Unilever 20-F 2006 Documents found in this filing:As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 29, 2006
Securities
registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: Securities
for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant to Section 15(d) of the
Act:
Unilever’s mission is to add vitality to life. We meet everyday needs for nutrition, hygiene and personal care with brands that help people feel good, look good and get more out of life. Our deep roots in local cultures and markets around the world give us our strong relationship with consumers and are the foundation for our future growth. We will bring our wealth of knowledge and international expertise to the service of local consumers – a truly multi-local multinational. Our long-term success requires a total commitment to exceptional standards of performance and productivity, to working together effectively, and to a willingness to embrace new ideas and learn continuously. To succeed also requires, we believe, the highest standards of corporate behaviour towards everyone we work with, the communities we touch, and the environment on which we have an impact. This is our road to sustainable, profitable growth, creating long-term value for our shareholders, our people, and our business partners.
At a glance
Earnings per share and dividends(a)
Report of the Directors
General information
The Unilever Group Unilever PLC (PLC) is a public limited company registered in England which has shares listed on the London Stock Exchange and, as American Depositary Receipts, on the New York Stock Exchange. The two parent companies, NV and PLC, together with their group companies, operate as a single economic entity (the Unilever Group, also referred to as Unilever or the Group). NV and PLC and their group companies constitute a single reporting entity for the purposes of presenting consolidated accounts. Accordingly, the accounts of the Unilever Group are presented by both NV and PLC as their respective consolidated accounts.
Publications
The separate publication, ‘Unilever
Annual Review 2005’, containing a Summary Financial Statement with figures
expressed in euros, with translations into pounds sterling and US dollars, is
also published in Dutch and English. It is a short form document that is prepared
in accordance with the United Kingdom regulations for Summary Financial Statements.
The Unilever Annual Review 2005 is mailed to all registered shareholders and
to other shareholders who are either entitled or have asked to receive it, and
is also made available on the website at
Accounting standards
Reporting currency and exchange rates
Basis of discussion and analysis € is used in this report to denote amounts in euros. £ and p are used in this report to denote amounts in pounds sterling and pence respectively. Fl. is used in this report to denote amounts in Dutch guilders. $ is used in this report to denote amounts in United States dollars, except where specifically stated otherwise. The brand names shown in italics in this report are trademarks owned by or licensed to companies within the Unilever Group.
Cautionary statement
Chairman’s foreword
2005 was the first year when Patrick and I worked together as respectively Group Chief Executive and Chairman. I've been delighted with how successfully our combination has developed. I’d like to congratulate Patrick and his Executive, as well as all the staff at Unilever, for the progress made during the year. Although there is still work to do to release the full growth potential of our powerful portfolio of brands, the business has stabilised its aggregate market share, a key objective in 2005. To ensure the business has the best structure and governance processes to deliver long-term shareholder value in the top third of our peer group, I set myself three objectives at the start of last year. These were reviewing Unilever’s dual NV/PLC structure, evaluating its corporate governance procedures and preparing for a series of Board departures over the next couple of years.
Dual structure strengths Three important principles guided the review. First, Unilever’s commercial operations should be advanced and not prejudiced by any change. Second, any change should have tangible benefits for shareholders. Lastly, any change should improve transparency and flexibility. These principles were designed to ensure that any resulting structure serves the best interests of both the business and our shareholders. Based on these criteria and an in-depth analysis, the Boards unanimously concluded that Unilever’s current dual structure, with some important changes, meets the needs of the business for the foreseeable future. While this conclusion might seem somewhat unexpected in an age of constant change, it is totally consistent with the review’s three guiding principles. The current structure has been and still serves as a framework by which we can benefit from the best of many cultures and influences. Moving to a unitary structure would not only be costly and disruptive to the business but in our case would not yield the material advantages to justify it. As a result of changes made to our Boards and leadership structures at the beginning of 2005, Unilever already has operational and governance unity, with a single Chairman, a single Board with a majority of Non-Executive Directors, a single Group Chief Executive and one Executive team. The current structure does not hinder the operation of the business, its decision-making ability or organisational efficiency. Unilever might also in moving to a unitary structure lose some of the fiscal flexibility that it has under its dual structure.
Changes These include adapting Unilever’s constitutional arrangements to allow greater flexibility for allocating assets between both parent companies. This will ensure that the Group continues to be able to return capital to shareholders and pay dividends in the most efficient manner. To simplify the relationship between our NV and PLC shares, and provide greater transparency, we also propose establishing a one-to-one equivalence in their underlying value by splitting the NV shares and consolidating the PLC shares. Finally, we intend to allow shareholders the right to nominate candidates to the Boards, taking into account the need to ensure the unity of management. Details of all these changes are set out in the Notices convening the AGMs.
Board succession After a thorough search I am pleased to announce the nomination of four new Non-Executive Directors, all with extensive financial and business experience, to take over from the Board members retiring this year and Claudio Gonzalez who retired at the 2005 AGMs. These are Charles Golden, Executive Vice-President and CFO of Eli Lilly and Company, Byron Grote, CFO of BP p.l.c., Jean-Cyril Spinetta, Chairman/CEO of Air France-KLM S.A. and Kornelis (Kees) Storm, former Chairman of the Executive Board of AEGON N.V. We engaged the services of two highly reputable independent search firms to help us in this task and they are also leading the evaluation of potential candidates to succeed me as Chairman in 2007.
Governance study The review was conducted by independent consultants who concluded that our arrangements stood comparison with our peers. A full report was made to the Boards in the first quarter of 2006, and a range of minor changes in terms of the day-to-day operation of the Boards will be introduced during the balance of the year. A particular pleasure for me this year has been to work with our social and environmental partners, for example with UNICEF’s Child Nutrition programme and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development. Ensuring the vitality of the societies and environments in which we operate is essential for Unilever to sustain its long-term growth. It is good to see that the many changes that were initiated over the last 12 months have not impeded the progress of Unilever in the market place. All this progress would not be possible without the commitment and the hard work of all our 206 000 employees. Without their dedication we could not add vitality to the lives of our consumers across the globe. On behalf of the Boards I would like to convey my thanks to all of them.
Antony Burgmans
Group Chief Executive
Here Patrick Cescau, Group Chief Executive, talks about performance in 2005 and looks ahead to what needs to be achieved over the next 12 months.
What was the key challenge for 2005? But we had to do it in a way that we can sustain for the long term, creating value and unlocking our full potential.
How did you set about tackling this challenge? First, to make our portfolio work harder for us, with sharper priorities and resource allocation. Secondly, better execution, especially in the areas of marketing and customer management. And, finally, create a more agile ‘One Unilever’ organisation, aligned behind a single strategy, with the right people in the right jobs, delivering quality and speed of execution.
What were the priorities and why did you focus on these areas? Regaining momentum in Europe was an equally important priority.
Overall, what results have been achieved by following this approach? I’m also pleased to report that our growth rates improved across most of our major markets and in most categories. These figures are a real testament to the hard work of our people, the strength of our brands and the resilience of our business. Restoring growth required a step up in investment behind our brands. In 2005, we invested an extra €500 million in advertising and promotions. We also invested significantly to reduce prices, especially in Europe, and offer better value to the consumer in selected categories and markets. Our savings programmes generated more than €700 million in 2005 and helped fund the additional investment in our brands and absorb the impact of higher input costs. Why has Personal Care played a key role in the strategy? Over the last year or so, Personal Care has been achieving growth levels that are up with the best at more than 6%. And we have delivered broad-based share gain across most of our biggest markets and strong profitability. Key to this success are our brands. The big global brands such as Axe, Dove, Lux, Rexona and Sunsilk all performed and delivered growth. Smaller, more local brands such as Clear and Lifebuoy also pulled their weight.
What role has vitality played in the progress that’s been achieved? Our mission is to help people feel good, look good and get more out of life and this underpins everything we do. It is the inspiration for innovations that are driving growth across the entire product portfolio. Lipton and AdeS – healthy and refreshing beverages; Dove – the Campaign for Real Beauty; and healthier choices in ice cream. In Foods, for instance, our Knorr Vie mini shots, which help you on your way towards your daily fruit and vegetable needs, have done extremely well in Europe. We have revitalised Lipton in the US by stressing its natural health benefits with its ‘AOX’ antioxidant seal, and this has produced good share gain especially in the ready-to-drink market. In Home and Personal Care our Dove Campaign for Real Beauty, which offers consumers a broader, healthier view of female beauty, has played a central role in the brand’s continued growth, while programmes to encourage hygienic handwashing in India have improved sales of Lifebuoy.
You mentioned developing and emerging markets. Why are these so important
to Unilever? In 2005 we delivered a strong performance in all major D&E markets in Foods, Home Care and Personal Care. And for the first time, our D&E sales, at 38%, exceeded our sales in Western Europe. The reason for our success here is partly due to our well-established distribution strength in both the traditional and modern trade and also to our ability to adapt excellent global brand concepts, such as the Omo ‘Dirt is Good’ campaign, to local markets. In Turkey, for instance, this enabled us to regain market leadership with double-digit growth.
But what has been achieved in Europe and North America? Europe has been an area that needed our attention. A healthy European business matters to Unilever. It delivers a large proportion of our sales – 41% in 2005 – and is an important source of profit. Looking at our performance, Central and Eastern Europe performed strongly in 2005 with Russia, for example, delivering around 20% growth. So the challenge is Western Europe. And the issue here is growth, not profitability. Western Europe is an extremely tough competitive environment and to turn the business around we are having to do things differently. We have addressed pricing in selected markets and categories and by doing so are now offering consumers better value.
Group Chief Executive
We are also increasing choice by extending our product portfolio – ice cream value ranges, for example – and by moving into a wider range of channels. And we are delivering innovation – new heart health ranges and Sunsilk styling are just two examples, which are being backed by increased marketing investment.
What are you doing to build capabilities across the business? An important element of this programme is combining our Foods and HPC sales teams so that we can present a single, integrated face to our customers and leverage our scale. The programme developed in the USA has been rolled out in France, Germany and the Netherlands and will be extended to other markets in 2006. By working closely with our customers such as Carrefour, Tesco and Wal-Mart we are increasing the value that we can gain by doing business together. We are also improving our marketing capabilities. For example, we will craft more of our global brand mixes to the standards set by the best of our brands. And we intend to get more out of the investment in our brands whether it be in advertising or in R&D.
In 2004 you announced ‘One Unilever’ as a way of simplifying the
business and generating savings. Has it achieved this? We have merged our operations in countries so that, at the end of 2005, almost 80% of our turnover is managed through ‘One Unilever’ organisations. We will continue with its implementation in 2006 with our priorities being to put in place a single management team in all markets. Most of our top 20 markets report directly to UEx. There will be a further reduction in the management headcount and simplified, standardised business services up and running, with a substantial proportion outsourced. By the end of 2006, ‘One Unilever’ will deliver €700 million savings and €1 billion by the end of 2007. But the biggest benefit for us is that we now have ‘one face’ for our customers and consumers, as well as being faster and more disciplined. In other words we are fit to compete.
What is driving the decisions you are making relating to the portfolio? to make choices and to allocate resources according to those choices. It then allows us to drive disciplined execution. We had to take decisive action on parts of our portfolio where we had reached a strategic cross-roads. The sale of UCI (Unilever Cosmetics International) and the recent announcement of our intention to sell the majority of our European frozen foods business were tough decisions. We made them because it was clear we would not be able to grow these businesses in the long term which is fundamental to future value creation. We felt we had better opportunities to invest in and that these businesses would perform better in the hands of owners to whom they were a top priority. As we move forward we will continue to invest behind our best growth opportunities, channelling more of our resources into building leading positions in high growth areas.
Continuing to look forward, what are your priorities for 2006 and beyond? Obviously I can’t disclose all our intentions in detail. But I would like to give you some insight into our priorities for 2006. You will not be surprised to hear that our plans include capitalising on the high-growth potential of D&E markets such as China, India and Russia. Or that in Personal Care, we will be building on our leading market positions in deodorants and personal wash. And that vitality will continue to be at the heart of our innovation programme.
Unilever is now in better shape, with increased competitiveness and growth.
What’s your summary of 2005? The Unilever team has worked together to create a momentum that will help us rise to the challenges of the year ahead. There is still a great deal to do, but we know the categories, segments, brands and countries that will drive growth. And we are now rigorously deploying our funds and resources behind our best opportunities. We have the right structure to deliver and the processes in place to make sure that we execute against our priorities. Our people are clear about what they need to do. We will build on what we achieved in 2005 and deliver the results we have promised for 2006. This will unlock more of the unique potential of Unilever. I passionately believe that we can now compete to win.
[THIS PAGE HAS BEEN DELIBERATELY LEFT BLANK]
Report of the Directors
About Unilever
Description of business
Regions The Europe region includes our operations in Western Europe and in Central and Eastern Europe, and in 2005 accounted for approximately 41% of our business on a turnover basis. The Americas region includes our operations in North America and Latin America and represented around 33% of our business. Our Asia Africa region accounted for 26% of our business, and includes our operations in the Middle East, Turkey, Africa, Asia and Australasia.
Categories For more information about our two categories and their innovation activities during 2005 please refer to pages 29 and 30.
Functions
Brands Savoury and dressings includes sales of soups, bouillons, sauces, snacks, mayonnaise, salad dressings and olive oil. Among the leading brands are Knorr, Hellmann’s, Calvé, Wishbone, Amora and Bertolli. Spreads and cooking products includes sales of margarines, spreads and cooking products such as liquid margarines. Our most important brands in this group are our healthy heart Becel and Flora ranges, together with our family brands including Rama, Blue Band and Country Crock. Beverages includes sales of tea, where our brands include Lipton and Brooke Bond, weight management products, principally Slim•Fast, and nutritionally enhanced staples sold in developing markets, including our Annapurna and AdeS ranges. Ice cream and frozen foods includes our sales of ice cream under the international Heart brand, including Cornetto, Magnum, Carte d’Or and Solero, and also Ben & Jerry’s, Breyers, Klondike and Popsicle. Our frozen foods brands include Iglo, Birds Eye and Findus. In addition to these groups, our Unilever Foodsolutions business is a global food service business providing solutions for professional chefs and caterers. Its results are reported within those for the groups above. Our Home and Personal Care category manages brands in two main groups: In Personal Care, six global brands are the core of our business in the deodorants, skin cleansing, daily hair care and mass-market skin care categories – Axe, Dove, Lux, Pond’s, Rexona and Sunsilk. Other important brands include Suave, Clear, Lifebuoy and Vaseline, together with Signal and Close Up in oral care. Our Home Care ranges include a series of laundry products, including tablets as well as traditional powders and liquids for washing by hand or machine. Tailored products including soap bars are available for lower-income consumers. Our brands include Comfort, Omo, Radiant, Skip, Snuggle and Surf. Our household care products are led by our Cif and Domestos brands.
At Unilever our people are at the centre of everything we do. We give priority to their professional fulfilment, their work-life balance and their ability to contribute equally as part of a diverse workforce. Our people’s creativity, energy and passion drive our business. One of our ongoing goals is to help our business leaders connect to our people around the world and achieve a shared understanding of our business objectives and future challenges. In January 2006 at Unilever’s leadership forum Group Chief Executive Patrick Cescau presented Unilever’s change agenda, a set of common initiatives which will be adopted throughout Unilever. We want to attract innovative individuals who relish real-life challenges. Questions like “Can you think of 101 new things to do with egg yolks and oil?”, which appeared in one of our recent recruitment ads, lie at the heart of a new and competitively different strategy to win the battle for the world’s top talent.
About Unilever
As ‘One Unilever’ we can now take a holistic view of our global marketing capability and manage and deploy our talent more strategically. Overseen by the new post of Chief Marketing Officer we have developed Group-wide programmes to improve our skills, tools and career paths, with an unprecedented focus on brand building and development to support our new structure. Via our Marketing Academy we have also adopted a more applied, business-led approach to training, underpinned by common toolsets and data. Unilever's mission is to add vitality to life. That includes encouraging greater vitality among our staff in a programme that encompassed the broad concepts of ‘fitness of body’ and ‘fitness of heart, mind and spirit’. Designed to help them manage their personal energy and resilience in the face of change, as well as striking a good work-life balance, among other objectives, the first step of the programme was an Enjoy Nutrition campaign. This provided staff with important nutritional information, such as advice on how to reduce consumption of sugar, salt and unhealthy fats. We also piloted nutritional training for our chefs and external suppliers so that our canteens and restaurants could offer healthier options. In today's global markets, Unilever's international heritage helps us compete. Our deep roots in over 100 countries worldwide give us a powerful competitive advantage, enabling us to adapt our global brands to local consumers’ needs. To help us understand their needs more fully we’ve introduced a diversity programme so that our staff reflect our consumers’ diversity more closely in gender, ethnicity and many other ways. Diversity is already very evident. For example, our top 1 000 managers span 45 nationalities. With new initiatives, including local Diversity Boards and toolkits, we hope to encourage diversity deeper into our organisation. In Unilever, by embracing our differences, we create an environment that inspires people to contribute to our business. We encourage people to be themselves within a framework of shared values and goals. This means giving full and fair consideration to all applicants and continuing development to all employees, regardless of gender, nationality, race, creed, disability, style or sexuality. Unilever’s success depends on the economic health of the countries in which it operates. In an extensive research project with Oxfam GB and Novib (Oxfam Netherlands) ‘Exploring the links between business and poverty reduction: A case study on Indonesia’, we examined the impact our local business has on the country’s economic well-being. Unilever Indonesia employs about 5 000 direct employees and contract workers. The research found that indirectly this manufacturing activity supports around 300 000 full-time equivalent jobs in our ‘value chain’ – the chain that stretches from raw materials suppliers through manufacturing to distribution and retailing to consumers. Such employment and the wealth that it spreads around can make a significant contribution to reducing poverty. Environment and corporate responsibility We aim to share these standards and values with our suppliers and contractors through our Business Partner Code which, in turn, is based on our Code of Business Principles. It sets out standards on ten key points of business integrity, labour standards, consumer safety and the environment. The long-term success of our business is intimately linked with the vitality of the environment and the communities in which we operate. More than two-thirds of our raw materials come from agriculture, while water and other natural resources play an equally critical role in our business. To ensure we protect these key resources, we have clear, long-term eco-efficiency objectives and targets for our manufacturing operations, as well as three sustainability initiatives on water, agriculture and fish. Over the last ten years, we have continued to improve our eco-efficiency performance across all of our seven key environmental parameters which we use to measure the emissions from our factories and set future reduction targets. In 2004 (the latest year for which figures are available) we continued to improve on our 2003 performance but did not meet all our targets. The strength of our commitment to sustainability is reflected in the fact that we remain the leading food company in the Dow Jones Sustainability World Index. In 2005 we spent around €79 million on our voluntary initiatives in communities around the world. This increase on our 2004 contribution of €65 million is partly due to the overwhelming response of our business to the plight of the December 2004 Asian tsunami victims. Our Close Up toothpaste brand launched Project Smile to bring much-needed oral health care products and advice to people in rural Nigeria where only around 60% of the population use toothpaste. The campaign involved retailers of all sizes, including the very smallest, as partners. We created branded kiosks – tiny shops – to promote Close Up, and these gave an opportunity to unemployed young people to make a living by creating new long-term outlets, as well as offering existing retailers a way to showcase their wares. The success of the campaign meant it was quickly extended into towns and cities and over the year sales rose by 35%. With its global supply chain, Unilever has a major role to play in caring for the environment. We believe that acting responsibly creates advantages for our business, as well as helping to address environmental concerns. For example, ensuring a sustainable supply of raw materials, such as palm oil, is essential for the long-term wealth of our business. Of course, due to the scale and complexity of this issue, we cannot do this alone. A multi-stakeholder approach is required, which is why we co-founded the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) in 2004.
About Unilever
The RSPO, which includes palm oil growers and processors, consumer goods manufacturers, retailers, investors and a number of social and environmental non-governmental organisations, now has over 100 members. As the largest consumer goods company on the RSPO Board, we have gained significant insights. Key developments during 2005 included the adoption of the principles and criteria for Sustainable Palm Oil Production – elements of sustainability ensuring that production is economically viable, environmentally appropriate and socially beneficial. The widely discussed Dove Campaign for Real Beauty has played a key role in highlighting the need for a broader, more inclusive definition of beauty, beyond the stereotypical super-model image. With our Dove Self-Esteem Fund, which is a cornerstone of the brand’s long-term growth strategy, we’re going even further. Together with partners such as the Girl Scouts in the US and the UK’s Eating Disorder Association, we’re funding educational ‘Body Talk’ programmes in schools to help young people develop stronger body-related self-esteem. By 2008 our aim is to have reached 1 million children. In Brazil, a recycling project has created jobs and brought commercial advantages. An exclusive recycling partnership with a major Brazilian retailer, Pao de Acucar, has not only given Unilever’s brands greater in-store prominence at no extra cost but also provided employment to more than 300 local people. Under the award-winning scheme, a co-operative of local people collects, recycles and sells used packaging deposited at recycling stations outside the retailer’s supermarkets. In addition to having Unilever’s logo on the stations, our participating brands, Hellmann’s, AdeS, Omo and Rexona, appear on point-of-sale information and educational materials, raising their profile. By reducing waste, Unilever has also succeeded in reducing its costs. Using the same methodology employed in our highly successful Medusa water conservation programme, we expect to reduce waste levels for disposal by 30% from our manufacturing sites in the Asia Africa region between 2005 and 2006. Under our new Triple ‘R’ (Reduce, Re-use, Recycle) programme, the sites are collaborating to share best practice and setting targets to reduce waste levels and disposal costs. In 2006 we’ll launch a similar initiative, Electra, to reduce energy consumption in Latin America. The health of our staff is a priority for Unilever worldwide. In some regions HIV/AIDS poses a serious risk to our employees and communities. Using the experience gained from dealing with AIDS in our own workplace over the last 25 years, we have worked in partnership to share our learning with international bodies such as the Global Business Coalition on HIV/AIDS. More locally, we work with groups such as the South African Business Coalition on HIV/AIDS, with whom we co-developed a well-respected toolkit to help businesses tackle the disease effectively. In Kenya we have formed a partnership with the German aid agency GTZ to share good practice with the wider community, including schools and smallholder tea growers. In 2005 we launched a searchable database where consumers can find out exactly what ingredients are used in our Home and Personal Care products in Europe. Access to the database is through Unilever’s website at www.unilever.com/ourvalues. Visitors select their country and preferred language before choosing a brand and product. A single click then reveals the full list of ingredients. Allergy sufferers can check the presence of ingredients to which they could be sensitive. Further help is available through the brand carelines (telephone numbers are listed on the website) and there is additional information on our website about the chemicals Unilever uses in its products. Millions of people suffer from heart disease every year. The World Heart Federation (WHF) is committed to helping the prevention and control of heart disease and stroke and is made up of over 150 medical societies and heart charities from 100 low and middle-income countries. We are a key sponsor of World Heart Day each September and our Becel/Flora brand’s partnership with the WHF means that we work together to increase public awareness of heart disease and its risk factors. For example in Greece our Becel pro•activ brand teamed up with the Cardiologists Foundation to bring free cholesterol testing, heart checks and health advice direct to people’s homes and school halls on the remote Greek islands of the eastern Mediterranean. In Sweden we ran a lecture tour on cholesterol, while in Finland our Foodsolutions business worked with the Finnish Heart Foundation to support national Heart Week with healthy food and recipes. Information technology In Europe, we have continued to progress the project to implement the single European Enterprise system. Successful 2005 implementations were performed in France, Germany, the Netherlands and Russia. We have also delivered a further nine countries onto the European customer relationship management system, covering primary sales force support and tele-business for Foodsolutions. An artwork management system commenced deployment in HPC and Foodsolutions; this system is now used by 2 200 users across Europe. With increasing dependence upon regional applications, resilience and recovery become even more critical. In mitigation we have constructed and commissioned an additional world class data centre to ensure full European backup and recovery capability. In Latin America, we have made significant progress towards the goal to operate as one business. This will be fully complete in July 2006, delivering a single system, process and information system for all operating companies in Latin America. In North America, we reached a regional agreement with Dell Computer Corp. to provide and manage PC equipment and support, including a technology update. A new regional supply chain planning solution was developed and implemented in the HPC business; Foods will go live by the end of the first quarter of 2006. In Asia Africa, the focus has been to deepen the penetration of the regional standard application portfolio. By the year end we had implemented the demand and supply network planning tool in thirteen countries and the Unilever standard data warehouse in fourteen countries, and twelve countries now use the regional eCommerce hub. In India, a system to manage pricing / promotions into our dealers, with a capability for e-Claims settlement and self-service was successfully rolled out to 1 500 stockists. This is planned for completion at all 6 000 stockists by
About Unilever
March 2006. We have completed the implementation of an SAP based system, which simplifies and harmonises processes across Arabia, Israel and Turkey – a project successfully delivered in an extremely challenging environment. An initiative to standardise operational IT processes and procedures globally started in 2005 and has delivered on plan. We have set world-class objectives for this programme and the implementations in 2005 won the ‘best project of the year’ in the 2005 ITsmf awards. To support the innovation agenda, the internal management system had a significant upgrade and has been deployed to 16 000 users world-wide.
Competition
We support efforts to create a more open competitive environment through the liberalisation of international trade. We support the full implementation of the Single European Market and inclusion of other European countries in the European Union.
Distribution and selling
Exports
Seasonality
Related party transactions In approximately 40 countries, our associated company, JohnsonDiversey Inc., acts as Unilever’s sole and exclusive sales agent for professional channels, in respect of cleaning products, in return for which it receives an agency fee. In 2004 Patrick Cescau, Group Chief Executive, purchased a house from a group company ultimately owned by NV. The full Boards, acting on the recommendation of the Remuneration Committee and without participation of Mr Cescau, gave their prior approvals to the purchase, which was made at full market value based on two independent valuations of the property. Further information is given in note 32 on page 142.
Intellectual property
About Unilever
Description of our properties We currently have no plans to construct new facilities or expand or improve our current facilities in a manner that is material to the Group.
Legal and arbitration proceedings and regulatory matters In 1999, NV issued 211 473 785 €0.05 (Fl.0.10) cumulative preference shares, with a notional value of €6.58 (Fl.14.50), as an alternative to a cash dividend. In March 2004, NV announced its intention to convert part (€6.53 – equivalent to Fl.14.40) of the notional value of the preference shares, in accordance with its Articles of Association, into NV ordinary shares in the first quarter of 2005. A number of holders of preference shares raised objections to the conversion, claiming that NV is obliged to buy the preference shares back for an amount of €6.58, the amount of the cash dividend in 1999. A group of holders of preference shares requested the Enterprise Chamber of the Amsterdam Court of Appeal to conduct an inquiry into the course of affairs surrounding the preference shares. On 21 December 2004, the Enterprise Chamber decided to order an inquiry; an additional request to forbid NV to convert the preference shares was rejected. NV lodged an appeal with the Dutch Supreme Court against the decision of the Enterprise Chamber, which was dismissed. As at the date of this Report, the inquiry is ongoing. On 15 February 2005, after close of trading, NV converted part of the notional value of the preference shares into NV ordinary shares. The value, which the holders of the preference shares received upon conversion, was €4.55 for each preference share. As a consequence of the conversion, the notional value of the preference shares was reduced to €0.05 (Fl.0.10) and pursuant to the Articles of Association of NV the preference shares could be cancelled upon repayment of this remaining notional value. On 4 May 2005, the Enterprise Chamber of the Amsterdam Court of Appeal rejected another request of a group of holders of preference shares which was aimed to prohibit NV from cancelling the preference shares. This group lodged an appeal to the Dutch Supreme Court on 4 August 2005 against the decision given on 4 May 2005. The Dutch Supreme Court has not yet decided on this case. On 10 May 2005, NV’s Annual General Meeting decided to cancel the preference shares. Cancellation took effect as of midnight on 13 July 2005. Both groups of former preference shareholders have requested the Rotterdam District Court to nullify the NV Board’s decision to convert the preference shares, claiming that this decision was unreasonable. Unilever has businesses in many countries and from time to time these are subject to investigation by competition and other regulatory authorities. One such matter concerns ice cream distribution in Europe, notably the issues of outlet and cabinet exclusivity. In October 2003, the Court of First Instance in Luxembourg ruled in favour of the European Commission’s decision banning Unilever’s Irish ice cream business, HB Ice Cream, from seeking freezer cabinet exclusivity for their products in the Irish market. HB Ice Cream has submitted an appeal against the decision of the Court of First Instance in Luxembourg. If unsuccessful, then freezer exclusivity in Ireland will be unenforceable in outlets which only have HB freezers. Similar consequences may apply in specific European markets with equivalent structures to those described in the decision. During 2004 the Federal Supreme Court in Brazil (local acronym STF) announced a review of certain cases that it had previously decided in favour of taxpayers. Because of this action we established a provision in 2004 of €169 million for the potential repayment of sales tax credits in the event that the cases establishing precedents in our favour are reversed. Also during 2004 in Brazil, and in common with many other businesses operating in that country, one of our Brazilian subsidiaries received a notice of infringement from the Federal Revenue Service. The notice alleges that a 2001 reorganisation of our local corporate structure was undertaken without valid business purpose. If upheld, the notice could result in a tax claim in respect of prior years. The 2001 reorganisation was comparable with that used by many companies in Brazil and we believe that the likelihood of a successful challenge by the tax authorities is remote. This view is supported by the opinion of outside counsel.
Government regulation We have processes in place to ensure that products, ingredients, manufacturing processes, marketing materials and activities comply with the above-mentioned laws and regulations.
Report of the Directors
Financial Review
Certain discussions and analyses set out in this Annual Report and Accounts include measures which are not defined by generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) such as IFRSs or US GAAP. We believe this information, along with comparable GAAP measurements, is useful to investors because it provides a basis for measuring our operating performance, ability to retire debt and invest in new business opportunities. Our management uses these financial measures, along with the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures, in evaluating our operating performance and value creation. Non-GAAP financial measures should not be considered in isolation from, or as a substitute for, financial information presented in compliance with GAAP. Non-GAAP financial measures as reported by us may not be comparable to similarly titled amounts reported by other companies. Definitions of non-GAAP measures and reconciliations to GAAP measures are provided on pages 17 to 19. Measures of long term value creation
Unilever communicates progress against these measures annually, and management remuneration is aligned with these objectives. The UFCF over a three year period is incorporated as a performance element of Unilever’s management incentive scheme. UFCF and ROIC are non-GAAP measures under IFRSs and US GAAP. We include them in this respect since they are the way in which we communicate our ambition and monitor progress towards our longer-term value creation goals and in order to:
As investor measures, we believe that there are no GAAP measures directly comparable with UFCF and ROIC. However, in the tables on pages 17 and 18, we reconcile each as follows: UFCF to cash flow from operating activities and also to net profit; ROIC to net profit. Unilever cautions that, while UFCF and ROIC are widely used as tools for investment analysis, they are not defined terms under IFRSs or US GAAP and therefore their definition should be carefully reviewed and understood by investors. Investors should be aware that their application may vary in practice and therefore these measures may not be fully comparable between companies. In particular:
Financial Review
Ungeared free cash flow UFCF is cash flow from group operating activities, less capital expenditure, less charges to operating profit for share-based compensation and pensions, and less tax (adjusted to reflect an ungeared position), but before the financing of pensions. The reconciliation of UFCF to the GAAP measures net profit and cash flow from operating activities is as follows:
The tax charge used in determining UFCF can be either the income statement tax charge or the actual cash taxes paid. Our consistently applied definition uses the income statement tax charge in order to eliminate the impact of volatility due to the variable timing of payments around the year end. For 2005 and 2004 the income statement tax charge on this basis is materially impacted by the tax effect of non-cash charges for the impairment of Slim•Fast and certain other non-cash items. UFCF based on actual cash tax paid would be €3.7 billion (2004: €4.8 billion). UFCF reported in the 2004 Annual Report and Accounts was based on cash flow from group operating activities, less capital expenditure and financial investment less a tax charge adjusted to reflect an ungeared position. This measure is the same as defined above in all respects except for the non-cash charge for share-based compensation less payments of €545 million (2004: €(114) million), the non-cash charge for pensions less payments of €(532) million (2004: €(472) million) and net financial investment of €33 million (2004: €43 million), resulting in UFCF on this basis of €4 057 million (2004: €4 803 million).
Financial Review
Return on invested capital ROIC is profit after tax but excluding net interest on net debt and impairment(a) of goodwill and indefinite-lived intangible assets both net of tax, divided by average invested capital for the year. Invested capital is the sum of property, plant and equipment and other non-current investments, software and finite-lived intangible assets, working capital, goodwill and indefinite-lived intangible assets at gross book value and cumulative goodwill written off directly to reserves under an earlier accounting policy. The reconciliation of ROIC to the GAAP measure net profit is as follows:
Financial Review
Underlying sales growth The reconciliation of USG to the GAAP measure turnover is as follows:
Net debt The reconciliation of net debt to the GAAP measure total borrowings is as follows:
Financial review
Basis of reporting and discussion International Financial Reporting Standards The most significant impacts of the transition to IFRS on Unilever’s restated consolidated financial statements relate to the timing of the recognition of items in the income statement. Reported net assets are impacted as a result of these timing changes, but there is no impact on the underlying cash flows generated by Unilever. The key changes in our accounting policies as a result of our adoption of IFRSs are described in note 35 on pages 144 and 145. These changes, unless otherwise stated, have been applied retrospectively in arriving at the opening balance sheet under IFRSs as at 1 January 2004. Reconciliations of our equity as at the transition date and 31 December 2004 and the profit for the year then ended are given in note 35 on pages 146 to 151. For further details of these and other changes in Unilever’s reporting please refer to our website at www.unilever.com/investorcentre. Turnover definition The effect of this change in presentation is a reclassification from advertising and promotions expenditure to a deduction from turnover for the year ended 31 December 2004 amounting to €1 061 million. This change in accounting policy does not have any impact on operating profit or net profit. Critical accounting policies
Goodwill, intangible assets and property, plant and equipment Impairment reviews are performed following the guidance in IAS 36. Such reviews are performed by comparing the carrying value of the asset concerned to that asset’s recoverable amount (being the higher of value in use and fair value less costs to sell). Value in use is a valuation derived from discounted future cash flows. Significant assumptions, such as long-term growth rates and discount rates, are made in preparing these forecast cash flows; although these are believed to be appropriate, changes in these assumptions could change the outcomes of the impairment reviews. The most significant balances of goodwill and intangible assets relate to the global savoury and dressings product group. We have reviewed the carrying value of this cash generating unit by considering expected future cash flows based on actual and planned growth rates and margins for this product group. No impairment loss has been identified. We have reviewed the carrying value of the Slim•Fast business in light of the continued decline in the weight management market segment throughout 2005. Over the last few years, consumer tastes in this group have changed frequently, featuring low-calorie, low-carbohydrate, low-salt, low-sugar and other products. The business declined in 2005 but maintained leadership of the market segment by refreshing its product range and offering a more personalised diet plan. The impairment review of the business resulted in an impairment loss of €363 million (2004: €791 million) reflected in operating profit for the Americas region. The impairment review was based on determining the value in use of the global Slim•Fast business incorporating a number of important assumptions regarding the future performance of the Slim•Fast business. For further details, refer to note 10 on page 99.
Financial
review
Financial instruments
From 1 January 2005, we account for financial instruments in accordance with IAS 32 and 39. Financial instruments are classified according to the purpose for which the instruments were acquired. This gives rise to the following categories: held-to-maturity investments, loans and receivables, available-for-sale financial assets and financial assets at fair value through profit or loss. Please refer to note 1 on page 83 for a description of each of these categories. Based on IAS 32 and 39, we report derivative financial instruments at fair value. Changes in fair values are booked through profit or loss unless the derivatives are designated and effective as hedge of future cash flows, in which case the changes are recognised directly in equity. At the time the hedged cash flow results in the recognition of an asset or a liability, the associated gains or losses on the derivative that had previously been recognised in equity are included in the initial measurement of the asset or liability. For hedged items that do not result in the recognition of an asset or liability, amounts deferred in equity are recognised in the income statement in the same period in which the hedged item affects net profit or loss. Changes in fair value of net investment hedges in relation to foreign subsidiaries are recognised directly in equity. The most important change associated with the implementation of IAS 32 relates to the treatment of our preference share capital. Under the new accounting rules we treat the preference shares as third-party borrowings and the dividends are reported as interest costs through profit or loss.
Retirement benefits Pension accounting requires certain assumptions to be made in order to value our obligations and to determine the charges to be made to the income statement. These figures are particularly sensitive to assumptions for discount rates, inflation rates and expected long-term rates of return on assets. The following table sets out these assumptions, as at 31 December 2005, in respect of the four largest Unilever pension plans. Further details of assumptions made are given in note 22 on pages 115 and 116.
These assumptions are set by reference to market conditions at the valuation date. Actual experience may differ from the assumptions made. The effects of such differences are recognised through the statement of recognised income and expense. Demographic assumptions, such as mortality rates, are set having regard to the latest trends in life expectancy, plan experience and other relevant data. The assumptions are reviewed and updated as necessary as part of the periodic actuarial valuation of the pension plans. Mortality assumptions for the four largest plans are given in more detail in note 22 on page 116.
Share-based compensation
Provisions
Advertising and promotion costs
Deferred tax
Reporting currency and exchange rates
Financial
review
The figures quoted in the following discussion are in euros, at current rates of exchange, ie. the average or year-end rates of each period, unless otherwise stated. Information about exchange rates between the euro, pound sterling and the US dollar is given on page 156. Results
for 2005 compared with 2004 Reported turnover grew by 2.9% in the year to €39 672 million. This increase includes a favourable effect from movements of the average euro exchange rate against the basket of Unilever currencies, which amounted to 1.3% of turnover. The net impact of disposals less acquisitions was a decline in turnover of 1.5% . This arose principally from the sale of European olive oil and other foods businesses. Underlying sales growth in the year of 3.1% was the result of volume increases. Operating profit increased by 25% in the year to €5 314 million with operating margin increasing to 13.4% (2004: 11.0%) . Before the impact of net costs of restructuring, business disposals and impairments, the operating margin for 2005 would have been 0.8 percentage points lower than the previous year. Advertising and promotions were 1.1 percentage points of sales higher than last year. Cost savings and an improved mix more than offset the effect of an increase of nearly €600 million in input costs. Operating charges for restructuring, business disposals and impairments include the impairment of the Slim•Fast business in both 2005 and 2004 amounting to €363 million and €791 million respectively. An overview of performance by region is included in the operating reviews on pages 26 to 28. Net finance costs were 2% lower in the year at €618 million, through lower levels of borrowings. This also reflects a reduction in the finance costs associated with pensions which were €55 million. A reduced contribution was generated from our shares in joint ventures and associates, most significantly from our associate JohnsonDiversey. Profit from discontinued operations includes the gain of €458 million arising from the sale of UCI. The Group’s effective tax rate of profit for the year was 26%, compared with 22% in 2004, which reflected resolution of a higher level of outstanding prior year tax issues. Net profit and earnings per share from continuing operations increased by 21% and 22% respectively in the year. Including the profits of the discontinued operations, total earnings per share increased by 37% in the year. Return on invested capital (ROIC) for the year was 12.5%, up from 10.7% in 2004. This reflects the lower restructuring costs and higher profits on business disposals included in net profit. ROIC retains all goodwill and intangibles in invested capital, regardless of impairment. Acquisitions
and disposals In March 2005 Unilever completed the restructuring of its Portuguese foods business. Before the restructuring Unilever Portugal held an interest in FIMA/VG – Distribuição de Produtos Alimentares, Lda. (FIMA) foods business, a joint venture with Jerónimo Martins Group, in addition to its wholly owned Bestfoods business acquired in 2000. As a result of the transaction the two foods businesses – FIMA and Unilever Bestfoods Portugal – were unified and the joint venture stakes were re-balanced so that Unilever now holds 49% of the combined foods business and Jerónimo Martins Group 51%. On 11 July 2005, we announced the completion of the sale of our Prestige fragrance business, UCI, to Coty Inc. of the United States. Unilever received US $800 million in cash, with the opportunity for further deferred payments contingent upon future sales. On 20 December 2005, Unilever announced its intention to sell its Mora business to Ad van Geloven in the Netherlands, for an undisclosed sum. The agreement is subject to approval by competition authorities and advice from work councils. The proposed transaction relates to the Mora brand and to factories in Maastricht and Mol (Belgium). Other business disposals in 2005 included Stanton Oil in the UK and Ireland, Dextro in various countries in Europe, Opal in Peru, Karo and Knax in Mexico, spreads and cooking products in Australia and New Zealand, Crispa, Mentadent, Marmite, Bovril and Maizena in South Africa, frozen pizza in Austria, Biopon in Hungary and tea plantations in India. The combined annual turnover of these businesses was approximately €200 million. In 2004 we disposed of more than 20 businesses with total turnover in excess of €700 million. Significant disposals included the sale of certain household care brands in North America, our edible oils business under the Capullo, Inca and Mazola brands in Mexico, the Dalda brand in Pakistan and the sale of our European frozen pizza and baguette business. Our chemicals business in India (Hindustan Lever Chemicals) was merged with Tata Chemicals.
Financial
review
On 9 February 2006 Unilever announced its intention to sell the majority of its frozen foods businesses in Europe. The intended sale includes the frozen food portfolio under the Iglo and Birds Eye brands in Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom. For further information on the impact of acquisitions and disposals refer also to the cash flow section of this review on page 24 and to note 28 on page 128. Dividends
and market capitalisation Unilever’s combined market capitalisation at 31 December 2005 was €57.5 billion (2004: €49.3 billion). Balance
sheet Total equity has increased by €2 250 million since 1 January. Net profit added €3 975 million and currency retranslation and fair value gains €540 million. Treasury stock, which is deducted from equity, was used for the conversion of the €0.05 preference shares. This reduced borrowings by €1 380 million and increased equity by €930 million. Subsequent purchases of treasury stock and parent company dividends reduced equity by €1 262 million and €1 867 million respectively. The net debt position (see page 19) at 31 December 2004 was €9 663 million which increased on 1 January 2005 to €11 185 million as a result of the application of IAS 32/39 and IFRS 5 from this date. Closing net debt was €10 502 million, a decrease of €683 million since 1 January. Purchases of treasury stock were €1 276 million (including the share buy-back program of €500 million) and proceeds of business disposals were €804 million. The €1 380 million net debt reduction on conversion of the €0.05 preference shares was largely offset by currency movements. At 31 December 2005, cash and cash equivalents and financial assets (including the positive fair value of derivatives relating to borrowings amounting to €250 million) amounted to €2 114 million (2004: €2 603 million); borrowings, including finance leases, amounted to €12 616 million (2004: €12 266 million). The net of these cash and borrowing positions, being the net debt, amounted to €10 502 million (2004: € 9 663 million). Unilever manages the related interest rate and currency exposures based on this net debt position. Taking into account the various cross currency swaps and other derivatives, 60% of Unilever's net debt was in US dollars (2004: 96%) and 17% in euros (2004: (28)% financial assets), with the remainder spread over a large number of other currencies. The currency distribution of total borrowings was as follows: 51% in US dollars (2004: 58%) and 20% in euros (2004: 15%) with the remainder spread over a large number of other currencies. Further details of the currency analyses are given in note 17 on page 106 and note 18 on page 109. Unilever has committed credit facilities in place to support its commercial paper programmes and for general corporate purposes. The undrawn committed credit facilities in place at the end of 2005 were: bilateral committed credit facilities totalling US $4 292 million, bilateral notes commitments totalling US $200 million and bilateral money market commitments totalling US $1 725 million. Further details regarding these facilities are given in note 18 on page 109. In September, a total of €750 million of term financing was raised through issuance of a 10 year Eurobond. Unilever is satisfied that its financing arrangements are adequate to meet its working capital needs for the foreseeable future. Unilever’s contractual obligations at the end of 2005 included capital expenditure commitments, borrowings, lease commitments and other commitments. A summary of certain contractual obligations at 31 December 2005 is provided in the table below. Further details are set out in the following notes to the accounts: note 11 on page 100, note 18 on page 108, note 19 on pages 110 to 112 and note 27 on page 127. Contractual obligations at 31 December 2005
Financial
review
In 2005, pension liabilities less plan assets amounted to €5 581 million (2004: €5 454 million). In November 2001, NV entered into a forward purchase contract with a counterparty bank to buy 10 000 000 PLC shares at 559p per share in November 2006 to meet the obligation to employees under share option plans. Depending on the market value of this forward purchase contract, a cash collateral must be placed with the counterparty bank at a minimum of €8 million. At 31 December 2005, €16 million of collateral had been placed with the counterparty. Off-balance
sheet arrangements Cash
flow Net cash flow from investing activities was €635 million higher than last year, reflecting higher disposal receipts (including €623 million from the sale of UCI) and net movements in investments with maturity greater than three months. Net cash flow used in financing activities fell by €1 117 million, reflecting borrowing activity offset by increased purchases of own shares. Share
buy-back Finance
and liquidity
Unilever aims to concentrate cash in the parent and finance companies in order to ensure maximum flexibility in meeting changing business needs. Operating subsidiaries are financed through the mix of retained earnings, third-party borrowings and loans from parent and group financing companies that is most appropriate to the particular country and business concerned. Unilever maintains access to global debt markets through an infrastructure of short-term debt programmes (principally US domestic and euro commercial paper programmes) and long-term debt programmes (principally a US Shelf registration and euromarket Debt Issuance Programme). Debt in the international markets is, in general, issued in the name of NV, PLC or Unilever Capital Corporation. NV and PLC will normally guarantee such debt where they are not the issuer. Treasury Unilever Treasury operates as a service centre and is governed by policies and plans approved by the Boards. In addition to policies, guidelines and exposure limits, a system of authorities and extensive independent reporting covers all major areas of activity. Performance is monitored closely. Reviews are undertaken by the corporate internal audit function. The key financial instruments used by Unilever are short- and long-term borrowings, cash and cash equivalents and certain straightforward derivative instruments, principally comprising interest rate swaps and foreign exchange contracts. The accounting for derivative instruments is discussed in note 1 on page 83. The use of leveraged instruments is not permitted. Other relevant disclosures are given in note 2 on pages 86 to 87, and notes 17, 18 and 19 on pages 105 to 113. Unilever Treasury manages a variety of market risks, including the effects of changes in foreign exchange rates, interest rates and liquidity. Further details of the management of these risks are given in note 2 on pages 86 and 87.
Financial
review
Pensions
investment strategy Total
Shareholder Return Unilever’s TSR target is to be in the top third of a reference group including 20 other international consumer goods companies on a three-year rolling basis. At the end of 2004 we were positioned 13th, and at the end of 2005 the ranking was 14th. In 2005, the following companies formed the peer group of comparative companies:
From 2006, Kraft will replace Altria and Kimberly-Clark will replace Gillette in the peer group. Unilever’s position relative to the TSR reference group  The reference group, including Unilever, consists of 21 companies. Unilever’s position is based on TSR over a three-year rolling period. Significant
changes after the balance sheet date
Operating
review by region
Turnover at current rates of exchange fell by 2.6%, mainly due to disposals, and including a positive impact from currency movements of 0.4% . Operating profit at current rates of exchange was at the same level as in 2004, after including a favourable effect of currency movements of 0.2% . The underlying performance of the business after eliminating these exchange translation effects and the impact of acquisitions and disposals is discussed below at constant exchange rates. Our priority in Europe is to regain momentum and improve competitiveness. The focus has been on enhancing the value to consumers of our products through keener pricing, improved quality and more and better innovation. Marketing support has been raised to a more competitive level with additional spend deployed against our best opportunities. The organisation is being streamlined and we are building up stronger capabilities in customer management. We have made progress over the last year. Volume has been slightly positive (compared with a 2% decline in 2004), but investment in pricing meant that underlying sales declined by 0.8% in the year. Central and Eastern Europe performed well in buoyant markets, notably in Russia which was ahead by nearly 20%. Western Europe was challenging, with continued weak consumer demand. Our businesses grew in the Netherlands and Spain, but declined by around 2% in France and Germany and by nearly 4% in the UK. In Foods, we have held overall market share through the course of the year, with growth across all key categories apart from frozen foods. On 9 February 2006 we announced that we were putting up for sale the majority of our frozen foods business in Europe. In Home and Personal Care we had a disappointing year and we have lost market share, particularly in the UK. Overall, there was some pick-up in the fourth quarter, but we are not yet where we want to be. New product launches this year have included Knorr Vie mini shots, extensions of the Becel/Flora pro•activ heart health range, soups fortified with vitamins and low-fat soups. We have introduced a Rexona Sport variant in deodorants, Axe shower gel and Sunsilk hair styling products. We have further improved our Home Care product range with launches that address specific consumer needs, such as ‘no-need-to-pre-treat’ laundry detergents, Sun 4-in-1 dishwash and Domestos sink and drain unblocker. The operating margin, at 14.2%, was 0.4 percentage points higher than last year. Increased advertising and promotions and pricing investment together with higher input costs were partly offset by productivity gains. Net restructuring, disposal and impairment costs, at 0.8% were 1.5 percentage points lower than in 2004.
Operating
review by region
Turnover at current rates of exchange rose by 7.2%, including a positive impact from currency movements of 3.8% . Operating profit at current rates of exchange was 92% higher than in 2004, including a favourable impact from currency movements of 8.3% . The underlying performance of the business after eliminating these exchange translation effects and the impact of disposals is discussed below at constant exchange rates. Underlying sales grew by 4%, all coming from volume gains, broadly based across the region, underpinned by a successful innovation programme. Consumer demand in the US showed a sustained recovery. Our sales in the US grew by 3.2%, accelerating through the year, and we gained market share in aggregate. In Brazil and Mexico, a strong first half was followed by relatively weaker demand in the second half of the year. We grew in line with our markets in Home and Personal Care, but saw some share loss in Foods. Growth in Personal Care across the region has been driven by good consumer response to our initiatives, including vitality innovation and consistent support. This has been particularly evident in the deodorants and personal wash categories, with strong double-digit growth for Axe, now the number one deodorant in the US, and for the Dove and Rexona brands. Another strong Foods performance in the US was driven by further share gains in ice cream, continued good results from the extension of the Country Crock and Bertolli brands into new categories, and from Lipton ready-to-drink and speciality teas. Slim•Fast continued to regain share, but in a much contracted weight management market and sales were well below the previous year. New launches in the US included the well received Dove Cool Moisture range and the extension of Axe into male shower gels. In Latin America our brands have also been very successful in connecting with younger consumers through Rexona ‘teens’ and innovative communication for Axe. In the US we introduced all Small & Mighty laundry detergent, offering the convenience of the same cleaning power in a smaller bottle. We have invested in communication of our Omo laundry brands, under the ‘Dirt is Good’ campaign in southern Latin America. In Foods, we strengthened the vitality credentials of our brands in the US with Promise heart health spread, Ragú organic and support for the anti-oxidant properties of Lipton teas. AdeS continued to build across Latin America with the distinctive nutrition benefits of ‘soy with fruit’. The operating margin at current rates of exchange was 13.0%, 5.7 percentage points higher than in 2004. Net charges for restructuring, disposal and impairment were 3.4%, which was 5.8 percentage points lower than in the prior year. Cost savings offset a higher level of advertising and promotions and increased input costs. There were also gains from the sale of an office in the US, in US healthcare plans and from currency effects on capital reductions.
Operating
review by region
Turnover at current rates of exchange rose by 6.9%, with no net impact from currency movements. Operating profit at current rates of exchange was 24% higher than in 2004, after allowing for an adverse impact from currency movements of 0.6% . The underlying performance of the business after eliminating these exchange translation effects and the impact of disposals is discussed below at constant exchange rates. We have capitalised on our leading positions and buoyant consumer demand across most of the region, growing underlying sales by nearly 9%, in a competitive environment, and increasing market share in key battlegrounds. The growth was broad-based in terms of both categories and geographies. There were notable performances in all major developing and emerging countries, including a strong recovery in India with market share gains, and significant contributions from China, which was up by over 20%, and from South East Asia, South Africa, Turkey and Arabia. Japan returned to growth. After a weak first half, Australia improved in the second half of the year. Most of the increase came from volume, but price growth gained momentum through the year, as we moved to selectively recover increased commodity costs, especially in Home Care. Growth was underpinned by a range of innovations. In skin care in India, Lux has been strengthened with new soap bars from the global range and the introduction of limited editions. Innovations in Pond’s included a new ‘mud’ range in China. In hair care we launched Dove in Indonesia, a Sunsilk summer range across South East Asia, a new variant for Lux Super Rich in China and a strengthened Sunsilk range across several key markets in Africa and the Middle East. New formulations for our laundry products include improved whiteness delivery for Surf in Indonesia and Omo for sensitive skin in Turkey. In tea, we have substantially strengthened the Brooke Bond brand in India, while Lipton is benefiting from strong regional innovations, including Earl Grey and Green Tea variants in markets such as Turkey and Arabia. The operating margin was 12.6%, 1.8 percentage points higher than in 2004. Increased investment in advertising and promotions was partly offset by productivity gains. The remaining difference was due to net restructuring, disposal and impairment charges which were insignificant in 2005 compared with a net charge of 2.9% in 2004.
Operating
review by category
Highlights in 2005 included:
We are embracing vitality at the core of our Foods brands, ensuring they deliver the nutritional and health benefits that consumers are increasingly demanding, as well as that essential ingredient for success – great taste. Becel/Flora pro•activ is a case in point. Originally launched as a spread to help people reduce their cholesterol, Becel/Flora pro•activ has extended rapidly into a range that includes milk drinks, yoghurt products and minidrinks. This no longer relates only to cholesterol, as there is now a mini-drink to help people control blood pressure. In fact, the brand has proved so effective in improving heart health, as part of a balanced diet, that the Netherlands’ largest health insurer, VGZ, is rewarding its policy holders financially when they buy Becel/Flora pro•activ products. To help consumers meet their daily nutritional requirements, we also launched Knorr Vie mini shots in Europe. Free of preservatives and other additives, these convenient natural drinks help consumers on their way towards their daily fruit and vegetable needs. Other advances included new fruit variants of our nutritionally rich, soy-based drink, AdeS, in Latin America. Like so many of our brands that have embraced vitality, AdeS has proved a success and will be extended to other markets. Our dedicated new vitality platforms group are actively creating numerous future opportunities such as the ones mentioned above. In all cases, whether we’re communicating the health benefits of Lipton tea or the vitality credentials of Hellmann’s, we only make health and nutrition claims for our brands that are supported by robust, scientifically-validated evidence. This approach is underpinned by a strict claims guidance framework, as well as a commitment to make nutritional information available to consumers. Improved quality has been another theme of our innovations, reflected in the launch of our gourmet-standard Bertolli Dinner for Two frozen range, a major success in the US. Knorr has also produced exceptional results in the Netherlands and other European countries with its new, high quality wet soups in pouches (also sold as Unox), as has our ice cream business with its new and intensely flavoured Magnum Five Senses. For developing and emerging markets, we have continued to make our products more affordable through packaging and price-per-serving with pioneering products such as Knorr Cubitos seasoning cubes. While consumers increasingly look for ways to eat healthily out of home, they are not willing to sacrifice taste and convenience. This often challenges foodservice operators to offer food that meets all the needs of their customers. Our Unilever Foodsolutions business gives foodservice professionals products that deliver delicious taste, consistent quality, convenience and healthier menu options. In 2005 we launched Knorr Coulis, a new innovative range of pure sauces made from freshly mashed vegetables. To be used as a warm or cold sauce or as a natural ingredient, Knorr Coulis creatively refines and decorates all types of dishes. With its pure, high quality ingredients, its fresh authentic taste and exciting colours, it is a solution that brings chefmanship and vitality naturally together.
Operating
review by category
Highlights in 2005 included:
Vitality is now central to our Home and Personal Care business. The Dove Campaign for Real Beauty, the Omo Dirt is Good campaign and the Lifebuoy Handwashing campaigns in Asia are tangible programmes that bring Unilever’s vitality mission to life in our Home and Personal Care brands. The success of Lifebuoy in India and Indonesia contributed to the performance of our skin business in Asia, as did the launch of Pond’s whitening platform, which underlines Unilever’s strength in the face care sector across Asia. The new Dove Cool Moisture range was launched in North America while the Dove firming range was rolled out globally. We also extended the Dove Campaign for Real Beauty with the creation of the Dove Self-Esteem Fund for young women to educate and inspire girls on a wider definition of beauty. In South Africa we relaunched Vaseline with a range of lotions and creams aligned with the new global packaging. We also launched South Africa’s first mass-market male lotion, new Vaseline ‘For Men’. To grow our share of the male grooming market, we launched Axe shower gel in North America. Within just three years, Axe has become the leading deodorant brand in the US. We also launched Rexona Sport for Men with an award-winning advertising campaign called ‘Stunt City’. Rexona is now the number one male deodorant brand in Russia and Ukraine. In hair, the new Sunsilk colour enhancement range in Europe has been designed to increase the brand’s appeal among young consumers. In oral care, the world’s first centre-filled gel toothpaste was introduced in Vietnam. Innovation has reinvigorated our laundry business. The Omo Dirt is Good campaign was rolled out across most of Asia after its launch in Latin America and Europe, giving us near global coverage. In Europe, we introduced a new gel-layered detergent tablet that helped make Skip the fastest growing HPC brand in France by the end of 2005. A new whiteness shading technology in Latin America gave consumers more appealing whites with Radiant. The proprietary technology behind the innovation is ensuring we keep ahead of our key competitors. In North America, all Small & Mighty is leading the concentrated liquid detergent market. Its success illustrates how great mixes, which have both a consumer-winning innovation and a strong customer benefit, can be successful. In China, we continued to develop the fabric conditioners market where Comfort is the market leader. The level of innovation in household care has been equally creative. Cif, for example, rolled out pioneering power cream sprays for the bathroom and kitchen. The traditional offer to the consumer of cream from Cif has now been enhanced with an attractive new proposition with the same power of the Cif cream in a spray. Domestos, meanwhile, extended its ‘kill germ’ power into a new territory with the sink and drain unblocker that now clears blockages up to twice as fast as the market leader.
The following discussion about risk management activities includes ‘forward-looking’ statements that involve risk and uncertainties. The actual results could differ materially from those projected. See the ‘Cautionary Statement’ on page 04. Unilever’s system of risk management is outlined on page 74. Responsibility for establishing a coherent framework for the Group to manage risk resides with the Boards. The remit of the Boards is outlined on page 35. Particular risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to vary from those described in forward-looking statements within this document, or which could impact on our ability to meet our published targets, have been identified. In this context the following specific risks have been identified as areas of focus in 2006.
Sales and profit growth We have a number of large global brands, including 12 with an annual turnover of greater than €1 billion which often depend on global or regional development and supply chains. Any adverse event affecting consumer confidence or continuity of supply of such a brand could have an impact in many markets. The carrying value of intangible assets associated with many of our brands is significant, and depends on the future success of those brands. There remains a risk that events affecting one or more of our global brands could potentially impair the value of those brands. As the retail market place through which our products are distributed continues to evolve, our growth and profitability can be threatened if we do not adapt our strategies and enhance our operational capabilities. It is important that we continue to build and deepen relationships with our customers. Plans to raise our effectiveness in the trade, where necessary, receive increasing attention at all levels.
Change initiatives
People
Corporate reputation
Potential economic instability
Risk management
Price and supply of raw materials and commodities contracts
Insurance risks
Financial risks
Further information about these, including sensitivity analysis to changes in certain of the key measures, is given in note 2 on pages 86 and 87 and note 22 on page 114.
Other risks
Report of the Directors
Corporate governance
Introduction
The
Unilever Group NV and PLC together with their group companies operate effectively as a single economic entity. This is achieved by a series of agreements between NV and PLC (the Foundation Agreements, see below), together with special provisions in the Articles of Association of NV and PLC. NV and PLC have the same directors and adopt the same accounting principles. Shareholders of both companies receive dividends on an equalised basis. NV and PLC and their group companies constitute a single reporting entity for the purposes of presenting consolidated accounts. Accordingly, the accounts of the Unilever Group are presented by both NV and PLC as their respective consolidated accounts. NV and PLC have agreed to co-operate in all areas and to ensure that all group companies act accordingly. NV and PLC are holding and service companies, and the business activity of Unilever is carried out by their subsidiaries around the world. Shares in group companies may ultimately be held wholly by either NV or PLC, or jointly by the two companies, in varying proportions. The
Equalisation Agreement The
Deed of Mutual Covenants The
Agreement for Mutual Guarantees of Borrowing Corporate
Policies Unilever corporate policies include: the Code of Business Principles; policies on positive assurance and risk management; policies on environmental strategy and reporting, social and ethical matters, including in respect of human rights; corporate social responsibility; the Unilever share dealing code; and a procedures manual for the timely release of price sensitive information. The Code
of Business Principles sets out the standards of behaviour we require from
all of our employees. We also have a Code of Ethics that applies to the senior
executive, financial and accounting officers and comprises the standards prescribed
by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The Code of Ethics comprises
an extract of the relevant provisions of Unilever’s Code of Business
Principles and the more detailed rules of conduct that implement it. Copies
of the Code of Business Principles and the Code of Ethics are posted on
our website at Our internal risk management and control systems are described on page 31. Developments
in corporate governance Developments
in 2004
Corporate
governance
Developments
in 2005 In 2005, we also announced that we would undertake a thorough review of our corporate structure to see if any change should be made. The review team was led by the Chairman, Antony Burgmans, and included Non-Executive Directors David Simon and Jeroen van der Veer. On 19 December 2005, the conclusions of the structure review were announced. The Boards decided that Unilever would retain its current structure with some important changes (see below). Reference is made to the announcement text on our website at www.unilever.com/ourcompany/investorcentre. Proposed
Developments for 2006
The above proposals will require changes to the Articles of Association of NV and PLC, to the Deed of Mutual Covenants, and to the Equalisation Agreement. More information on these proposals can be found in the notices to these AGMs, which can be found at www.unilever.com/investorcentre/agms. The text
that follows describes the corporate governance arrangements since the 2005
AGMs. More information on our corporate governance arrangements is set out
in The Governance of Unilever, the Boards’ statement of their internal
arrangements, which can be found at The
Boards The Boards are one-tier boards, comprising Executive Directors and, in a majority, Non-Executive Directors. The Boards have ultimate responsibility for the management, general affairs, direction and performance of the business as a whole. The responsibility of the Directors is collective, taking into account their respective roles as Executive Directors and Non-Executive Directors. The Executive Directors have additional responsibilities for the operation of our business as determined by the Group Chief Executive. Our Directors have set out a number of areas of responsibility which are reserved to themselves and other areas for which matters are delegated to the Group Chief Executive and committees whose actions are regularly reported to and monitored by the Boards. These are described on pages 37 to 39. Further details
of how our Boards effectively operate as one board, govern themselves and
delegate their authorities are set out in The Governance of Unilever, which
can be found at Appointment
of Directors As mentioned above, proposals will be made to the AGMs in 2006 to allow shareholders the right to nominate directors. Below, we describe our current system used in 2005.
Corporate
governance
Currently, in the case of NV, the Articles of Association grant to the holders of the special ordinary shares numbered 1-2 400 inclusive the right to draw up a nomination list for shareholders to vote upon at the General Meeting. In the case of PLC, this right of nomination is given by the Articles of Association to the holders of PLC’s deferred stock. The joint holders of both the NV special ordinary shares and the PLC deferred stock are N.V. Elma and United Holdings Limited, which are joint subsidiaries of NV and PLC. The boards of N.V. Elma and United Holdings Limited comprise the members of the Nomination Committee. Only persons who have offered themselves for election to the Boards of both NV and PLC are eligible to be elected as Directors of NV and PLC. The interests of our shareholders are protected because all the Directors submit themselves for election every year and shareholders can remove any of them by a simple majority vote. Thus, as a practical matter, the Boards cannot perpetuate themselves contrary to the will of the shareholders. In addition, shareholders can overrule Director nominations. In the case of NV, this can be done by a resolution adopted by at least a two-thirds majority of the votes cast, which majority must represent more than one half of NV’s issued share capital. If this happens, a new meeting can be held and a new Director can be appointed with an absolute majority of the votes cast. In the case of PLC, shareholders can overrule nominations with resolutions passed at General Meetings to alter the nomination rights attached to the Deferred Shares and to alter the Articles of Association. The former resolution would require a two-thirds majority of those voting, so long as that majority comprises not less than half of the issued PLC shares. The latter resolution would require a three-quarters majority of those voting. Board
meetings
In 2005 the Boards of NV and PLC met ten times. All our Executive Directors attended all meetings. All the Non-Executive Directors attended all meetings, except for Hilmar Kopper and David Simon who each missed one meeting and Jeroen van der Veer and Oscar Fanjul who each missed two meetings. Board meetings are held either in London or Rotterdam and chaired by the Chairman. The Chairman is assisted by the Joint Secretaries, who ensure the Boards are supplied with all the information necessary for their deliberations. The Chairman and the Joint Secretaries involve the Senior Independent Director (see page 38) in the arrangements for Board Meetings. Board
induction and training Board
evaluation 2005 was the first year of our new Boards’ operation. To ensure optimal functioning of the Board and the individual Directors and compliance with the most recent developments in best practice, the Nomination Committee commissioned Spencer Stuart to carry out a full review of the functioning of the Boards and of its governance arrangements. This review concluded that our arrangements stood comparison with our peers. A full report was made to the Boards in February 2006 and a range of minor changes in terms of the day-to-day operations of the Boards will be introduced during the balance of the year. A Board evaluation and Chairman and individual director appraisal process is scheduled for the second quarter of 2006. Thus, the changes following the said review can be taken into account in the evaluations. Board
support A procedure is in place to enable Directors, if they so wish, to seek independent professional advice at Unilever’s expense. Board
changes Antony Burgmans took up the role of Non-Executive Chairman of NV and PLC at the 2005 AGMs and Patrick Cescau became Group Chief Executive in April 2005.
Corporate governance
Leon Brittan, Lynda Chalker, Bertrand Collomb, Wim Dik, Oscar Fanjul, Hilmar Kopper, David Simon and Jeroen van der Veer were nominated for re-election as Non-Executive Directors of NV and PLC at the 2005 AGMs. Their biographies are set out on page 49. In 2005, Bertrand Collomb, our Senior Independent Director, became Vice-Chairman of NV and PLC, Wim Dik joined the Audit Committee, and Antony Burgmans joined the External Affairs and Corporate Relations Committee. At the 2005 AGMs, Clive Butler, Keki Dadiseth and André van Heemstra retired as Executive Directors and Claudio Gonzalez retired as Non-Executive Director. At the 2006 AGMs, all of the Executive Directors and the Non-Executive Directors, with the exception of Bertrand Collomb, Oscar Fanjul and Hilmar Kopper, will be nominated for re-election. Bertrand Collomb, Oscar Fanjul and Hilmar Kopper will retire as Non-Executive Directors at the 2006 AGMs and their colleagues wish to thank them for their advice during the period of their appointments. In addition at the 2006 AGMs, Charles Golden, Executive Vice-President and CFO of Eli Lilly and Company, Byron Grote, CFO of BP p.l.c., Jean-Cyril Spinetta, Chairman/CEO of Air France-KLM S.A., and Kornelis (Kees) Storm, former Chairman of the Executive Board of AEGON N.V. will be nominated as Non-Executive Directors. Biographical details for the new Non-Executive Directors are contained in the 2006 AGM Notice’s of Meeting, and on our website at www.unilever.com/ourcompany/investorcentre.
Chairman and Group Chief Executive The Group Chief Executive has been entrusted, within the parameters set out in the Articles of Association of NV and PLC and The Governance of Unilever, with all the Boards' powers, authorities and discretions in relation to the operational management of Unilever. The Group Chief Executive has the authority to determine which duties regarding the operational management of the companies and their business enterprises will be carried out under his responsibility by one or more Executive Directors or by one or more other persons. This provides a basis to the Unilever Executive team (UEx) that reports to the Group Chief Executive. For UEx members’ biographies see page 50. For our business structure, please refer to ‘About Unilever’ on page 10. Executive Directors The Executive Directors are full-time employees of Unilever. Information about their remuneration can be found in the report of the Remuneration Committee and on our website at www.unilever.com/investorcentre/corpgovernance. The current Executive Directors are long-serving Unilever executives who can reasonably expect, subject to satisfactory performance, to be employed by Unilever until retirement. The Remuneration Committee takes the view that the entitlement of the Executive Directors to the security of twelve months’ notice of termination of employment is in line both with the practice of many comparable companies and the entitlement of other senior executives within Unilever. The Remuneration Committee’s aim is always to deal fairly with cases of termination while taking a robust line in minimising any compensation. The Executive Directors submit themselves for re-election at the AGMs each year. The Nomination Committee carefully considers each nomination for reappointment. The Directors stop holding executive office on ceasing to be Directors. Those appointed prior to 2004 retire at the latest by the age of 62. Appointees from 2004 onwards retire at an age between 60 and 65, as decided by either them or Unilever. At the AGMs of 2001 our shareholders adopted the remuneration policy for Executive Directors. Further changes were made at the AGMs in 2005. We do not grant our Executive Directors any personal loans and guarantees. There are no family relationships between any of our Executive Directors, other key management personnel or Non-Executive Directors. None of our Executive Directors are elected or appointed under any arrangement or understanding. Executive Directors are to obtain approval from the Chairman for all outside Board appointments. Normally not more than one such appointment should be accepted. For Executive Directors’ biographies see page 49.
Non-Executive Directors
Corporate
governance
Role and Responsibility
Our Non-Executive
Directors are chosen for their broad and relevant experience and international
outlook, as well as their independence. They form the Audit Committee, the
Nomination Committee, the Remuneration Committee and the External Affairs
and Corporate Relations Committee. The roles and membership of these key
Board committees are described on page 39. The profile set by the Boards
for the Non-Executive Directors and the chart used for orderly succession
planning can be seen on our website at
Meetings
Senior Independent Director
Tenure
Remuneration Independence Our definition of ‘independence’ for Directors is set out in The Governance of Unilever. It is derived from the applicable definitions in use in the Netherlands, UK and US. Our current Non-Executive Directors are considered to be independent of Unilever, with the exception of Antony Burgmans. Our Boards reached this conclusion after conducting a thorough review of all relevant relationships of the Non-Executive Directors, and their related or connected persons. A number of relationships, such as non-executive directorships, exist between several of our Non-Executive Directors and companies that provide banking, insurance or financial advisory services to Unilever. Our Boards considered in each case the number of other companies that also provide or could readily provide such services to Unilever, the significance to those companies of the services they provide to Unilever, the roles of the Non-Executive Directors within those companies and the significance of that role to our Non-Executive Directors. It concluded that none of these relationships threaten the independence of the Non-Executive Directors concerned. For example, the Boards have satisfied themselves that Leon Brittan’s position at UBS Investment Bank does not involve him in any way in its broking relationship with Unilever. They have noted that Lynda Chalker’s involvement in consultancy services for Unilever had been terminated before she was elected a Non-Executive Director in May 2004. The Boards have formed the view that the fact that Antony Burgmans is a member of the Supervisory Board of ABN AMRO, and David Simon is Senior Advisor of Morgan Stanley Dean Witter, was not material. The Board considers that the Chairmanship of Bertrand Collomb and the Non-Executive Directorship of Oscar Fanjul, and Lynda Chalker's membership of the International Advisory Board, of Lafarge, do not affect their status as independent in relation to their Non-Executive Directorships of Unilever. Antony Burgmans, who before May 2005 was an Executive Director, is not considered to be independent. The Nomination Committee and the Boards nominated him for election as a Non-Executive Director in 2005 because of his thorough knowledge of Unilever and its operations. In addition to his role as Chairman, the Boards considered his knowledge of the business to be essential to see through the changes resulting from the structure review. We expect Antony Burgmans to be succeeded by an independent Chairman in 2007. None of our Non-Executive Directors are elected or appointed under any arrangement or understanding.
Corporate
governance
Board committees
Audit Committee The Audit Committee assists the Boards in fulfilling their oversight responsibilities in respect of the integrity of Unilever’s financial statements; risk management and internal control arrangements; compliance with legal and regulatory requirements; the performance, qualifications and independence of the external auditors; and the performance of the internal audit function. The Committee is directly responsible, subject to local laws regarding shareholder approval, for the nomination, compensation and oversight of the external auditors. The Audit Committee is fully compliant with the rules regarding audit committees that are applicable in the Netherlands, UK and US. The Committee’s responsibilities and powers are fully aligned with all requirements in the UK, US and the Netherlands. The Audit Committee is supplied with all information necessary for the performance of its duties by the Chief Auditor, Chief Financial Officer, and Deputy Chief Financial Officer. Both the Chief Auditor and the external auditors have direct access to the Audit Committee separately from management. See page 70 for the Report of the Audit Committee to the shareholders.
Nomination Committee responsibilities for succession planning and oversight of corporate governance matters. It is supplied with information by the Joint Secretaries. See page 52 for the Report of the Nomination Committee to the shareholders.
Remuneration Committee The Committee reviews Directors’ remuneration and is responsible for the executive share-based incentive plans. It determines, within the parameters set by our shareholders, specific remuneration arrangements for each of the Executive Directors, the remuneration scales and arrangements for Non-Executive Directors and the remuneration of the tier of management directly below the Board. The Committee is supplied with information by Jan van der Bijl, Joint Secretary of Unilever. The detailed report to shareholders on Directors’ remuneration is on pages 53 to 69.
External Affairs and Corporate Relations Committee
Routine business committees
Disclosures Committee
Corporate governance
Directors – Various formal matters The Articles of Association of NV and PLC do not require Directors of NV or Directors of PLC to hold shares in NV or PLC. However, the remuneration arrangements applicable to our Executive Directors require our Executive Directors to build and retain a personal shareholding in Unilever equal to at least 150% of their annual base pay.
Directors – Indemnification The power to indemnify directors is provided for in PLC’s Articles of Association. Deeds of indemnity were issued to all PLC Directors during 2005. Appropriate Directors’ and Officers’ liability insurance is in place for all Unilever Directors.
Directors – Conflicts of interest Directors are not permitted to take part in any discussion or decision-making that involves a subject or transaction in relation to which they have a conflict of interest with the company. All transactions in which there are conflicts of interest with Directors must be agreed on terms that are customary in the sector concerned. As a formal matter, under Dutch law Directors are able to vote on transactions in which they are materially interested so long as they are acting in good faith. In general, PLC Directors cannot vote in respect of contracts in which they know they are materially interested, unless, for example, their interest is shared with other shareholders and employees. In 2005 no conflict of interests transactions took place between the Directors and NV and PLC.
Shareholder
matters
Relations with shareholders and other investors The Chief Financial Officer has lead responsibility for investor relations, with the active involvement of the Group Chief Executive. They are supported by our Investor Relations department which organises presentations for analysts and investors. Such presentations are generally made available on our website. Briefings on quarterly results are given via teleconference and are accessible by telephone or via our website. For further information visit our website at www.unilever.com/investorcentre. The Boards are regularly briefed on reactions to the quarterly results announcements. They, or the relevant Board Committee, are briefed on any issues raised by shareholders that are relevant to their responsibilities. Our shareholders can, and do, raise issues directly with the relevant Executive Director or the Chairman and, if appropriate, a relevant Non-Executive Director or the Senior Independent Director. Both NV and PLC communicate with their respective shareholders through the AGMs as well as responding to their questions and enquiries during the course of the year. We take the views of our shareholders into account and, in accordance with all applicable legislation and regulations, may consult them in an appropriate way before putting major new proposals at our AGMs.
General Meetings of shareholders General Meetings of shareholders of NV and PLC are held at times and places decided by our Boards. NV meetings are held in Rotterdam and PLC meetings are held in London on consecutive days. The notices calling the meeting normally go out more than thirty days prior to the meetings and include further information on how to gain access to the AGMs and how to vote by proxy. At the AGMs, a full account is given of the progress of the business over the last year and there is a review of current issues. Shareholders are encouraged to attend the meetings and ask questions, and the question-and-answer sessions form an important part of the meetings in both Rotterdam and London. We welcome our external auditors to the AGMs and they are entitled to address the meetings.
Corporate governance
We are committed to efforts to establish more effective ways of communication with our shareholders around the AGMs. Electronic communication is becoming an important medium for shareholders, providing ready access to shareholder information and reports, and for voting purposes.
NV was one of the founders
of the Dutch Shareholders’ Communication
Channel. NV shareholders participating in the Dutch Shareholders’ Communication
Channel are able to appoint electronically a proxy to vote on their behalf at
the NV AGM and NV shareholders who wish to participate should contact their bank
or broker. Shareholders of PLC in the United Kingdom can choose to receive electronic
notification that the Annual Review, Annual Report and Accounts and Notice of
AGMs have been published on our website, instead of receiving printed copies,
and can also electronically appoint a proxy to vote on their behalf at the AGM.
Registration for electronic communication by shareholders of PLC can be made
at
Voting rights Shareholders can vote in person or by proxy, and can cast one vote for each €0.51 (Fl. 1.12) nominal amount of NV ordinary shares, NV preference shares or NV New York shares. Similar arrangements apply to holders of depositary receipts issued for NV shares (see pages 43 and 44). PLC shareholders can cast one vote for each PLC ordinary 1.4p share they hold. Shareholders can vote in person at the meeting or by proxy. Proxies should be submitted to the Registrars, Computershare Investor Services PLC, whose details can be found on page 190, at least 48 hours before the AGM. More information on the exercise of voting rights can be found in NV’s and PLC’s Articles of Association and in the respective notices of meetings. Holders of NV New York shares or PLC American Depository Receipts of shares will receive a proxy form enabling them to authorise and instruct ABN AMRO N.V. or Citibank N.A. respectively to vote on their behalf at the shareholders’ meeting of NV or PLC. N.V. Elma and United Holdings Limited (the holders of NV’s special shares), other group companies of NV which hold ordinary or preference shares, and United Holdings Limited, which owns half of PLC’s deferred stock, are not permitted to vote at General Meetings. The proxy vote is published at the meetings and the outcome of the votes, including the proxy votes, is put on Unilever’s website.
Shareholder proposed resolutions Shareholders who together hold shares representing at least 5% of the total voting rights of PLC, or 100 shareholders who hold on average £100 each in nominal value of PLC capital, can require PLC to propose a resolution at a General Meeting. PLC shareholders holding in aggregate one tenth of the issued ordinary shares of PLC are able to convene a general meeting of PLC.
Required majorities
Right to hold shares
Equalisation Agreement The Equalisation Agreement sets out the rights and benefits accruing to each unit of ownership in NV in relation to each unit of ownership in PLC. Under the Equalisation Agreement we compare the ordinary share capital of the two companies in units: a unit made up of €5.445 nominal of NV’s ordinary capital carries the same weight as a unit made up of £1 nominal of PLC’s ordinary capital. For every unit (€5.445) you have of NV you have the same rights and benefits as the owner of a unit (£1) of PLC. NV’s ordinary shares currently each have a nominal value of €0.51, and PLC’s share capital is divided into ordinary shares of 1.4p each. This means that a €5.445 unit of NV is made up of approximately 10.7 NV ordinary shares of €0.51 each and a £1 unit of PLC is made up of approximately 71.4 PLC ordinary shares of 1.4p each. Consequently, one NV ordinary share equates to about 6.67 ordinary shares of PLC.
Corporate governance
When we pay ordinary dividends we use this formula. On the same day, NV and PLC allocate funds for the dividend from their parts of our current profits and free reserves. We pay the same amount on each NV share as on 6.67 PLC shares calculated at the relevant exchange rate. For interim dividends this exchange rate is the average rate for the quarter before we declare the dividend. For final dividends it is the average rate for the year. In arriving at the equalised amount we include any tax payable by the Company in respect of the dividend, but calculate it before any tax deductible by the Company from the dividend. The Equalisation Agreement provides that if one company had losses, or was unable to pay its preference dividends, the loss or shortfall would be made up out of:
If either company could not pay its ordinary dividends, we would follow the same procedure, except that the current profits of the other company would only be used after it had paid its own ordinary shareholders and if the Directors thought this more appropriate than, for example, using its own free reserves. So far, NV and PLC have always been able to pay their own dividends, so we have never had to follow this procedure. If we did, the payment from one company to the other would be subject to any United Kingdom and Netherlands tax and exchange control laws applicable at that time. Under the Equalisation Agreement, the two companies are permitted to pay different dividends in the following exceptional circumstances:
In either of these rare cases, NV and PLC could pay different amounts of dividend if the Boards thought it appropriate. The company paying less than the equalised dividend would put the difference between the dividends into a reserve: an equalisation reserve in the case of exchange rate fluctuations, or a dividend reserve in the case of a government restriction. The reserves would be paid out to its shareholders when it became possible or reasonable to do so, which would ensure that the shareholders of both companies would ultimately be treated the same. If both companies were to go into liquidation, NV and PLC would each use any funds available for shareholders to pay the prior claims of their own preference shareholders. Then they would use any surplus to pay each other’s preference shareholders, if necessary. After these claims had been met, they would pay out any equalisation or dividend reserve to their own shareholders before pooling the remaining surplus. This would be distributed to the ordinary shareholders of both companies, once again on the basis that the owner of €5.445 nominal NV ordinary share capital would get the same as the owner of £1 nominal PLC ordinary share capital. If one company were to go into liquidation, we would apply the same principles as if both had gone into liquidation simultaneously. In principle, issues of bonus shares and rights offerings can only be made in ordinary shares. Again we would ensure that shareholders of NV and PLC received shares in equal proportions, using the ratio of €5.445 NV nominal share capital to £1 PLC nominal share capital. The subscription price for one new NV share would have to be the same, at the prevailing exchange rate, as the price for 6.67 new PLC shares. Neither company can issue or reduce capital without the consent of the other. The Articles of Association of NV establish that any payment under the Equalisation Agreement will be credited or debited to the income statement for the financial year in question. Under Article 2 of the Articles of Association of NV and Clause 3 of the Memorandum of Association of PLC, each company is required to carry out the Equalisation Agreement with the other. Both documents state that the Agreement cannot be changed or terminated without the approval of shareholders. For NV, the General Meeting can decide to alter or terminate the Equalisation Agreement at the proposal of the Board. The necessary approval of the General Meeting is then that at least one half of the total issued ordinary capital must be represented at an ordinary shareholders’ meeting, where the majority must vote in favour; and (if they would be disadvantaged or the agreement is to be terminated), at least two-thirds of the total issued preference share capital must be represented at a preference shareholders’ meeting, where at least three-quarters of them must vote in favour. For PLC, the necessary approval must be given by the holders of a majority of all issued shares voting at a General Meeting and the holders of the ordinary shares, either by three-quarters in writing, or by three-quarters voting at a General Meeting where the majority of the ordinary shares in issue are represented. In addition, Article 3 of the PLC Articles of Association states that PLC’s Board must carry out the Equalisation Agreement and that the other provisions of the Articles of Association are subject to it. We are advised by counsel that these provisions oblige our Boards to carry out the Equalisation Agreement, unless it is amended or terminated with the approval of the shareholders of both companies. If the Boards fail to enforce the Agreement, shareholders can compel them to do so under Netherlands and United Kingdom law.
Corporate governance
As mentioned on page 35, a proposal to amend the Equalisation Agreement will be put to shareholders at the 2006 AGMs. More information on this proposal can be found in the notices to these AGMs which can be found at www.unilever.com/investorcentre/agms.
Combined earnings per share Further information about these calculations, and about the calculation of earnings per share on a diluted basis, can be found in note 8 on page 97. Despite the Equalisation Agreement, NV and PLC are separate companies, and are subject to different laws and regulations governing dividend payments in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. In our combined earnings per share calculation, we assume that both companies will be able to pay their dividends out of their part of our profits. This has always been the case in the past, but if we did have to make a payment from one to the other it could result in additional taxes, and reduce our combined earnings per share.
Share capital
PLC’s issued share capital on 31 December 2005 was made up of:
For NV share capital, the euro amounts quoted in this document are representations in euros on the basis of Article 67c of Book 2 of the Civil Code in the Netherlands, rounded to two decimal places, of underlying share capital in Dutch guilders, which have not been converted into euros in NV’s Articles of Association or in the Equalisation Agreement. Until conversion formally takes place by amendment of the Articles of Association, the entitlements to dividends and voting rights are based on the euro equivalent of the underlying Dutch guilder according to the official euro exchange rate. As mentioned on page 35, proposals to simplify the relationship between the NV and PLC shares by establishing a one-to-one equivalence in their underlying economic value will be put to shareholders at the 2006 AGMs. More information on this proposal can be found in the notices to these AGMs and these can be found at www.unilever.com/investorcentre/agms.
Stichting Administratiekantoor Unilever N.V. (Foundation NV Trust Office)
The depositary receipts issued by Nedamtrust against NV shares were known as Nedamtrust certificates. They were traded and quoted on Euronext Amsterdam and other European stock exchanges. Nedamtrust had issued certificates for NV’s ordinary and NV 7% cumulative preference shares, and almost all the NV shares traded and quoted in Europe were in the form of these certificates. The exception is that there are no certificates for NV’s 4% and 6% cumulative preference shares. In October 2005, Nedamtrust held a meeting of the holders of Nedamtrust certificates to approve the transfer of the administration of the underlying shares to a new trust office, Stichting Administratiekantoor Unilever N.V. (Foundation NV Trust Office). These proposals were made in order for the trust office to be fully compliant with the Dutch Corporate Governance Code. The holders of the Nedamtrust certificates approved the transfer of the administration of the NV shares held by Nedamtrust to the new Foundation NV Trust Office with a majority of 99.6% of the votes cast; approximately 23% of all outstanding Nedamtrust certificates were represented. The meeting furthermore expressed its confidence in the board of the Foundation. The Foundation NV Trust Office was incorporated on 31 October 2005. The transfer of the administration of the NV shares from Nedamtrust to the Foundation took place on 13 January 2006. The Foundation NV Trust Office and its arrangements are fully compliant with the Dutch Corporate Governance Code. The text that follows describes the arrangements of the new Foundation NV Trust Office following acceptance by the certificate holders of the transfer of the administration of the underlying NV shares.
Corporate
governance
Depositary receipts for shares Holders of depositary receipts can under all circumstances exchange their depositary receipts for the underlying shares (or vice versa). Holders of depositary receipts are entitled to dividends that are paid on the underlying shares held by the Foundation.
Voting by holders of depositary receipts Holders of depositary receipts not attending a shareholders’ meeting and who participate in the Dutch Shareholders’ Communication Channel can also issue binding voting instructions to the Foundation. The Foundation is obliged to follow these instructions. The same applies to holders of depositary receipts that instruct the Foundation NV Trust Office outside the Shareholders Communication Channel.
Voting by the Foundation NV Trust Office If a change to shareholders’ rights is proposed, Foundation NV Trust Office will let shareholders know if it intends to vote, at least 14 days in advance if possible. It will do this by advertising in the press. Hitherto the majority of votes cast by ordinary shareholders at NV meetings have been cast by the trust office. Unilever and the Foundation NV Trust Office have a policy of actively encouraging holders of depositary receipts to exercise their voting rights in NV meetings.
Foundation NV Trust Office’s Board The trust office shall report periodically, but at least once a year, on its activities.
Foundation NV Trust Office’s shareholding
Further information on Foundation NV Trust Office, its arrangements and its activities can be found on www.unilever.com/ourcompany/investorcentre.
Leverhulme Trust When the will trusts were varied in 1983, the interests of the beneficiaries of his will were also preserved. Four classes of special shares were created in Margarine Union (1930) Limited, a subsidiary of PLC. One of these classes can be converted at the end of the year 2038 into 157 500 000 PLC ordinary shares of 1.4p each. These convertible shares replicate the rights which the descendants of the first Viscount would have had under his will. This class of the special shares only has a right to dividends in specified circumstances, and no dividends have yet been paid. PLC guarantees the dividend and conversion rights of the special shares. The first Viscount wanted the trustees of the trusts he established to be Directors of PLC. On 28 February 2006 the trustees of the charitable trusts were:
On 28 February 2006, in their capacity as trustees of the two charitable trusts, they held approximately 5% of PLC’s issued ordinary capital.
Corporate
governance
Requirements
and compliance – general The preceding description of our governance arrangements and the text on compliance that follows reflect Unilever’s governance arrangements following the changes adopted at the Shareholder Meetings in May 2005. They also reflect our Boards’ intentions for 2006 and 2007. The Boards reserve the right, in cases where they decide such to be conducive to the interests of the companies and the enterprise connected therewith, to depart from that which is set out in the present and previous sections in relation to our corporate governance. Further changes will be reported in future Annual Reports and Accounts and, when necessary, through changes to the relevant documents published on our website. As appropriate, proposals for change will be put to our shareholders for approval. Further information can be found in The Governance of Unilever, the Boards’ own constitutional document, on our website at www.unilever.com/investorcentre/corpgovernance. This describes the terms of reference of our Board Committees, including their full responsibilities. It will be kept up to date with changes in our internal constitutional arrangements that our Boards may make from time to time. General
Board and Committee structures
Board evaluation, and Chairman and individual Director appraisals
Role of the Chairman
Nomination of Directors
Corporate governance
Following the review of our corporate structure in 2005, proposals will be put to the NV and PLC AGMs in May 2006 to substantially alter these arrangements and bring them fully in line with the Dutch Code (see page 35).
Risk management and control The Board considers that the internal risk management and control systems are appropriate for our business and in compliance with bpp II.1.3. In bpp II.1.4 the Dutch Code invites our Board to make a statement on our internal risk management and control systems. In its report, published on 20 December 2005, the Corporate Governance Code Monitoring Committee has made recommendations concerning the application of this best practice provision. In accordance with its recommendation and in light of the above, the Board believes that, as regards financial reporting risks:
This statement is not a statement in accordance with the requirements of Section 404 of the US Sarbanes Oxley Act.
Share options
Retention period of shares Severance pay During 2005, Clive Butler, Keki Dadiseth and André van Heemstra ceased to be Directors. For their severance arrangements see page 60.
Regulations for transactions in securities in other companies
Conflicts of interest
Financing preference shares
Corporate governance
Anti-takeover constructions and control over the company
Meetings of analysts and presentations to investors
Provision of information
Requirements – the United Kingdom In the preceding pages we have complied with the requirement to report on how we apply the Principles and the provisions in the Combined Code. 2005 was the first year of our new Boards’ operation. To ensure optimal functioning of the Board and the individual Directors and compliance with the most recent developments in best practice, the Nomination Committee commissioned Spencer Stuart to carry out a full review of the functioning of the Boards and of its governance arrangements. This review concluded that our arrangements stood comparison with our peers. A full report was made to the Boards in February 2006 and a range of minor changes in terms of the day-to-day operations of the Boards will be introduced during the balance of the year. A Board evaluation and Chairman and individual director appraisal process is scheduled for the second quarter of 2006. Thus, the changes following the said review can be taken into account in the evaluations. Antony Burgmans, who before May 2005 was an Executive Director, is not considered to be independent. The Nomination Committee and the Boards nominated him for election as a Non-Executive Director in 2005 because of his thorough knowledge of Unilever and its operations. In addition to his role as Chairman, the Board considered his knowledge of the business to be essential to see through the changes resulting from the structure review. The Board considers that the Chairmanship of Bertrand Collomb and the Non-Executive Directorship of Oscar Fanjul, and Lynda Chalker’s membership of the International Advisory Board, of Lafarge, do not affect their status as independent in relation to their Non-Executive Directorships of Unilever. Due to the requirement for Unilever to hold two AGMs for its respective companies on consecutive days, it may not always be possible for all Directors and possibly the Chairmen of the Audit, Remuneration and Nomination Committees to be present at both meetings. The Chairman therefore ensures that a majority of Directors attend both meetings and that at least one member of each Committee attends each AGM.
Requirements – the United States We have complied with the requirements concerning corporate governance that were in force during 2005. Attention is drawn in particular to the remit of the Audit Committee on page 39 and the Report of the Audit Committee on page 70. Actions already taken to ensure compliance that are not specifically disclosed elsewhere or otherwise clear from reading this document include:
In each of these cases, existing practices were revised and/or documented in such a way as to conform to the new requirements.
Corporate governance
The Code of Ethics applies to the senior executive, financial and accounting officers and comprises the standards prescribed by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and a copy has been posted on our website at www.unilever.com/investorcentre/corpgovernance. The Code of Ethics comprises an extract of the relevant provisions of Unilever’s Code of Business Principles and the more detailed rules of conduct that implement it. The only amendment to these pre-existing provisions and rules that was made in preparing the Code of Ethics was made at the request of the Audit Committee and consisted of a strengthening of the explicit requirement to keep proper accounting records. No waiver from any provision of the Code of Ethics was granted to any of the persons falling within the scope of the SEC requirement in 2005. We are required by US securities laws and the Listing Standards of the New York Stock Exchange, with effect from 1 August 2005, to have an Audit Committee that satisfies Rule 10A-3 under the Exchange Act and the Listing Standards of the New York Stock Exchange. We are fully compliant with these requirements. We are also required to disclose any significant ways in which our corporate governance practices differ from those typically followed by US listed companies. In addition to the information we have given you in this document about our corporate governance arrangements, further details are provided in The Governance of Unilever, which is on our website at www.unilever.com/investorcentre/corpgovernance. We are fully compliant with the Listing Standards of the New York Stock Exchange applicable to foreign issuers. Our corporate governance practices do not significantly differ from those followed by US companies listed on the New York Stock Exchange. However, the New York Stock Exchange listing standards for US issuers require that all members of the Nomination Committee must (but not foreign issuers such as Unilever) be independent. Our Chairman is not independent and he is a member of the Nomination Committee. The changes we have made in 2005, in particular with the appointment of a Group Chief Executive on the Board and the creation of a Unilever Executive that is immediately below Board level, have brought our arrangements closer to those of a typical model for US issuers, where the most senior executives draw their authority primarily from their corporate office rather than their appointment, if any, as a director. However, the situation remains that the laws in the Netherlands and the UK only give limited recognition to the existence of any corporate officer other than that of a Director. We would also confirm that it is our practice, in accordance with our home country laws and practices, to give our shareholders the opportunity to vote on equity compensation plans.
Corporate governance
Patrick Cescau
Kees van der Graaf
Ralph Kugler
Rudy Markham
Antony Burgmans1,2
Bertrand Collomb4,5,6
The Rt Hon The Lord Brittan of Spennithorne QC, DL2
The Rt Hon The Baroness Chalker of Wallasey3
Professor Wim Dik2,7
Oscar Fanjul7
Hilmar Kopper8
The Lord Simon of Highbury CBE1,9
Jeroen van der Veer1,9
Corporate governance
Unilever Executive (UEx)* Patrick Cescau
Vindi Banga Kees van der Graaf Ralph Kugler
Harish Manwani Chief Financial Officer (see previous details on page 49) Sandy Ogg John Rice
Report of the Directors
Report of the Nomination Committee
Composition The composition of the Committee, having a majority of Independent Non-Executive Directors, ensures that these Directors control the procedure for nominating the candidates for election as Directors of NV and PLC. To ensure that the candidates presented for election as Directors of NV and PLC are the same, the members of the Nomination Committee are also the Directors of N.V. Elma and United Holdings Limited. These two companies jointly own the Special Shares of NV and the Deferred Shares of PLC which carry the right to nominate persons for election as Directors of NV and PLC at general meetings. In December 2005 it was announced that we will propose to change this process to allow shareholders the right to nominate candidates to the Board, taking into account the need for the Boards of NV and PLC to be the same to ensure unity of management. Further information on these proposals can be found in the notices to the 2006 AGMs. The Boards are of the view that it is appropriate that the Chairman is included as a member of the Committee on the express condition that he did not participate in any discussion of his own position.
Remit Also on that website is The Governance of Unilever, which, amongst other matters, sets out the procedures for evaluating the Boards and individual Directors. These are designed to enable the results of the evaluations to be provided to the Nomination Committee when it discusses the nominations for election as Directors of NV and PLC at the next Annual General Meeting. Meetings of the Committee It carried out the Committee’s annual review of its terms of reference and performance of its responsibilities and commenced its evaluation of its performance in 2004. Succession planning for the Non-Executive Directors, one of whom retired at the 2005 AGMs and three of whom are retiring at the 2006 AGMs was also considered by the Committee during 2005. Specialist recruitment firms have been commissioned to assist in finding individuals with the appropriate skills and expertise who will be nominated as Non-Executive Directors at the AGMs in 2006 and 2007. During 2005, the Committee also commenced the search for a new Chairman to succeed Antony Burgmans who is due to retire in 2007. A well-reputed search firm has been commissioned by the Committee to assist them in this process. Further work on this will be carried out during 2006. 2005 was the first year of our new Boards’ operation. To ensure optimal functioning of the Boards and the individual Directors and compliance with the most recent developments in best practice, the Nomination Committee commissioned Spencer Stuart to carry out a full review of the functioning of the Boards and of their governance arrangements. This review concluded that our arrangements stood comparison with our peers. A full report was made to the Boards in the first quarter of 2006 and a range of minor changes in terms of the day-to-day operations of the Boards will be introduced during the balance of the year. A Board evaluation and Chairman and individual director appraisal process is scheduled for 2006. Thus, the changes following the said review can be taken into account in the evaluations. The Committee also met early in 2006. It decided to nominate all those Directors offering themselves for re-election at the 2006 AGMs and four new Directors to be appointed as Non-Executive in place of Claudio Gonzalez who retired at the 2005 AGMs and of Bertrand Collomb, Oscar Fanjul and Hilmar Kopper who are retiring at the 2006 AGMs. The new Non-Executive Directors were chosen specifically for their financial and/or general business expertise. The Committee’s annual Report to Shareholders was approved.
Bertrand Collomb Chairman of the Nomination Committee
Report of the Remuneration Committee
2005 was a year of far-reaching and important changes to the way Unilever is run. These changes have had an important impact on the work of the Remuneration Committee. The most significant change was the ending of the dual chairmanship and the creation of the single chief executive role. At the AGMs in May 2005 Antony Burgmans was appointed to the new role of Non-Executive Chairman, and Patrick Cescau took on the new role of Group Chief Executive. This change improved our governance and organisational effectiveness. At the AGMs in May 2005, three Executive Directors retired after long and distinguished careers with Unilever. Clive Butler, Keki Dadiseth and Andre van Heemstra all agreed to retire to allow the creation of a new executive team. Each agreed to retire at the age of 60. Unilever continued to pay their base salary and benefits, in lieu of notice, for a maximum of one year, fulfilling its contractual obligations. Antony Burgmans stepped down as Executive Director at the 2005 AGMs and assumed the new role of Non-Executive Chairman. In fulfilment of contractual obligations he continues to receive his salary and benefits until June 2006. However, he is no longer entitled to any annual or long-term incentives. After June 2006, he will receive a fee for his services as Chairman. Given the new Board structure and Unilever’s longer-term strategy, the Committee reviewed the existing reward packages for each of the current Executive Directors during the year. Base salaries have been adjusted to reflect the new roles and responsibilities in line with the market. The revised salary levels are set out on page 56. Annual incentives criteria for 2005 were underlying sales growth, trading contribution (Unilever’s version of economic value added) and individual performance targets. Taking into account the actual delivery of sales growth and trading contribution in 2005, the annual incentive Executive Directors earned for 2005 were roughly half maximum levels. No awards vested in 2005 for Executive Directors under the TSR plan as Unilever’s TSR performance over the period 2002-2004 fell short of requirements. Following shareholder approval, we operated the Global Performance Share Plan for the first time. Its clearly defined performance criteria focus management on top-line growth and cash flow generation. For 2006, we retained the same criteria as in 2005 for annual incentive, and we reviewed individual performance targets to ensure these reflect, next to corporate performance, each Executive Director’s responsibility for delivering specific growth objectives. All this was done to create the greatest possible alignment between the various elements of the remuneration package and Unilever’s longer-term strategy. Finally, we have revised the Report of the Remuneration Committee to improve its transparency in respect of the arrangements.
Bertrand Collomb Chairman of the Remuneration Committee
Report of the Remuneration Committee
Remuneration policy 2006 and beyond – Executive Directors Main principles
Each element of the Executive Directors’ reward package focuses on supporting different business objectives. The table below provides an overview of all the elements of reward (excluding pension), the key drivers, the resulting performance measures and indicative levels. In setting targets for the performance measures, the Committee is guided by what needs to happen to drive underlying performance and this is reflected in both the short-term and long-term performance targets.
Short-term (one year)
Long-term (three year)
Depending on the level of performance the variable component could vary between 0 and around 80% of the total reward package (excluding pensions). Some of the Executive Directors serve as a non-executive on the Board of another company. Unilever requires that all remuneration and fees earned from outside directorships are paid directly to Unilever.
Report of the Remuneration Committee
Base salary
Annual incentive In 2005, shareholders approved changes to the corporate performance criteria for the annual incentive arrangement, to ensure continuing alignment with business priorities, and a maximum opportunity for the Group Chief Executive of 150% of base salary. The maximum level is only payable in the case of exceptional performance. The annual incentive opportunity for other Executive Directors remains between 0 and 100%. The performance criteria for the annual incentive are now:
The annual incentive is calculated at the end of each financial year and payable in the following March. Part of the annual incentive (25%) is delivered to the Executive Directors in the form of shares in NV and PLC, which are matched by a conditional award of ‘matching shares’, as further described under long-term incentives below.
Long-term incentives
The policy in respect of each of the plans is described below, details for 2005 are set out on page 57 and in the tables on pages 61 to 64. Executive Directors are required to demonstrate a significant personal shareholding commitment to Unilever. Within five years of appointment, they are expected to hold shares worth 150% of their annual base salary. This reinforces the link between the executives and other shareholders.
Global Performance Share Plan (GPSP) The performance measures for vesting are underlying sales growth (for 50% of the award) and ungeared free cash flow (for 50% of the award). These are key performance measures in Unilever’s external reporting. Underlying sales growth focuses on the organic growth of Unilever’s turnover. Ungeared free cash flow expresses the translation of profit into cash and thus longer term economic value. In respect of performance targets, there is a minimum and a maximum performance range for each of the two measures and associated vesting levels. Each year, the Remuneration Committee reviews the performance targets by taking account of market conditions and internal financial planning. The Remuneration Committee will conduct a review of these targets at the start of 2006 and ensure that those attached to awards to be made in 2006 are appropriate and challenging.
Total Shareholder Return (TSR) Long-Term Incentive Plan Under this plan conditional rights over shares in NV and PLC are awarded annually to Executive Directors. The current level of conditional annual awards is as follows:
Vesting is subject to Unilever’s relative Total Shareholder Return (TSR) performance. TSR measures the returns received by a shareholder, capturing both the increase in share price and the value of dividend income (assuming dividends are re-invested). Unilever’s TSR performance is compared with a peer group of competitors over a three-year performance period. The TSR results are compared on a single reference currency basis. No shares will vest if Unilever is ranked below position 11 of the TSR ranking table over the three-year period. Between 25% and 200% of the shares will vest if Unilever is ranked in the top half of the table as shown below:
Report of the Remuneration Committee
Kraft will replace Altria and Kimberly-Clark will replace Gillette in the peer group.
Share Matching Plan (linked to the annual incentive) As mentioned earlier, the Executive Directors receive 25% of their annual incentive in the form of NV and PLC shares. These are matched with an equivalent number of matching shares. The matching shares will vest after three years provided that the underlying shares have been retained during this period and the Executive Director has not resigned or been dismissed. The Remuneration Committee considers that there is no need for further performance conditions on the vesting of the matching shares because the number of shares is directly linked to the annual bonus (which is itself subject to demanding performance conditions). In addition, during the three-year vesting period the share price of NV and PLC will be influenced by the performance of Unilever which, in turn, will affect the ultimate value of the matching shares on vesting.
Executive Directors’ pensions As stated in last year’s report, the Remuneration Committee decided that annual incentive would no longer be part of pensionable pay for new Executive Directors appointed as from 2005. For Executive Directors appointed prior to 2005, annual incentive is pensionable up to a maximum of 20% of base salary.
Other benefits and allowances
Future developments
Commentary
on Executive
Directors’ Remuneration paid in 2005
Base salary
Report of the Remuneration Committee
Annual incentive
Pensions
For Executive Directors appointed since 2005, the annual incentive no longer forms part of pensionable salary.
Arrangements for former Executive Directors in 2005 Clive Butler, Keki Dadiseth and André Van Heemstra stepped down as Executive Directors at the AGMs in May 2005. Each has received a pro-rated annual incentive payment for service to the 2005 AGMs. None received any new long-term incentive awards for the period after May 2005 and their existing long-term incentives are subject to relevant provisions in the plan rules. The company is respecting its contractual obligations and has provided for each director to be paid their base salary and benefits for the maximum of one year. Clive Butler and Keki Dadiseth have received their payments as lump sums. André Van Heemstra is receiving his payments on a monthly basis. They receive their full pension benefits at 60 as if they had retired on this date. Non-Executive Directors The level of their fees reflects their commitment and contribution to the companies. The levels were last reviewed in 2004 against fees payable by comparable companies in the UK and continental Europe, to ensure Unilever’s levels reflected current market practice and their increased responsibilities as Directors. The current fee levels are set out below:
Report of the Remuneration Committee
Five-Year Historical TSR Performance 
Remuneration committee
The Non-Executive Directors are chosen for their broad experience and international outlook. The Committee is supplied with information by Jan van der Bijl, who is also one of the Joint Secretaries of Unilever. The Group Chief Executive can be invited to attend Committee meetings to provide his own insights to the Committee on business objectives and the individual performance of his direct reports. Naturally, he does not attend when his own remuneration is being discussed. The Non-Executive Chairman can, in his role as Chairman of the Board, also attend the meetings.
Report of the Remuneration Committee
The following section contains detailed information on the Executive Directors’ annual remuneration, long-term incentives, pension benefits and share interests in respect of 2005. The following table gives details of the aggregate remuneration (including long-term incentives) received by Executive Directors as a group.
Report of the Remuneration Committee
Remuneration for individual Executive Directors The following table gives details of the total remuneration (including long-term incentives) received by each Executive Director.
Figures have been translated into euros using the following exchange rate: €1 = £0.6837.
Report of the
Remuneration Committee
Executive Directors’ Global
Performance Share Plan
Report of the Remuneration Committee
Executive Directors’ conditional
share awards under the TSR Long-Term Incentive Plan
TSR ranking of Unilever shares against its defined peer group of companies for period 2003 to 2005 Unilever’s position relative to the TSR reference group
Report of the Remuneration Committee
Executive
Directors’ Share Matching Plan
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Europe 
The
Americas 
