | | | | | — | | |
| |
Income tax expense
|
| | | | 128,953 | | | | | | 124,861 | | |
| |
Depreciation, depletion and amortization
|
| | | | 62,533 | | | | | | 25,162 | | |
| |
EBITDA
|
| | | | 673,552 | | | | | | 603,983 | | |
| | Add (deduct): | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
Employee share-based compensation
|
| | | | 13,817 | | | | | | 11,364 | | |
| |
Pension curtailment and settlement gain
|
| | | | — | | | | | | (4,616) | | |
| |
Adjusted EBITDA
|
| | | $ | 687,369 | | | | | $ | 610,731 | | |
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
A-1
|
|
| | | | |
Years Ended December 31,
|
| |||||||||
| | | | |
2025
|
| |
2024
|
| ||||||
| | Net income | | | | $ | 481,376 | | | | | $ | 453,960 | | |
| | Add (deduct): | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
Income tax expense
|
| | | | 128,953 | | | | | | 124,861 | | |
| |
Depreciation, depletion and amortization
|
| | | | 62,533 | | | | | | 25,162 | | |
| |
Employee share-based compensation
|
| | | | 13,817 | | | | | | 11,364 | | |
| |
Pension curtailment and settlement gain
|
| | | | — | | | | | | (4,616) | | |
| |
Current income tax expense
|
| | | | (122,398) | | | | | | (120,257) | | |
| |
Purchase of fixed assets
|
| | | | (59,531) | | | | | | (29,696) | | |
| |
(Increase) decrease in accounts payable related to purchases of fixed assets
|
| | | | (6,417) | | | | | | 273 | | |
| |
Free cash flow
|
| | | $ | 498,333 | | | | | $ | 461,051 | | |
| | A-2 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
B-1
|
|
| | B-2 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
B-3
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
C-1
|
|
| | C-2 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
D-1
|
|
| | D-2 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
D-3
|
|
|
Name
|
| |
Address
|
|
| Rhys J. Best | | |
2699 Howell Street, Suite
800 Dallas, Texas 75204 |
|
| General Donald G. Cook, USAF (Ret.) | | |
2699 Howell Street, Suite
800 Dallas, Texas 75204 |
|
| Peter Doyle | | |
2699 Howell Street, Suite
800 Dallas, Texas 75204 |
|
| Barbara J. Duganier | | |
2699 Howell Street, Suite
800 Dallas, Texas 75204 |
|
| Donna E. Epps | | |
2699 Howell Street, Suite
800 Dallas, Texas 75204 |
|
| Tyler Glover | | |
2699 Howell Street, Suite
800 Dallas, Texas 75204 |
|
| Karl F. Kurz | | |
2699 Howell Street, Suite
800 Dallas, Texas 75204 |
|
| Robert Roosa | | |
2699 Howell Street, Suite
800 Dallas, Texas 75204 |
|
| Marguerite Woung-Chapman | | |
2699 Howell Street, Suite
800 Dallas, Texas 75204 |
|
| | D-4 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
D-5
|
|
| | D-6 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
E-1
|
|
| | E-2 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
E-3
|
|
| | E-4 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
E-5
|
|
| | E-6 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
E-7
|
|
| | E-8 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
E-9
|
|
| | E-10 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
E-11
|
|
| | E-12 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
E-13
|
|
| | E-14 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
E-15
|
|
| | E-16 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
E-17
|
|
| | E-18 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
E-19
|
|
| | E-20 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
E-21
|
|
| | E-22 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
E-23
|
|
| | E-24 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
E-25
|
|
| | E-26 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
E-27
|
|
| | E-28 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|
| |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
| |
E-29
|
|
| | E-30 | | |
Texas Pacific Land Corporation | Proxy Statement
|
|