Organization: Voya Financial

Year: 2015

Whereas: Whereas: We believe that: 1. Investors do not want their investments to help fund genocide. a) While reasonable people may disagree about socially responsible investing, few want their investments to help fund genocide. b) A 2012 genocide-free investing proposal at ING's Emerging Countries Fund passed decisively, 59.8% to 10.7% with 29.5% abstaining. Despite this clear direction from shareholders and a corporate value of 'listening to our customers and responding with a sense of urgency,' Voya failed to act. The renamed fund still holds shares in two oil companies helping fund genocide in Sudan. Voya's funds invest in all the companies targeted by Investors Against Genocide. c) KRC Research's 2010 study showed 88% of respondents want their mutual funds to be genocide-free. d) Millions of investors at Franklin Resources, Fidelity, Vanguard and JPMorgan voted for similar genocide-free investing proposals. 2. Voya exercises investment discretion over its own assets and, through investment management contracts, those of its mutual funds. 3. Example demonstrate that Voya inadequately protects shareholders from investments in companies funding genocide because Voya and funds it manages: a) Claim a corporate value to 'uphold both the letter and the spirit of the law,' but make investments that, while legal, are inconsistent with U.S. sanctions prohibiting transactions relating to Sudan and Syria's petroleum industries. b) Claim to maintain the 'highest level of standards' as one of the 'World's Most Ethical Companies,' yet invest in companies that help fund mass atrocities in well-publicized conflict zones. c) Hold 10,583,124 PetroChina shares (10/31/2014). CNPC, PetroChina's controlling parent, is Sudan's largest oil partner, thereby helping fund ongoing government-sponsored genocide and crimes against humanity. CNPC is also Syria's largest oil partner, thereby helping fund that government's mass atrocities. d) Hold 13,713,688 Sinopec shares (10/31/2014). Sinopec also operates in Sudan and Syria. 4. Individuals, through ownership of shares of Voya and its funds, may inadvertently be invested in companies that help support genocide. Voya may increase holdings in problem companies without notice. Should Voya's duties as an advisor require holding these investments, prominent disclosure would help shareholders avoid unintentional ownership. 5. Voya can implement a genocide-free investing policy because: a) Ample alternative investments exist. b) Avoiding problem companies need not significantly affect investment performance, as shown in Gary Brinson's classic asset allocation study. c) Index funds need not invest in every security to statistically track index performance. d) Appropriate disclosure can address any legal concerns regarding the exclusion of problem companies. e) Management can easily obtain independent assessments to identify companies connected to genocide. f) Time-limited engagement with problem companies is possible when management believes engagement will be effective. g) Other large financial firms (including T. Rowe Price and TIAA-CREF) have policies to avoid such investments. 7. Investor action can influence foreign governments, as in South Africa and South Sudan. RESOLVED Shareholders request that the Board institute transparent procedures to avoid holding or recommending investment in companies that, in management's judgment, substantially contribute to genocide or crimes against humanity, the most egregious violations of human rights.

Resolved: Resolved: Shareholders request that the Board institute transparent procedures to avoid holding or recommending investment in companies that, in management's judgment, substantially contribute to genocide or crimes against humanity, the most egregious violations of human rights.