Item 16. G. Corporate Governance

The Dutch Corporate Governance Code

Since our initial public offering in August 2010, we have been required to comply with the Dutch corporate governance code. The Dutch corporate governance code, as revised, became effective on January 1, 2009, and applies to all Dutch companies listed on a government-recognized stock exchange, whether in the Netherlands or elsewhere. The code is based on a “comply or explain” principle. Accordingly, companies are required to disclose in their Annual Reports filed in the Netherlands whether or not they are complying with the various rules of the Dutch corporate governance code that are addressed to the board of directors or, if any, the supervisory board of the company and, if they do not apply those provisions, to give the reasons for such non-application. The code contains principles and best practice provisions for managing boards, supervisory boards, stockholders and general meetings of stockholders, financial reporting, auditors, disclosure, compliance and enforcement standards.

We expect to take various actions towards compliance with the provisions of the Dutch corporate governance code.

The Dutch corporate governance code provides that if a company indicates to what extent it applies the best practice provisions, such company will deemed to have applied the Dutch corporate governance code.

The following discussion summarizes the primary differences between our corporate governance structure and best practice provisions of the Dutch corporate governance code:

	•		Best practice provisions II.2.4 and II.2.5 state that stock options granted to members of our board shall, in any event, not be exercised in the first three years after the date of granting and shares granted to board members without financial consideration shall be retained for a period of at least five years or until at least the end of the employment, if this period is shorter. Under our equity incentive schemes, part of the stock options granted to our chief executive officer in November 2010, November 2011 and November 2012 are exercisable one year after the date of grant, and members of our board who received restrictive shares and performance shares in November 2010, November 2011 and November 2012 are not required to retain these shares for at least five years. Although a deviation from the Corporate Governance Code, we hold the view that the combination of equity incentives granted to our chief executive officer, in relation to his obligation to invest in the Company and the applicable strict vesting and performance criteria, as well as the limited exercise possibility for pre-IPO MEP stock options granted to him, will enhance the goal of promoting long-term investments in the Company. The same is true for the equity grants made to other members of our board, which also have very strict vesting criteria with the purpose of creating long-term commitment to the Company.

	•		Best practice provision III.8.4 states that the majority of the members of the board shall be independent. In our board of directors, four non-executive members are independent. It is our view that given the nature of our business and the practice in our industry and considering our stockholder structure, it is justified that only four non-executive directors are independent.

	•		Pursuant to best practice provision IV.1.1, a general meeting of stockholders is empowered to cancel binding nominations of candidates for the board, and to dismiss members of the board by a simple majority of votes of those in attendance, although the company may require a quorum of at least one third of the voting rights outstanding. If such quorum is not represented, but a majority of those in attendance vote in favor of the proposal, a second meeting may be convened and its vote will be binding, even without a one-third quorum. Our articles of association currently state that the general meeting of stockholders may at all times overrule a binding nomination by a resolution adopted by at least a two-thirds majority of the votes cast, if such majority represents more than half of the issued share capital. Although a deviation from provision IV.1.1 of the Dutch Corporate Governance Code, we hold the view that these provisions will enhance the continuity of the Company’s management and policies.

Effective January 1, 2012, Dutch law does not allow directors to vote on a matter with regard to which they have an interest.

The NASDAQ Global Select Market Corporate Governance Rules

NASDAQ rules provide that NASDAQ may provide exemptions from its corporate governance standards to a foreign issuer when those standards are contrary to a law, rule or regulation of any public authority exercising jurisdiction over such issuer or contrary to generally accepted business practices in the issuer’s country of domicile. We are exempt from certain NASDAQ corporate governance standards that are contrary to the laws, rules, regulations or generally accepted business practices of the Netherlands. These exemptions and the practices followed by our company are described below:

	•		We are exempt from NASDAQ’s quorum requirements applicable to meetings of stockholders. Pursuant to Dutch corporate law, the validity of a resolution by the general meeting of stockholders does not depend on the proportion of the capital or stockholders represented at the meeting (i.e. quorum), unless the law or articles of association of a company provide otherwise. Our articles of association provide that a resolution proposed to the general meeting of stockholders by the board of directors shall be adopted by a simple majority of votes cast, unless another majority of votes or quorum is required under Dutch law or our articles of association. All other resolutions shall be adopted by a two thirds majority of the votes cast, provided such majority represents at least half of the issued share capital, unless another majority of votes or quorum is required under Dutch law. To this extent, our practice varies from the requirement of Listing Rule 5620(c), which requires an issuer to provide in its bylaws for a quorum, and that such quorum may not be less than one-third of the outstanding voting stock.

	•		We are exempt from NASDAQ’s requirements regarding the solicitation of proxies and provision of proxy statements for meetings of stockholders. We inform stockholders of meetings in a public notice. We prepare a proxy statement and solicit proxies from the holders of our listed stock. Our practice in this regard, however, differs from the typical practice of U.S. corporate issuers in that the advance record date for determining the holders of record entitled to attend and vote at our stockholder meetings is determined by Dutch law (currently 28 days prior to the meeting). As an administrative necessity, we establish a mailing record date in advance of each meeting of stockholders for purposes of determining the stockholders to which the proxy statement and form of proxy will be sent. However, only stockholders of record on the specified record date are entitled to attend and vote, directly or by proxy, at the meeting.

	•		NASDAQ requires stockholder approval prior to the issuance of securities when a stock option or purchase plan is to be established or materially amended or other equity compensation arrangement made or materially amended, pursuant to which stock may be acquired by officers, directors, employees or consultants. Under Dutch law and the Dutch corporate governance code, stockholder approval is only required for equity compensation plans (or changes thereto) for members of the board, and not for equity compensation plans for other groups of employees. However, we note that under Dutch law, the stockholders have the power to issue shares or rights to subscribe for shares at the general meeting of the stockholders unless such power has been delegated to the board. Our board is designated for a period of five years from the date of the public offering in August 2010 to issue shares and rights to subscribe for shares.

	•		NASDAQ requires the majority of the board of directors to be comprised of independent directors. Although the Dutch corporate governance code provides that the majority of the members of the board be independent, it also provides that if a company expressly indicates the reasons and the extent to which it does not apply the provisions of the Dutch corporate governance code, such company will deemed to have applied the code. As described under “—Corporate Governance—The Dutch Corporate Governance Code” above, four non-executive members of our board of directors will be independent. It is our view that given the nature of our business and the practice in our industry and considering our stockholder structure, it is justified that only four non-executive directors will be independent.

	•		We are exempt from NASDAQ’s requirement to have independent director oversight of executive officer compensation. Although the SEC has recently proposed new rules directing national securities exchanges, including NASDAQ, to adopt listing standards requiring that issuers’ compensation committees be comprised exclusively of independent directors, we, as a foreign private issuer, remain exempt from this requirement provided that we disclose the reasons for not having such an independent compensation committee. Under Dutch law and the Dutch corporate governance code, the general meeting of stockholders must adopt a policy in respect of the remuneration of the board. In accordance with our articles of association and our board rules, the remuneration of the

	executive directors is determined by the board of directors upon the recommendation of our nominating and compensation committee. Accordingly, applicable laws, regulations and corporate governance rules and practices do not require independence of the members of our nominating and compensation committee.

	•		We are exempt from NASDAQ’s requirement to have independent director oversight of director nominations. In accordance with Dutch law, our articles of association require that our directors will be appointed by the general meeting of stockholders upon the binding nomination of the board. In accordance with our board rules, the nominating and compensation committee will recommend the nomination of directors to our board.

	•		NASDAQ requires us to adopt a nominations committee charter or a board resolution addressing the nominations process. In accordance with the Dutch corporate governance code, we have adopted the committee’s charter. However, the nominations process has been set out in our articles of association and board rules.

Moreover, we will not distribute Annual Reports to all of our stockholders in accordance with NASDAQ rules. Dutch law requires that the external auditors be appointed at the general meeting of stockholders and not by the audit committee. Our audit committee, which consists of members of our board of directors, shall only make a recommendation to the stockholders through the board of directors for the appointment and compensation of the independent registered public accounting firm and shall oversee and evaluate the work of our independent registered public accounting firm.

PART III

Previous: Item 16C. Principal Accountant Fees and Services · Next: Item 17. Financial Statements

Item 16. G. Corporate Governance

Item 16. G. Corporate Governance

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents