Unilever Weighs Future Support for Ben & Jerry’s Amid Shareholder Pressure
Unilever is reevaluating its financial support for Ben & Jerry’s social advocacy initiatives, following mounting investor pressure over the brand’s politically charged marketing campaigns. The consumer goods giant signaled it might pull funding if the ice cream subsidiary continues to act in ways deemed inconsistent with shareholder interests.
During Unilever’s annual general meeting held this week, CEO Hein Schumacher responded to a shareholder motion that challenged Ben & Jerry’s governance structure, saying the company is “in ongoing discussions” and would make funding decisions “based on the best interests of Unilever as a whole.” Schumacher added that if Ben & Jerry’s activities “lead to material harm for Unilever,” the parent company may take stronger action.
The shareholder proposal, backed by the National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC), called for a reassessment of Ben & Jerry’s corporate structure, which currently allows the brand’s independent board to make decisions on social causes, separate from Unilever’s broader business strategy. While the motion was ultimately voted down, it reflected growing concerns from investors about the financial and reputational risks tied to brand activism.
Controversies over Ben & Jerry’s positions on geopolitical issues—including a 2021 decision to stop selling in Israeli-occupied territories and a 2023 Fourth of July tweet calling for land to be returned to Indigenous communities—have sparked criticism and raised questions about the impact on Unilever’s brand equity.
Unilever, which has spent recent years streamlining its portfolio to focus on high-performing brands, is under pressure to improve profitability across its operations. With ice cream comprising one of its weaker-performing divisions, underperformance coupled with reputational risks could drive further scrutiny of how aligned Ben & Jerry’s values are with Unilever’s business objectives.
As FMCG stakeholders increasingly weigh the ROI of brand purpose campaigns, this case underscores the importance of balancing social messaging with shareholder accountability. While purpose remains a powerful tool for differentiation, FMCG brands operating within larger conglomerates must navigate tighter governance and investor expectations.