Delaware’s dominance as the favored jurisdiction of corporations in the United States has been tested in recent years, as several high-profile companies—particularly those with controlling shareholders—have initiated or threatened to pursue reincorporation in states believed to offer a more management-friendly statutory regime, such as Nevada and Texas.[1] This nascent trend, colloquially termed “DExit,”prompted a swift response from Delaware’s General Assembly, which passed Senate Bill 21 (“SB 21” or “the Bill”) through an expedited legislative process. Governor Matt Meyer signed it into law on March 26, 2025. The Bill amends two key provisions of the Delaware General Corporation Law: § 144, which governs transactions involving conflicts of interest; and § 220, which defines and limits shareholders’ rights to inspect corporate books and records.
As amended, Section 144 establishes three statutory safe harbors for transactions involving conflicted directors, officers, or controlling shareholders. These safe harbors shield not only the transaction itself from being invalidated on account of the conflict but also the involved fiduciaries from claims for equitable relief or damages based on alleged breaches of fiduciary duty. Amended Section 144 further provides the benefit of business judgment deference to transactions that satisfy at least one “cleansing” mechanism—approval by a majority of disinterested directors or an informed, uncoerced majority of disinterested shareholders—with the exception of going-private transactions, which must still satisfy both. A transaction failing to meet either cleansing mechanism may nonetheless qualify for safe harbor protection if it withstands entire fairness scrutiny.
SB 21’s amendments to Section 220 narrow the scope of corporate materials a shareholder may demand for inspection. Revised subsection (a) now limits the definition of “books and records” to a discrete set of formal corporate documents, including the certificate of incorporation, bylaws, minutes of shareholder meetings, minutes of board or subcommittee meetings, materials provided to the board or any subcommittees, and annual financial statements for the three years preceding the date of the shareholder’s demand. To obtain access to these materials, shareholders must first satisfy a series of procedural requirements introduced by the amendments to subsection (b). Specifically, demand is proper only if it is “made in good faith and for a proper purpose,” describes “with reasonable particularity” both its purpose and the specific books and records sought, and demonstrates that the requested materials are “specifically related” to the stated purpose.
Whether SB 21 will successfully quell the growing momentum behind DExit and preserve the First State’s corporate franchise remains to be seen. While the Bill may appease corporate insiders by to streamlining corporate governance and reducing regulatory burdens, it has raised concerns among institutional investors, governance advocates, and even the chief judge of the Delaware Court of Chancery. What is clear, however, is that by codifying a more permissive standard and relaxing long-standing protections, SB 21 shifts the internal balance of power within Delaware corporations in a manner that disproportionately favors directors, officers, and controlling shareholders.
___________________________________________________
[1] Most notably, Tesla, Inc.’s relocation to Texas after a second unfavorable ruling by the Court of Chancery on CEO Elon Musk’s $56 billion compensation package, payment of which shareholders later re-approved when also voting favorably on the move to Texas. Similarly, Dropbox, Inc. disclosed in March 2025 that it had successfully reincorporated in Nevada. Prior to the developments discussed herein, Meta Platforms, Inc.—the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp—was also reportedly considering a similar change in domicile.
About Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP
Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP focuses on complex civil litigation, including securities, antitrust, wage and hour and consumer class actions as well as shareholder derivative and merger and transactional litigation. The firm is headquartered in New York, and maintains offices in California, Georgia and Pennsylvania.
Since its founding in 1995, Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP has served as lead or co-lead counsel in numerous high-profile cases which ultimately provided significant recoveries to investors, direct purchasers, consumers and employees.
To schedule a free consultation with our attorneys and to learn more about your legal rights, call our offices today at (877) 247-4292 or (212) 983-9330.
About Braeden Hodges
Braeden Hodges is an Associate in Faruqi & Faruqi's New York City office. Braeden's practice is focused on Securities Litigation.
Braeden Hodges
Associate at Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP
New York office
Tel: (212) 983-9330
Fax: (212) 983-9331
E-mail: bhodges@faruqilaw.com
Social: LinkedIn