By Andrew Klein 18^th November 2025

We watch as corporations pollute our rivers, exploit their workers, and ravage the environment, all while posting record profits. We lament this “corporate greed” as if it were a force of nature. It is not. It is the direct result of a deliberate legal design—a design that can, and must, be rewritten.

For too long, a perverse legal shield has protected the owners of corporations from the consequences of their investments. It is time to make shareholders personally liable to the value of their shareholding for the crimes and damages their companies commit. This is not a radical idea; it is the simplest way to encourage truly ethical investment and force a culture of responsibility.

The Original Sin: How Profit Became the Only Law

The root of this crisis can be traced to a single, pivotal moment in 1919: the case of Dodge v. Ford Motor Company.

Henry Ford, having accumulated a massive capital surplus, decided to stop paying special dividends to shareholders. Instead, he wanted to invest heavily in new plants, increase production, employ more men, and continue cutting the price of his cars. In a public defence of this strategy, Ford declared: “My ambition is to employ still more men, to spread the benefits of this industrial system to the greatest possible number, to help them build up their lives and their homes.”

It was a vision that balanced profit with humanitarian purpose. The Michigan Supreme Court struck it down.

The court’s ruling was unequivocal: “A business corporation is organized and carried on primarily for the profit of the stockholders. The powers of the directors are to be employed for that end.”

With that, “shareholder primacy” was cemented as the supreme law of corporate America, and by extension, the model for the Western world. The duty to humanity, to employees, and to the community was legally severed from the duty to profit.

The Consequences: A World Designed for Looting

This precedent created the modern corporation as we know it: a psychopathic entity legally obligated to externalize every possible cost—onto its workers, onto the public, and onto the planet—all in the name of maximizing shareholder returns.

The damage has been catastrophic. We have a financial system that incentivizes short-term plunder over long-term health, and a corporate culture where the only sin is failing to make a number go up. Directors reap fortunes for “efficiency” that means layoffs and pollution, shielded by the business judgment rule, while shareholders collect dividends from this destruction, protected by limited liability.

The Antidote: Piercing the Shield of Immunity

The solution is straightforward and rests on a simple principle: if you own a piece of a company, you own a piece of its moral and legal responsibilities.

It would take a simple Act of Federal Parliament to change this. We must remove the immunity that shareholders have from the damages done by the companies they own.

Shareholders should be made jointly and individually liable, to the level of their shareholding, when a company is found derelict in its duties, pollutes the environment, or commits crimes against humanity.

This is not rocket science; it is accountability.

· Ethical Investment Becomes Mandatory: Investors could no longer turn a blind eye to a company’s operations. Perverse incentives would vanish overnight. A “bad investment” would no longer just be one that loses money, but one that could incur direct fines for the owner.

· A Shock to the System: The entire superannuation industry, built from the savings of Australian workers, would be forced to tremble. Fund managers would have to perform deep, ethical due diligence. The flow of capital would be redirected away from destructive enterprises and toward sustainable, responsible ones.

· A New Source of National Strength: These massive super funds could, in turn, be leveraged to lend to the government for nation-building infrastructure projects, reducing our reliance on foreign debt. Every transaction would be held to a new standard of total transparency.

Conclusion: From Moral Bankruptcy to a Moral Bottom Line

The usual suspects will whine. Economists will dust off their tired theories. Lobbyists will warn of economic collapse. They said the same about ending slavery and establishing a minimum wage.

Their objections are not based on principle, but on privilege. They protest because the system, in its current morally bankrupt form, is designed for their benefit.

This simple idea challenges the core of that privilege. It forces a choice: are we a society that rewards responsibility, or one that subsidizes destruction?

The age of the reckless, unaccountable corporation must end. It is time to make ownership mean something again. It is time for a shareholder’s reckoning.