Some links on this page are affiliate links: if you buy through them we may earn a commission, at no extra cost to you.
At Microsoft’s December 10, 2024 annual meeting, just 0.55% of votes supported a proposal asking the company to consider investing in Bitcoin. A proposal seeking an annual report on AI-data sourcing risks received more than 36% support—the strongest showing among six outside shareholder proposals—but it also failed. The vote did not ban Bitcoin or endorse Microsoft’s AI strategy.
What Microsoft shareholders voted on
Microsoft held its annual meeting on December 10, 2024, and reported the final voting results the following day. The company’s SEC filing records the meeting results. Of the six outside shareholder proposals, none received enough support to pass. The director elections and management proposals were separate matters, not part of that count.
The striking contrast was between a Bitcoin-investment proposal, backed by 0.55% of votes, and an AI-data accountability proposal, backed by more than 36%. Those percentages show the relative support for two different requests; they are not a head-to-head choice between Bitcoin and AI.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →What the Bitcoin proposal asked—and what its defeat means
The proposal asked Microsoft to consider diversifying its investments by including Bitcoin. It was not a binding instruction to buy Bitcoin immediately, nor a shareholder vote on Bitcoin’s price prospects. Proponents commonly make the case that Bitcoin’s limited supply could make it a diversification asset, an inflation or currency hedge, or an alternative reserve asset. The proposal’s request, however, was to consider Bitcoin as an investment—not to adopt every claim made for it.
Only 0.55% of votes favored the proposal, a result that amounts to near-total opposition among votes counted in its favor-or-against measure. That is not the same as a corporate Bitcoin ban. Shareholders rejected this resolution; they did not direct Microsoft to buy or sell an asset. Microsoft’s board and management retain discretion over corporate investment policy, and the company did not entirely rule out future cryptocurrency consideration, as GeekWire reported.
One plausible reading is that many voters regarded Bitcoin as less closely tied to Microsoft’s operating strategy than risks arising from its AI business. Volatility, limited connection to core operations, and Microsoft’s capacity to fund itself without a new treasury asset are possible reasons for skepticism, but the vote alone does not establish shareholders’ individual motivations.
Rank #2
Why the AI-data proposal attracted more support
The leading outside proposal was Proposal 9, “Report on AI Data Sourcing Accountability,” submitted by the National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC). It sought an annual report assessing risks from potentially unethical or improper use of external data to develop and train Microsoft AI products, the steps the company takes to mitigate those risks, and how it measures whether those controls work.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREERepair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEFix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →NLPC’s SEC-filed proxy memorandum raised concerns about personal information, copyrighted works, proprietary commercial information, data scraping, privacy, and Microsoft’s relationship with OpenAI. Those are the sponsor’s arguments, not independent findings that Microsoft or OpenAI unlawfully used data. The proposal’s focus was recurring risk disclosure and accountability, not a demand to halt AI development or end the Microsoft–OpenAI relationship.
Microsoft’s board opposed the reporting request
Microsoft’s board recommended voting against the AI-data proposal. As GeekWire reported, the company’s position was that it had already publicly articulated commitments to source generative-AI training data consistently with applicable law and with respect for privacy, safety, and content concerns. In that view, a new annual report was unnecessary or duplicative.
The disagreement was therefore about whether existing commitments and disclosures were sufficient, or whether shareholders should receive a recurring report with measures of risk and control effectiveness. The proposal’s defeat did not resolve copyright or privacy questions, and the board’s opposition does not mean Microsoft had no AI-data policies.
How the six outside proposals ranked
These figures, reported by GeekWire from the vote results, describe support for each proposal—not approval of the underlying conduct or a broad position on AI.
PC Slower Than It Used to Be?
A free scan shows the junk files, broken settings and background clutter dragging Windows down - then fixes them in one click.Free scan · Windows 10 & 11Outdated Drivers Are Slowing You Down
One free scan finds every outdated or missing driver and matches the right update for your exact hardware.Free scan · exact hardware match| Outside shareholder proposal | Support |
|---|---|
| Consider Bitcoin investment | 0.55% |
| Annual report on AI-data sourcing accountability | More than 36% |
| Data-center placement in countries identified by the proposal as presenting significant human-rights concerns | About 32% |
| AI-related misinformation and disinformation | 18.7% |
| Military applications and potential weapons-related technology | 15% |
| AI and technology use in new oil and gas development and production | 9.7% |
Microsoft’s filing provides the official meeting results, while the reported percentages offer a compact comparison of proposal support. These were distinct requests: for example, the data-center proposal concerned geography and human-rights risk, not the AI-data provenance issues in Proposal 9.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What the voting pattern does—and does not—signal
The AI-data report was the most-supported outside proposal, yet it did not pass. More than 36% is a substantial minority, not a majority mandate. The result suggests that a notable share of voting power was willing to consider additional AI-data oversight, a subject directly connected to Microsoft’s products, legal exposure, and AI expansion. The Bitcoin proposal attracted almost no support by comparison.
That comparison is a signal about these particular resolutions, not a definitive survey of shareholder beliefs. Proposal wording, board recommendations, proxy-adviser policies, ownership concentration, and the credibility of a sponsor can all affect voting. Percentages of votes cast also do not necessarily represent the views of individual retail investors in proportion to their number.
Quick Recap
- The vote did not establish that Microsoft will never hold Bitcoin or that shareholders oppose cryptocurrency generally.
- It did not require Microsoft to publish the proposed annual AI-data report.
- It did not prove NLPC’s allegations, show that more than 36% opposed Microsoft’s AI strategy, or settle the underlying data-governance questions.
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
