RAG Foundation is keeping open the option of a full exit from Evonik, extending beyond its previously stated plan to cut its holding to a blocking minority. The Essen-based foundation currently owns about 43% of the German chemicals group, making any further sale significant for the company's shareholder structure.
Highlights
- RAG Foundation confirms that its statutes allow for a full divestment of its 43% Evonik stake if approved by the board of trustees.
- RAG has previously targeted reducing its Evonik holding to a 25.1% blocking minority but now signals possible further sales up to a complete exit.
- A potential full sale by RAG, Evonik's largest shareholder, could significantly alter Evonik's ownership structure, contingent on trustee board approval.
Foundation sets out scope for stake sale
As reported by Reuters, RAG Foundation says its statutes allow a complete disposal of its Evonik stake if approved by the foundation's board of trustees.The foundation says it currently holds around 43% of Evonik shares. In the past, it has stated its intention to reduce that holding to a blocking minority of 25.1%, but it now says additional share sales could extend to a full divestment.
RAG says any further sale, including a complete exit, would require the approval of its board of trustees.
Governance and market relevance
The potential for a full sale is material because RAG is Evonik's largest shareholder, and any reduction in its position could reshape the ownership profile of the German chemicals manufacturer.The board of trustees that would have to approve such a move is dominated by politicians and trade union representatives, adding a governance layer to any decision on a broader stake sale.
Our earlier coverage of the widening Tata Sons–Tata Trusts rift examined how a senior trustee sought regulatory scrutiny over the charities’ direct involvement in the group’s commercial decisions. We noted that the clash has intensified broader governance questions about how far a board can override a controlling shareholder, with potential implications for strategic moves such as leadership appointments and a possible listing.
-
Afghanistan
-
Albania
-
Algeria
-
Angola
-
Argentina
-
Armenia
-
Australia
-
Austria
-
Azerbaijan
-
Bahamas
-
Bahrain
-
Bangladesh
-
Belarus
-
Belgium
-
Bolivia
-
Botswana
-
Brazil
-
Brunei
-
Bulgaria
-
Cambodia
-
Cameroon
-
Canada
-
Chile
-
China
-
Colombia
-
Congo
-
Costa Rica
-
Cote d'Ivoire
-
Croatia
-
Cuba
-
Cyprus
-
Czechia
-
DR Congo
-
Denmark
-
Dominican Republic
-
Ecuador
-
Egypt
-
El Salvador
-
Estonia
-
Eswatini
-
Ethiopia
-
Finland
-
France
-
Georgia
-
Germany
-
Ghana
-
Greece
-
Haiti
-
Hong Kong
-
Hungary
-
India
-
Indonesia
-
Iran, Islamic republic
-
Iraq
-
Ireland
-
Israel
-
Italy
-
Jamaica
-
Japan
-
Jordan
-
Kazakhstan
-
Kenya
-
Korea
-
Kuwait
-
Kyrgyzstan
-
Laos
-
Latvia
-
Lebanon
-
Lesotho
-
Libya
-
Lithuania
-
Luxembourg
-
Madagascar
-
Malaysia
-
Malta
-
Mauritius
-
Mexico
-
Moldova
-
Mongolia
-
Montenegro
-
Morocco
-
Mozambique
-
Myanmar
-
Namibia
-
Nepal
-
Netherlands
-
New Zealand
-
Nigeria
-
North Macedonia
-
Norway
-
Oman
-
Pakistan
-
Palestine
-
Panama
-
Papua New Guinea
-
Paraguay
-
Peru
-
Philippines
-
Poland
-
Portugal
-
Puerto Rico
-
Qatar
-
Reunion
-
Romania
-
Rwanda
-
Saudi Arabia
-
Serbia
-
Singapore
-
Slovakia
-
Slovenia
-
Somalia
-
South Africa
-
Spain
-
Sri Lanka
-
Sweden
-
Switzerland
-
Syria
-
Taiwan
-
Tajikistan
-
Tanzania
-
Thailand
-
Trinidad and Tobago
-
Tunisia
-
Turkey
-
UAE
-
Uganda
-
Ukraine
-
United Kingdom
-
United States
-
Uruguay
-
Uzbekistan
-
Venezuela
-
Vietnam
-
Yemen
-
Zambia
-
Zimbabwe
- Forex
- Crypto
