Chemours Form 4: 1,294 Shares Withheld; Beneficial Ownership Corrected
Rhea-AI Filing Summary
Gerardo Familiar Calderon, an officer at The Chemours Company (CC), reported a transaction dated 09/01/2025 in which 1,294 common shares were withheld to satisfy tax obligations on vesting restricted stock units and dividend equivalent units; the withholding was executed at a price of $15.40 per share and no shares were sold. The filing shows 33,949.9429 shares beneficially owned following the transaction; that total was reduced to correct an inadvertent over-reporting in a prior Form 4 filed August 5, 2025. The Form 4 was executed on 09/03/2025 by an attorney-in-fact.
Positive
- Administrative withholding only: 1,294 shares were withheld solely to satisfy tax obligations, and no shares were sold in the open market.
- Correction to prior reporting: Beneficial ownership was reduced to correct an inadvertent over-reporting on the Form 4 filed August 5, 2025, improving disclosure accuracy.
- Exempt transaction: Transactions are noted as exempt from Section 16(b) pursuant to Rule 16b-3.
Negative
- None.
Insights
TL;DR: Routine tax-withholding on vested equity; not a market-sale signal and has limited impact on share count.
The transaction is a standard administrative withholding of 1,294 shares to meet tax obligations from vested restricted stock units and dividend equivalent units, executed at $15.40 per share. Such withholdings are exempt under Rule 16b-3 and do not represent open-market dispositions, so they typically carry minimal interpretive weight for company valuation or insider sentiment. The filing also corrects a prior over-reporting, which improves reporting accuracy but does not indicate a change in economic exposure beyond the withholding.
TL;DR: Compliance-appropriate disclosure; correction enhances transparency but reflects no governance concern.
The Form 4 discloses a tax-withholding event and an explicit correction to previously reported beneficial ownership, demonstrating adherence to reporting obligations. The use of an attorney-in-fact signature is documented. There is no evidence in the filing of discretionary sales, option exercises beyond RSU vesting, or changes in control. From a governance perspective, the filing is routine and reflects corrective compliance rather than material governance risk.