Trump, former Unilever chief back call to end quarterly reports, UK markets wary

A bid to end quarterly reporting has drawn an unlikely alliance between former Unilever chief Paul Polman and President Donald Trump, who say the practice encourages short-termism in corporate boards. The pairing, described in coverage of global markets, centers on a push to shift away from mandatory quarterly disclosures toward a biannual cadence that proponents say would free management to focus on the long term. The conversation comes as investors, regulators and boards debate how often companies should reveal performance and strategy to markets.

Trump said the quarterly reporting rule is not good and called for scrapping it to save money and allow managers to focus properly on running their companies. He argued that ending quarterly updates would bring New York in line with London and other major markets, where half-yearly trading updates are the norm. Polman, who helped pioneer the move away from quarterly reporting at Unilever, echoed the sentiment by noting the cadence can promote the sugar hit over the steady meal of sustained investment. "Promotes the sugar hit over the steady meal," Polman has said, framing the issue as a test of long-term value versus short-term signals.

The alliance is notable because the two men have been on opposite sides of broader policy debates, including the environment and governance. Trump’s stance on what he has characterized as woke or stakeholder capitalism contrasts with Polman’s history of championing stakeholder interests, which had influenced Unilever’sCSR campaigns under his leadership. The shift at Unilever and the resulting changes in CSR strategies have fed into the broader dialogue over whether public companies should prioritize environmental and social goals alongside profits.

Only eight of Britain's biggest companies still publish quarterly results, new analysis shows. In the FTSE 100 index, AstraZeneca, GSK, Shell, Barclays, BP, HSBC, NatWest and Lloyds continue to report every three months, and all have secondary listings in New York where quarterly reporting remains mandatory. The finding, drawn from stock-market data analyzed by AJ Bell, underscores the friction between market structure and corporate disclosure norms across borders. Critics say twice-yearly updates can reduce transparency when investors want timely information, potentially obscuring price-sensitive developments. Yet Andrew Ninian of The Investment Association argues UK rules require any material price-sensitive information to be published promptly, enabling informed investment decisions.

The cross-border dynamics extend beyond quarterly cadence. Firms such as Flutter Entertainment and CRH, the owner of Tarmac, have relocated their main listings to New York in search of higher market valuations and broader investor bases. The trend illustrates how some companies leverage dual listings to access different funding ecosystems, even as others worry that an endless reporting cycle could undermine management focus and draw scrutiny from regulators on both sides of the Atlantic.

Industry observers caution that any reform would require regulatory alignment across markets and cross-border cooperation to avoid creating new inconsistencies or arbitrage opportunities. At present, there is no imminent move to scrap quarterly reporting, and many market participants emphasize that disclosure norms are only part of a broader calculus about long-term capital allocation, governance, and the balance between market discipline and strategic resilience.

In the meantime, the discussion of quarterly versus biannual updates reflects a broader debate about how best to align corporate transparency with the needs of long-term investors, corporate strategists, and policymakers. As markets continue to weigh the costs and benefits of different disclosure cadences, the outcome will depend on regulatory responses, cross-border cooperation, and the willingness of corporate leaders to recalibrate timelines for communicating value to shareholders.