Trump, former Unilever chief Polman urge end to quarterly reporting, stirring cross‑border market debate

Donald Trump and Paul Polman, the former chief executive of Unilever, have formed an unusual alliance to press for an end to the United States’ mandatory quarterly earnings reports, arguing the cadence fosters short-term decision making at the expense of long-term investment. The development adds to a broader debate about disclosure practices as markets increasingly weigh the value of frequent updates versus steadier, semiannual reporting.

Trump said last week the rule is not good and should be scrapped, arguing that eliminating quarterly reporting would save money and allow managers to focus more on running their companies. He noted that ending the practice would bring New York in line with London and other major markets where half-yearly trading updates are the norm. Polman, who helped shift Unilever away from a quarterly cadence, echoed the sentiment, saying the practice promotes the sugar hit over the steady meal and the easy cut over the lasting investment.

The unlikely pairing comes amid a wider divergence in policy stances on corporate governance and social policy. Trump’s broader clampdown on what he calls woke or stakeholder capitalism contrasts with Polman’s earlier advocacy for CSR and sustainability initiatives, which were scaled back by Unilever’s new leadership as market and political priorities shifted. The alliance nonetheless highlights a cross‑Atlantic tension about how much disclosure is necessary to empower investors without inviting a focus on short-term results.

Across the United Kingdom, the practice remains far less common than in the United States. New analysis from stockbroker AJ Bell shows that only eight of Britain’s 100 largest listed companies still publish quarterly results. In the FTSE 100, the eight still reporting every three months are AstraZeneca, GSK, Shell, Barclays, BP, HSBC, NatWest and Lloyds, and all have secondary listings in New York where quarterly reporting is mandatory. Critics say twice-yearly updates can reduce transparency at times when shareholders want timely information to assess pricing and strategy. Andrew Ninian of The Investment Association said UK rules require any material price-sensitive information to be published promptly, which enables informed investment decisions.

Nevertheless, some UK‑listed companies have relocated main listings to New York in pursuit of higher valuations, with Flutter Entertainment and CRH identified as examples in contemporary reporting. Others remain deterred by the prospect of an endless reporting cycle, even if it can produce higher short‑term valuations for some issuers. Supporters of more frequent updates argue that investors still rely on quarterly data to gauge earnings momentum, manage risk and compare performance across peers. Critics contend the burden of quarterly reporting can tempt management to optimize for quarterly targets rather than long-term strategy.

Investors and market observers say the choice between quarterly and semiannual reporting is shaped by jurisdictional rules and market structure. UK authorities have emphasized timely disclosure of material information, while many large UK‑listed companies still operate under a cadence that aligns with European and North American norms for longer‑horizon planning. The debate now centers on whether reforms to reporting cycles could harmonize incentives for capital allocation without eroding transparency.

The dialogue between Trump and Polman underscores a broader question about how much quarterly data best serves investors, employees and other stakeholders. While there is no clear consensus, the discussion signals that both sides expect policy and market practice to evolve as globalization intensifies the pressure on firms to balance short-term results with sustainable, long‑term growth.