AutoNation (AN) DEF 14ADefinitive proxy

In accordance with the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), we are furnishing our proxy materials, including this proxy statement and our annual report, to our stockholders primarily via the Internet. On March 9, 2023, we began mailing to most of our stockholders a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials (the “Notice”) that contains instructions on how to access our proxy materials on the Internet. The Notice also contains instructions on how to vote via the Internet or by telephone. Other stockholders, in accordance with their prior requests, received an email with instructions on how to access our proxy materials and vote via the Internet, or have been mailed paper copies of our proxy materials and a proxy card or voting form. Stockholders may request to receive all future proxy materials in printed form by mail or electronically by email by following the instructions contained in the Notice.

Our Board is committed to sound corporate governance principles and practices. Our Board’s core principles of corporate governance are set forth in the AutoNation, Inc. Corporate Governance Guidelines (the “Guidelines”), which were adopted by the Board in March 2003 and most recently amended as of October 20, 2021. The Guidelines serve as a framework within which our Board conducts its operations. The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee of our Board is charged with reviewing annually, or more frequently as appropriate, the Guidelines and recommending to our Board appropriate changes in light of applicable laws and regulations, the governance standards identified by leading governance authorities, and our Company’s evolving needs.

In order to clearly set forth our commitment to conduct our operations in accordance with our high standards of business ethics and applicable laws and regulations, we have a company-wide Business Ethics Program, which includes a Code of Business Ethics applicable to all of our employees. We also maintain a 24-hour Alert-Line for employees to report any Company policy violations under our Business Ethics Program. In addition, our Board has adopted the Code of Ethics for Senior Officers and the Code of Business Ethics for the Board of Directors. These codes comply with applicable NYSE listing standards and SEC rules.

Our business and affairs are managed under the direction of our Board, which is the Company’s ultimate decision-making body, except with respect to those matters reserved to our stockholders. Our Board’s mission is to maximize long-term stockholder value. Our Board establishes our overall corporate policies, selects and evaluates our senior management team, who is charged with the conduct of our business, and acts as an advisor and counselor to senior management. Our Board also oversees our business strategy and planning, our ongoing and long-term plans for capital allocation, as well as the performance of management in executing our business strategy, assessing and managing risks, and managing our day-to-day operations. Our Board reviews and approves the Company’s long-term strategic plan developed by management.

Our Board’s oversight of our business strategy and planning and management of our day-to-day operations includes an ongoing review of risks that could impact our goals, objectives, and financial condition. In addition, our Audit, Compensation, and Corporate Governance and Nominating committees assist the Board in overseeing our management of risk. Our Audit Committee reviews with management significant risks related to financial reporting, internal controls, and cybersecurity, as well as our comprehensive enterprise risk management process (annually, with quarterly updates, as appropriate) designed to assess, manage and identify risks in order to align Board discussion topics with identified risks. Our Compensation Committee reviews and approves our executive compensation program and also reviews the general compensation structure for our corporate and key field employees. Our Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee oversees our company-wide Business Ethics Program, which includes a Code of Business Ethics applicable to all of our employees and policies and practices relating to environmental, social, and governance issues.

Rick L. Burdick, one of our independent directors, currently serves as our Chairman of the Board. In addition, our Guidelines provide for the selection of a Lead Independent Director if the Chairman of the Board is not an independent director.

The Board believes that having an independent Chairman of the Board is in the best interests of the Company at this time because it allows Mr. Manley to devote his time and attention to the day-to-day operations of the Company, while allowing Mr. Burdick to focus on leading the Board and supporting the initiatives of the Company and management. The Board also believes that our current leadership structure, with the separation of the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer positions, together with independent leadership at the committee level, enhances the Board’s effectiveness in risk oversight.

Our Board held seven meetings and took three actions by unanimous written consent during 2022. In 2022, each person serving as a director attended at least 75% of the total number of meetings of our Board and any Board committee on which he or she served (held during the period for which such person has been a director). Our independent directors held five executive sessions without management present during 2022.

Our directors are expected to attend our Annual Meeting of Stockholders. Any director who is unable to attend our Annual Meeting is expected to notify the Chairman of the Board in advance of the Annual Meeting. Each person then serving as a director attended the 2022 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

The Audit Committee primarily assists our Board in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities by reviewing our financial reporting and audit processes and our systems of internal control over financial reporting and disclosure controls. Among the Committee’s core responsibilities are the following: (i) overseeing the integrity of our consolidated financial statements, for which management is responsible, and reviewing and approving the scope of the annual audit; (ii) selecting, retaining, compensating, overseeing, and evaluating our independent registered public accounting firm; (iii) reviewing the Company’s critical accounting policies; (iv) reviewing the Company’s quarterly and annual financial statements prior to the filing of such statements with the SEC; (v) preparing the Audit Committee report for inclusion in our proxy statement; and (vi) reviewing with management significant financial and cybersecurity risks or exposures and assessing the steps management has taken to minimize, monitor, and control such risks or exposures. For a complete description of our Audit Committee’s responsibilities, please refer to the Audit Committee’s charter.

Our Board has determined that each Audit Committee member has the requisite independence and other qualifications for audit committee membership under SEC rules, NYSE listing standards, the Audit Committee’s charter, and the independence standards set forth in the Guidelines (as discussed below under “Director Independence”). Our Board has also determined that each of Messrs. Edelson and Jenkins is an “audit committee financial expert” within the meaning of Item 407(d)(5) of Regulation S-K under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). See “Directors” above for a description of the business experience of each of our Audit Committee members.

The Audit Committee held four meetings during 2022. The Audit Committee Report for 2022, which contains a description of the Audit Committee’s responsibilities and its recommendation with respect to our audited consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2022, is set forth below under “Audit Committee Report.”

The Compensation Committee primarily assists our Board in fulfilling its compensation oversight responsibilities by, among other things: (i) reviewing our director compensation program and suggesting changes in director compensation to the Board, if appropriate; (ii) reviewing and approving the compensation of our CEO and other senior executive officers and setting annual and long-term performance goals for these individuals; (iii) reviewing and approving the compensation of all of our corporate officers; (iv) reviewing the Company’s program for management development and succession planning; (v) reviewing and approving performance-based compensation of executive officers, including incentive awards and stock-based awards; and (vi) administering our equity compensation plans.

Pursuant to its charter, the Compensation Committee may form subcommittees and may delegate to such subcommittees any or all power and authority of the Compensation Committee as the Compensation Committee deems appropriate, provided that no subcommittee may consist of fewer than two members, and provided further that the Compensation Committee may not delegate to a subcommittee any power or authority required by any applicable laws, regulations, or listing standards to be exercised by the Compensation Committee as a whole.

The Compensation Committee reviews executive compensation at its meetings throughout the year and sets executive compensation. The Compensation Committee also reviews director compensation annually and recommends to the full Board the compensation for non-employee directors. Our CEO reviews the performance of other named executive officers and makes recommendations, if any, to the Compensation Committee with respect to compensation adjustments for such officers. However, the Compensation Committee determines in its sole discretion whether to make any adjustments to the compensation paid to such executive officers.

Since October 2019, the Compensation Committee has engaged compensation consultant, Meridian Compensation Partners, LLC (“Meridian”). The Compensation Committee sought input from Meridian on executive and director compensation matters for 2022, including the design and competitive positioning of our executive and director compensation programs, our peer group, appropriate compensation levels, and evolving compensation trends. While the Compensation Committee considered input from Meridian, the Committee’s decisions reflect many factors and considerations.

Meridian did not provide any other services to the Company or its subsidiaries. The Compensation Committee assessed the independence of Meridian pursuant to SEC and NYSE rules and concluded that no conflict of interest exists that would prevent Meridian from serving as an independent consultant to the Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee reviews the appointment of its independent compensation consulting firm annually. As part of the review process, the Compensation Committee considers the independence of the firm in accordance with applicable SEC rules and NYSE listing standards.

For more information on the responsibilities and activities of the Compensation Committee, including the Committee’s processes for determining executive compensation, see “Executive Compensation” below, as well as the Compensation Committee’s charter.

Our Board has determined that each Compensation Committee member has the requisite independence for Compensation Committee membership under NYSE listing standards and the independence standards set forth in the Guidelines. Our Board has also determined that each Compensation Committee member qualifies as a “non-employee director” within the meaning of Rule 16b-3 under the Exchange Act and as an “outside director” under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code. The Compensation Committee held four meetings during 2022 and took one action by unanimous written consent.

The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee assists our Board in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities by performing the following duties: (i) reviewing annually, or more frequently as appropriate, the corporate governance principles and practices set forth in the Guidelines, in comparison to the governance standards identified by leading governance authorities and our evolving needs, and making recommendations to the Board with respect to any appropriate amendment to the Guidelines; (ii) considering and advising the Board with respect to other corporate governance issues; (iii) periodically reviewing our codes of ethics and conduct for directors, officers, and employees; (iv) leading annual evaluations of Board and Board committee performance; (v) assessing periodically our Board’s needs in terms of skills and qualifications and recommending to our Board candidates for nomination and election to our Board; (vi) reviewing Board candidates recommended by our stockholders; (vii) recommending to our Board assignments to committees; and (viii) reviewing and evaluating the Company’s programs, policies, and practices relating to social and environmental issues.

Our Board has determined that each Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee member is independent under NYSE listing standards and the independence standards set forth in the Guidelines. The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee held four meetings during 2022.

The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee has a policy with regard to the consideration of director candidates recommended by stockholders. For information regarding this policy, refer to “Stockholder Communications - Stockholder Director Recommendations” below.

Under our Guidelines, our Board must consist of a substantial majority of directors who qualify as independent directors under the listing standards of the NYSE. To be considered independent:

In addition to our independence standards, the directors who serve on our Audit Committee each satisfy standards established by the SEC providing that to qualify as “independent” for the purposes of membership on that committee, members of audit committees may not:

In accordance with the listing standards of the NYSE, in affirmatively determining the independence of each director who serves on our Compensation Committee, our Board also considered all factors specifically relevant to determining whether each such director has a relationship to the Company which is material to his or her ability to be independent from management in connection with the duties of a compensation committee member, including, but not limited to:

The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee is responsible for identifying, evaluating, and recommending candidates to the Board for nomination and election to the Board. The Committee is also responsible for assessing the appropriate balance of skills and characteristics required of our Board members. The Committee considers candidates suggested by its members and other Board members, as well as management and stockholders.

In accordance with the Guidelines, candidates, including candidates recommended by stockholders, are selected on the basis of, among other things, broad experience, financial expertise, wisdom, integrity, ability to make independent analytical inquiries, understanding of our business environment, the candidate’s ownership interest in the Company, and willingness and ability to devote adequate time to Board duties, all in the context of assessing the needs of our Board at that point in time and with the objective of ensuring diversity in the background, experience, and viewpoints of our Board members. The Guidelines provide that the number of directors should permit diversity of experience without hindering effective discussion, diminishing individual accountability, or exceeding a number that can function efficiently as a body.

The Board periodically reviews the size of the Board to determine the size that will be most effective for the Company. In addition, the Board completes an annual self-evaluation, which includes a self-assessment questionnaire for each Board member. The self-assessment questionnaire addresses topics such as the structure of the Board, the skills and backgrounds of the current directors, the size of the Board, and the Board’s committee structure. Each of the Audit, Compensation, and Corporate Governance and Nominating committees also completes an annual self-evaluation, which includes a self-assessment questionnaire tailored specifically for each committee.

Candidates recommended by our stockholders are considered on the same basis as if such candidates were recommended by one of our Board members or other persons. See “Stockholder Communications - Stockholder Director Recommendations” below.

Our Board has adopted a written policy which requires that transactions with related parties must be entered into in good faith on fair and reasonable terms that are no less favorable to us than those that would be available in a comparable transaction in arm’s-length dealings with an unrelated third party. Our Board, by a vote of the disinterested directors, must approve all related party transactions valued over $500,000, while our Audit Committee must approve related party transactions valued between $100,000 and $500,000 and review with management all other related party transactions. Under SEC rules, a related party is defined as any director, executive officer, nominee for director, or greater than 5% stockholder of the Company, and their immediate family members. Since the beginning of 2022, the Company has not participated in any related party transaction in which any related party had or will have a direct or indirect material interest.

Our non-employee directors are eligible to defer all or a portion of their annual and committee retainers under the AutoNation, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan (the “DCP”). We do not provide matching contributions to non-employee directors that participate in the DCP.

Detailed information for submitting stockholder proposals or nominations, other than for inclusion in our proxy statement, will be provided upon written request to the Corporate Secretary of AutoNation, Inc., 200 SW 1st Ave, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301.

Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, requires that our directors, certain covered officers, and holders of more than ten percent of our common stock file with the SEC reports regarding their ownership and changes in ownership of our securities. Based solely on a review of the copies of such reports filed with the SEC during the year ended December 31, 2022, and written representations that no reports on Form 5 were required, our directors, covered officers, and ten percent stockholders complied with all Section 16(a) filing requirements, except that one Form 4 for four transactions was filed late for Mr. Cade, due to an administrative error that was not the fault of the reporting person.

The Compensation Committee of the Company has reviewed and discussed with management the Compensation Discussion and Analysis required by Item 402(b) of Regulation S-K and, based on such review and discussion, the Compensation Committee recommended to the Board that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this Proxy Statement and incorporated by reference in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022.

This Compensation Discussion and Analysis provides a detailed description of our executive compensation philosophy and programs, the compensation decisions the Compensation Committee (referred to as the “Committee” in this section) of the Board has made under those programs, and the factors considered in making those decisions.

Our adjusted operating income increased 8% and our adjusted earnings per share increased 35% in 2022 as compared to 2021. Our adjusted earnings per share in 2022 was an all-time record for the Company. Please refer to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022 for additional information regarding our financial results and see Annex A for a reconciliation of non-GAAP financial measures to our results as reported under GAAP.

Our executive compensation programs are administered by the Committee. The Committee’s fundamental philosophy is to closely link executive compensation with the achievement of performance goals tied to key metrics and to create an owner-oriented culture through our executive compensation programs. The objectives of our executive compensation program are to ensure that we are able to attract and retain highly skilled executives and to provide a compensation program that incentivizes management to optimize business performance, deploy capital productively, and increase long-term stockholder value. The Committee believes that total compensation for each of our executive officers should be fair for the services rendered and competitive with market practice. In addition, the Committee designs our executive compensation program to be transparent and easily understood and administered, which is why the key components of executive compensation are limited to a base salary, an annual cash incentive award based on the achievement of a predetermined performance goal, and long-term incentive awards in the form of time-based and performance-based equity awards. The Committee strives to ensure executive compensation aligns management with the Company’s annual and long-term plans and strategy and stockholder interests.

The Committee reviews executive compensation at its meetings throughout the year and sets executive compensation based primarily on our financial and operating performance and on executive management’s performance in executing the Company’s business strategy, optimizing the Company’s business performance and productivity of its business operations, deploying capital productively, and increasing long-term stockholder value. The Committee also considers the scope of each executive’s experience, duties and responsibilities, individual performance, and total compensation, as well as compensation market data derived from our peer group. Our Chief Executive Officer reviews the performance of other named executive officers and makes recommendations, if any, to the Committee with respect to compensation adjustments for such officers. However, the Committee determines in its sole discretion whether to make any adjustments to the compensation paid to such executive officers.

For 2022, as in prior years, a significant portion of the total compensation for each named executive officer was allocated to compensation in the form of an annual performance-based cash incentive award and performance-based equity awards in order to provide incentives to enhance long-term stockholder value.

The Committee focuses on providing compensation that is fair for the services rendered and reflects an executive’s experience, performance, and scope of responsibilities, setting incentive opportunities that closely link executive compensation with the achievement of Company performance goals, and creating an owner-oriented culture, where the interests of our executive officers are aligned with the long-term interests of our stockholders.

The key elements of our executive compensation program for the year ended December 31, 2022 were:

We provide our named executive officers and other officers with a base salary to compensate them for services rendered during the fiscal year. The Committee reviews and, as appropriate, adjusts the base salaries for our named executive officers. The factors that the Committee considers in setting salaries include an executive’s experience, the scope of job responsibilities, individual contributions to our success, company-wide performance, and market compensation. For 2022, Messrs. Cannon, Edmunds, and Bender each received a base salary merit increase equal to 3%, and Mr. Lower received a base salary merit increase equal to 5%, in each case effective as of February 15, 2022. Mr.

A core component of our executive compensation program is the annual performance-based cash incentive program in which our executive officers participate. The program is designed to incentivize our senior management team to continually improve our operating performance and to use capital to maximize returns.

In February 2022, the Committee established a performance goal for the 2022 annual incentive program under the AutoNation, Inc. 2017 Employee Equity and Incentive Plan (the “2017 Plan”) based upon a specified level of adjusted operating income per basic share, taking into consideration our 2021 financial results, anticipated industry dynamics for 2022, planned capital investments, our macroeconomic outlook, payout opportunities, and pay-for-performance alignment. For 2022, the adjusted operating income per basic share target was set more than 129% higher than the target for 2021. Each of our named executive officers participated in the annual incentive program for 2022.

The following table sets forth the 2022 threshold, target, and maximum payout levels established under the annual incentive program for each of our named executive officers based on the adjusted operating income per basic share performance metric:

In calculating the level of our performance under our annual performance-based cash incentive program, certain adjustments are made to operating income per basic share to ensure that operating performance is fairly measured to incentivize management appropriately. For example, floorplan interest expense is charged against operating income to ensure management manages this expense. On a GAAP basis, floorplan interest expense is not included in operating income. Operating income per basic share is also adjusted for acquisitions and to reflect a capital charge for the repurchase of shares of our common stock. The capital charge is designed to encourage more productive uses of capital and to discourage less productive uses of capital. The Committee also has the authority to make, and from time to time makes, appropriate equitable adjustments to reflect the impact of unusual or infrequently occurring items.

One hundred percent of the target incentive award for each participant was based upon achievement of the predetermined performance goal. The annual incentive awards were payable on a sliding scale based on the Company’s actual achievement relative to the predetermined goal, with the possibility that awards earned may exceed or be less than the targeted payout level. The Committee had absolute “negative discretion” to eliminate or reduce the amount of any award under the program.

The following table sets forth the 2022 threshold, target, and maximum annual incentive awards, expressed as a percentage of salary, established by the Committee for each of our named executive officers in 2022. Target bonus opportunities were set based on the Committee’s objective of aligning a significant portion of executive compensation with the achievement of objective annual performance goals and a consideration of peer group and market data. The threshold, target, and maximum annual incentive award for each named executive officer that was eligible for an annual incentive award in 2021 remained the same for 2022 as compared to 2021.

The Committee grants stock-based awards to our named executive officers in order to provide long-term incentives, which align the long-term interests of management with the long-term interests of our stockholders. The Committee believes that stock-based awards motivate our named executive officers to focus on optimizing our long-term business performance and stockholder value and creating an owner-oriented culture.

Stock-based awards are approved on an annual basis in amounts determined by the Committee, while carefully considering the cost to us and our stockholders, including common stock dilution. The sum of all stock-based awards granted to AutoNation employees in 2022 represented potential share issuances equal to approximately 0.5% of our outstanding common stock, based on the number of shares outstanding at the beginning of 2022.

In February 2022, the Committee, advised by Meridian and based on a review of peer group and market data, approved the 2022 long-term incentive plan under the 2017 Plan, which included RSU awards (the “2022 RSU Awards”) for each of our named executive officers. The Committee generally sets the target award levels for long-term incentive awards that may be earned by each executive, taking into account the executive’s position, experience, and job duties. While the Committee considers peer group data, the Committee does not target a specific percentile within the peer group. The Committee also considers an executive’s individual skills, experience, both in general and in the role, and future potential in establishing the target value of each executive’s award.

For 2022, the Committee, advised by Meridian and based on its review of peer group and market data, and in recognition of the contributions by our executive team to our strong total shareholder returns in 2021, as well as their ability to improve our financial results, increased the target grant date values for the 2022 RSU Awards for each of Messrs. Lower and Bender. The following table sets forth the target grant date value for the 2022 RSU Awards that the Committee approved in February 2022 for each of our named executive officers.

The 2022 RSU Awards for each of our named executive officers were made on March 1, 2022 in the form of four different grants of RSUs. For each of Messrs. Manley and Camplone, the first grant was a time-based award, representing approximately one-third of the total number of RSUs they received in March 2022, and was made subject to a three-year installment vesting schedule pursuant to which one-third of the grant will vest on the first three anniversaries of the grant date. For each of Messrs. Lower, Cannon, Edmunds, and Bender, the first grant was also a time-based award, representing approximately two-thirds of the total number of RSUs they received in March 2022, and was made subject to (1) the achievement by the Company of not less than $450 million of “Adjusted EBIT” (defined as gross profit, less selling, general, and administrative expenses, less floorplan interest expense, and less depreciation and amortization) for fiscal year 2022 (the “2022 Performance Goal”) and (2) a four-year installment vesting schedule pursuant to which 25% of the grant will vest on the first four anniversaries of the grant date. The Committee certified the achievement of the 2022 Performance Goal in February 2023.

The second, third, and fourth grants (collectively, the “2022-2024 PBRSUs”), together representing approximately two-thirds of the total number of RSUs granted to each of Messrs. Manley and Camplone in March 2022 and approximately one-third of the total number of RSUs granted to each of Messrs. Lower, Cannon, Edmunds, and Bender in March 2022, were made subject to a three-year performance period (fiscal years 2022-2024) based on (a) a measure of earnings for the second grant (referred to as “Adjusted EBITDA” below), (b) a measure of return on invested capital for the third grant (referred to as “ROIC” below), and (c) certain customer satisfaction indices for the fourth grant (referred to as “CSI” below). The second, third, and fourth grants represented 40%, 40%, and 20%, respectively, of the total number of 2022-2024 PBRSUs granted in 2022 to our named executive officers.

The 2022-2024 PBRSUs will cliff vest (provided they have not been forfeited earlier) following the three-year performance period, with zero to 150% of the target number of shares vesting depending on the Company’s performance relative to the applicable performance metric. Target levels of Adjusted EBITDA, ROIC, and CSI were established by the Committee in February 2022 after consultation with Meridian and a review of the strategic plan for fiscal years 2022-2024. The target levels for the 2022-2024 PBRSUs were set at levels viewed as challenging but attainable, while the maximum goals were considered to be much more demanding.

The Committee chose Adjusted EBITDA as a performance measure because the Committee believes it is a strong indicator of overall financial performance and a key indicator used by industry analysts to evaluate operating performance and it motivates our executives to drive company growth and profitability. The ROIC measure is intended to hold executives accountable for returns on capital investments. The CSI measure is intended to increase customer satisfaction and retention. The Committee believes that these performance measures appropriately align the interests of our executive officers with the interests of our stockholders, incentivize our executives to strive for continuously improving performance, and provide variable compensation based on performance achieved against pre-established goals.

The 2022-2024 PBRSUs granted to Mr. Bender were prorated based on time served during the performance period (2 months out of 36) since he was retirement-eligible.

The following table sets forth our performance relative to each performance goal established for the 2020-2022 PBRSUs.

The Adjusted EBITDA, ROIC, and CSI grants represented 40%, 40%, and 20%, respectively, of the total number of 2020-2022 PBRSUs awarded to Messrs. Lower, Cannon, Edmunds, and Bender in 2020. Accordingly, the payout for the 2020-2022 PBRSUs was 142%, on a weighted-average basis, of the target number of shares awarded. Mr. Bender’s payout was prorated based on time served during the applicable performance period.

In connection with his appointment as our Chief Operating Officer Precision Parts, and Executive Vice President, Head of Mobility, Business Strategy, and Development, on March 1, 2022, Mr. Camplone was granted an inducement award of RSUs subject to a one-year vesting schedule with an aggregate grant date fair value of approximately $200,000, as well as a cash sign-on bonus in the amount of $600,000, subject to his obligation to repay such bonus in the event that he resigned from employment prior to the one-year anniversary of his start date with the Company. These awards were intended to replace certain compensation that Mr. Camplone forfeited from prior employment in connection with his recruitment to the Company.

Our compensation program for named executive officers also includes other benefits, including participation in the Company’s life and health insurance and similar benefit programs (including the AutoNation 401(k) Plan and the AutoNation, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan) on the same general terms as other participants in these programs.

We enter into employment agreements with persons serving as our Chief Executive Officer. The Committee believes that an employment agreement is appropriate to provide certainty regarding terms and conditions of employment and to aid in recruitment and retention.

In connection with his appointment as our Chief Executive Officer, we entered into an employment agreement with Mr. Manley on September 9, 2021. The Committee believes that entering into the employment agreement with Mr. Manley furthered our efforts to attract and recruit him to the Company. See the narrative following the “Summary Compensation Table” below for more information regarding his employment agreement.

We have a policy governing severance and change in control agreements with the Company’s named executive officers, which is set forth in our Corporate Governance Guidelines. Generally, the policy provides that we will not enter into any severance agreements with senior executives that provide specified benefits in an amount exceeding 299% of the sum of such executive’s base salary plus bonus unless such severance agreement has been submitted to a stockholder vote. Further, unless such severance agreement has been submitted to a stockholder vote, we will not enter into a severance agreement that provides for the payment of specified benefits to an executive triggered by (i) a change in control of our Company that is approved by stockholders but not completed, or (ii) a completed change in control of the Company in which the named executive officer remains employed in a substantially similar capacity by the successor entity. We have not entered into any change in control agreements with any of our named executive officers.

Our employment agreement with Mr. Manley and our letter agreement with Mr. Camplone each provides for payments or benefits at, following, or in connection with, termination under certain circumstances. We do not have employment agreements with our other named executive officers.

Under the 2017 Plan, if an outstanding award is continued, assumed, or substituted in connection with a “change in control” (as defined in the 2017 Plan and related agreements), then, in the case of awards subject to performance goals, the performance goals will be deemed to be achieved at the target level of performance, and the awards will vest in full at the end of the applicable performance period, subject to the participant’s continued employment. Also if awards remain outstanding in connection with a change in control, the 2017 Plan only provides for “double trigger” vesting. Specifically, if within 24 months following such change in control, a participant’s employment or service is terminated without cause or the participant resigns with good reason (as defined in the 2017 Plan and related agreements), all restrictions on such participant’s RSUs will immediately lapse and such awards will be settled as soon as reasonably practicable. These provisions are designed to promote stability and continuity of senior management.

In April 2018, the Board adopted the Severance Plan to help retain key employees and maintain a stable work environment by providing severance benefits to covered employees in the event of certain terminations of employment. Under the Severance Plan, in the event a covered employee is terminated without cause, or a covered employee terminates his or her employment for good reason, as long as such person (a) is not in material breach of any restrictive covenant agreement with the Company, (b) does not breach any such restrictive covenant agreement as if it had been in effect through the 18-month period following the applicable termination date, and (c) signs a waiver and release of claims, then such person will be entitled to receive:

Each named executive officer who was serving as an executive officer of the Company as of December 31, 2022, other than Messrs. Manley and Camplone, was covered by the Severance Plan as of such date.

Mr. Bender’s retirement, effective as of March 4, 2022, did not constitute a termination without “cause” or a resignation for “good reason” under the Severance Plan, and he did not receive any benefits thereunder.

In order to further align the long-term interests of management with the interests of our stockholders and to ensure an owner-oriented culture, the Board has established stock ownership guidelines for each of our executive officers. These guidelines provide that the Board expects that each Executive Vice President will hold shares of our common stock having a fair market value of not less than two times his or her annual base salary. These guidelines further provide that a covered executive is expected to retain 50% of any shares of our common stock, net of applicable tax withholding and the payment of any exercise or purchase price (if applicable), he or she receives upon the vesting or settlement of any equity awards or the exercise of any employee stock options, until the applicable threshold under the guidelines is met. In addition, the guidelines provide that each covered executive is expected to satisfy the guidelines by the date that is five years after he or she became a covered executive.

Pursuant to the terms of Mr. Manley’s employment agreement, he is required to acquire within three years of his employment commencement date, shares of our common stock with a fair market value equal to five times his annual base salary, provided that any and all RSUs held by him shall be counted as owned by him, once performance-based conditions, if any, have been satisfied. Mr. Manley may not sell the shares of our common stock issuable pursuant to the inducement award he received in November 2021, unless he has and would continue to meet the stock ownership guidelines applicable to him. The terms and conditions of his employment agreement control and supersede the stock ownership guidelines described above.

The following table sets forth information regarding the number and dollar value of shares held by each of our executive officers as of February 27, 2023 under our ownership guidelines, and lists the specific ownership requirements under such guidelines. Each of our executive officers has satisfied such guidelines or has time remaining to do so under the guidelines.

As part of our annual assessment of the potential compensation-related risks to AutoNation, the Committee has reviewed the elements of our incentive compensation programs, discussed the concept of risk as it relates to our compensation program, and reviewed these items with Meridian. In addition, at the Committee’s request, Meridian conducted an independent risk assessment of our executive compensation program, which the Committee reviewed. Based on these reviews and discussions, the Committee does not believe our compensation program creates risks that are reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on our business.

The Committee believes that our compensation programs appropriately reward executive performance and align the interests of our named executive officers and key employees with the long-term interests of our stockholders, while also enabling the Company to attract and retain talented executives. The Committee will continue to evolve and administer our compensation program in a manner that the Committee believes will be in the best interests of our Company and our stockholders.

The following table provides information regarding compensation earned by each of our named executive officers for 2022, 2021, and 2020, except in the case of Mr. Manley who was not a named executive officer in 2020 and Mr. Camplone who was not a named executive officer in 2021 or 2020. This table should be read in conjunction with the narrative descriptions and analysis under “Compensation Discussion and Analysis.”

See “Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control” for a description of certain provisions in Mr. Manley’s employment agreement and Mr. Camplone’s letter agreement that provide for payments or benefits to the executive at, following, or in connection with, termination under certain circumstances.

The AutoNation, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan (“DCP”) affords our named executive officers and certain other employees the opportunity to defer up to 75% of base salary and 90% of bonuses and/or commissions on a pre-tax basis. For 2022, we provided eligible participants under the DCP a matching contribution of 100% on the first $6,100 deferred. The 2022 matching contributions were credited by the Company as of January 1, 2023. One-third of the 2022 matching contributions vested as of January 1, 2023, and an additional one-third will vest in January 2024 and 2025, provided that a participant’s matching contribution will immediately vest in the event of death, disability, or the attainment of age sixty with at least six years of service by such participant.

Earnings on deferrals are based on “deemed” investments in funds selected for inclusion in the DCP by us. Additionally, the DCP provides for payment of vested deferrals and earnings upon separation from service, death, and disability as well as upon specified payment dates selected by the participants. Participants may elect to receive payments upon specified in-service dates (in the form of a lump sum payment or up to five annual installments) or upon separation from service (in the form of a lump sum payment or up to 15 annual installments). The DCP is intended to meet the requirements of Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code and other relevant provisions thereunder and related Treasury regulations.

The tables below reflect the amount of compensation that would have been payable to our current named executive officers serving on December 31, 2022, under any contract, agreement, plan, or arrangement with us that provides for any payment to such officer in the event of termination of such officer’s employment or a change in control of the Company, in each case assuming the termination or change in control occurred effective as of December 31, 2022, the last business day of our last completed fiscal year. See “Named Executive Officer Departures” below for information regarding Mr. Bender’s retirement from the Company on March 4, 2022. Mr. Bender’s separation from the Company did not entitle him to benefits under our Severance Plan described below.

The amount of compensation payable to each named executive officer serving on December 31, 2022, upon “termination for cause,” “voluntary termination” (or “voluntary termination for good reason” and “voluntary termination without good reason”), “death or disability,” “retirement,” “involuntary termination without cause,” and “change in control,” as applicable, is shown below. We have prepared the tables based on the assumptions set forth below under “General Assumptions,” and the tables should be considered in conjunction with those assumptions and the disclosures below the tables.

In April 2018, the Board adopted the Severance Plan to help retain key employees and maintain a stable work environment by providing severance benefits to covered employees in the event of certain terminations of employment. Under the Severance Plan, in the event a covered employee is terminated without cause, or a covered employee terminates his or her employment for good reason, as long as such person (a) is not in material breach of any restrictive covenant agreement with the Company, (b) does not breach any such restrictive covenant agreement as if it had been in effect through the 18-month period following the applicable termination date, and (c) signs a waiver and release of claims, then such person will be entitled to receive:

Each named executive officer who was serving as an executive officer of the Company as of December 31, 2022, other than Messrs. Manley and Camplone, was covered by the Severance Plan as of such date.

In the event of a participant’s death, the vesting of certain RSUs would be accelerated or would continue on a prorated basis, subject to the satisfaction of applicable performance goals. In certain cases upon a termination of employment (other than as a result of death), such as separation from service for a retirement-eligible employee, the vesting of RSUs would continue in full or on a prorated basis, subject to the satisfaction of applicable performance goals and participant’s continued compliance with applicable covenants, following the termination of employment.

To determine the market value of unvested RSUs that would accelerate and the market value of unvested RSUs that would continue to vest in the applicable cases, we multiplied (x) the number of unvested RSUs that would accelerate or continue to vest by (y) the closing price per share of our common stock on December 30, 2022, which was $107.30. In addition, in the case of unvested RSUs that would continue to vest on a prorated basis subject to the satisfaction of applicable performance goals, we assumed that the target level of performance would be achieved.

Our named executive officers have entered into restrictive covenants and other obligations as contained in various stock-based award agreements, non-competition agreements, and other similar agreements with us in connection with their employment or the grant of stock-based awards. Generally, these restrictive covenants provide a restriction of one year in which the named executive officer may not perform certain activities within specified geographic regions. The competitive activities include generally (i) participating or owning an interest in an entity engaged in the auto business (as defined in the applicable agreement) or any other business of the type and character engaged in by us, (ii) employing any person that was employed by us within the prior six months or seeking to induce any such person to leave his or her employment, (iii) soliciting any customer to patronize any business in competition with our business, or (iv) requesting or advising our customers or vendors to withdraw, curtail, or cancel their business with us. In certain cases, the receipt of post-termination benefits by our named executive officers is conditioned upon their compliance with these restrictive covenants. In addition, if a named executive officer violates these restrictive covenants or other Company policy, (x) all employee stock options held by him or her would terminate immediately, and he or she would be required to pay to the Company an amount equal to the gain on any exercise of any stock option exercised by him or her during the preceding 12 months and (y) all unvested restricted stock units held by him or her would be immediately forfeited, and he or she would be required to pay to the Company an amount equal to the value of any restricted stock units that vested during the preceding 12 months. The following tables assume that each of our named executive officers would have complied with these agreements.

To the extent required in order to comply with Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code, certain payments that would otherwise be made during the six-month period immediately following the executive’s termination of employment may instead be paid on the first business day after the date that is six months following the executive’s “separation from service” within the meaning of Section 409A.

We have included below a description of triggering events that could provide for payments or benefits to our current named executive officers in the event of a separation of employment or a change in control of the Company. In certain instances, more than one triggering event may apply.

Under our employment agreement with Mr. Manley, termination for “cause” generally means termination because of (i) the executive’s breach of any covenants contained in the employment agreement, (ii) the executive’s failure or refusal to perform the duties and responsibilities required to be performed by him under the terms of his employment agreement, (iii) the executive willfully engaging in illegal conduct or gross misconduct (provided that no act or failure to act shall be deemed “willful” if done, or omitted to be done, in good faith and with the reasonable belief that such action or omission was in our best interest), (iv) the executive’s commission of an act of fraud or dishonesty affecting us or the commission of an act constituting a felony, or (v) the executive’s violation of our policies in any material respect.

Under the Severance Plan, termination for “cause” means that a covered employee has (i) breached the employee’s restrictive covenants set forth in any agreement with the Company, (ii) failed or refused to perform his or her assigned duties and responsibilities to the Company in any material respect, after notice and a reasonable opportunity to cure, (iii) willfully engaged in illegal conduct or gross misconduct in the performance of his or her duties to the Company (provided that no act or failure to act shall be deemed “willful” if done, or omitted to be done, in good faith and with the reasonable belief that such action or omission was in our best interest), (iv) committed an act of fraud or dishonesty affecting the Company or committed an act constituting a felony, or (v) willfully violated any material Company policies in any material respect.

Under our equity compensation plans, except to the extent defined in an individual employment agreement, termination for “cause” generally means termination because of (i) the executive’s conviction for commission of a felony or other crime, (ii) the commission by the executive of any act against us constituting willful misconduct, dishonesty, fraud, theft, or embezzlement, (iii) the executive’s failure, inability, or refusal to perform any of the material services, duties, or responsibilities required of him or her by us or to materially comply with the policies or procedures established from time to time by us, for any reason other than his illness or physical or mental incapacity, (iv) the executive’s dependence, as determined in good faith by us, on any addictive substance, including, but not limited to, alcohol or any illegal or narcotic drugs, (v) the destruction of or material damage to our property caused by the executive’s willful or grossly negligent conduct, and (vi) the willful engaging by the executive in any other conduct which is demonstrably injurious to us or our subsidiaries, monetarily or otherwise.

Under our employment agreement with Mr. Manley, “good reason” means the occurrence (without the executive’s express written consent) of (i) the assignment to him of any duties inconsistent with his status or a substantial adverse alteration in the nature or status of his responsibilities, including, without limitation, him ceasing to be Chief Executive Officer of the Company, (ii) a reduction by the Company in his salary or any other material decrease in his compensation, (iii) the relocation of his principal place of employment by more than 50 miles, or (iv) a material breach by the Company of his employment agreement or any equity award agreement between the Company and him.

Under our letter agreement with Mr. Camplone, “good reason” means the occurrence of a material decrease in compensation, a material change in duties or responsibilities, and/or a required relocation of more than 50 miles, which reason has not been cured within 10 days of notice by Mr. Camplone to the Company.

Under the Severance Plan, “good reason” generally means the occurrence (without the executive’s express written consent) of (i) the assignment to the executive of any duties inconsistent with such executive’s status or a substantial

“Retirement” (as defined in our equity compensation plans) generally means the named executive officer’s termination of employment or other service from us or a subsidiary of ours after attainment of age 55 and completion of at least six years of service with us or a subsidiary of ours (disregarding any service with an entity prior to becoming a subsidiary or after ceasing to be a subsidiary). As of December 31, 2022, Messrs. Cannon and Edmunds were, but Messrs. Manley, Lower, and Camplone were not, “retirement” eligible under our equity compensation plans. The one-time RSU awards awarded to for Messrs. Lower, Cannon, and Edmunds in November 2021 are not eligible for “retirement” treatment under the 2017 Plan.

We have not entered into any change in control agreements with any of our named executive officers. Under the 2017 Plan, if an outstanding award is continued, assumed, or substituted in connection with a “change in control” (as defined in the 2017 Plan and related agreements), then, in the case of awards subject to performance goals, the performance goals will be deemed to be achieved at the target level of performance, and the awards will vest in full at the end of the applicable performance period, subject to the participant’s continued employment. Also if awards remain outstanding in connection with a change in control, the 2017 Plan only provides for “double trigger” vesting. Specifically, if within 24 months following such change in control, a participant’s employment or service is terminated without cause or the participant resigns with good reason (as defined in the 2017 Plan and related agreements), all restrictions on such participant’s RSUs will immediately lapse and such awards will be settled as soon as reasonably practicable.

Under the 2017 Plan, if an outstanding award is not continued, assumed, or substituted in connection with a change in control, then all restrictions on such participant’s RSUs will immediately lapse and such awards will be settled as soon as reasonably practicable (if applicable, assuming achievement at the target level of performance goals).

The tables below disclose the value of unvested RSUs held by our named executive officers that would have accelerated if a change in control had taken place on December 31, 2022, assuming that the awards were not continued, assumed, or substituted in connection with the change in control. To determine such value, we used the formula and assumptions described above under “Unvested Restricted Stock Unit Awards.”

If we had terminated Mr. Manley’s employment for “cause,” he would not have been entitled to any payments triggered by the termination, and all equity awards held by him on the date of termination, whether vested or unvested, would have been canceled.

If Mr. Manley had terminated his employment with us for “good reason,” then, provided he is in compliance with all applicable restrictive covenants and he signs a mutually acceptable severance agreement, Mr. Manley will be entitled to receive (i) in a lump sum, 1.5 times the sum of his base salary and target annual bonus (or if greater, in each case, the base salary or target annual bonus as in effect prior to the event giving rise to good reason), (ii) in a lump sum at the same time bonuses are paid to active employees generally, an amount equal to his annual bonus based on actual performance as determined by the Committee, prorated for the number of days he was employed during the applicable calendar year through the applicable termination date, and (iii) accelerated vesting of all then-held time-based equity awards and, with respect to performance-based equity awards, vesting in accordance with actual performance as determined by the Compensation Committee as of the end of the year prior to the year in which the termination occurs for each open performance cycle, or for any award for which there has not been a full year of performance, at the target level of performance.

If Mr. Manley had terminated his employment with us without “good reason,” he would not have been entitled to any payments triggered by the termination.

If Mr. Manley’s employment had terminated due to death or disability, he would not have been entitled to any payments triggered by the termination.

If his employment had terminated due to death, Mr. Manley’s time-based RSUs would have immediately vested and his performance-based RSUs would have continued to vest on a prorated basis (with the payout level determined based on actual performance). If his employment had terminated due to disability, then he would have continued to vest in his time-based RSUs, and his performance-based RSUs would have continued to vest on a prorated basis (with the payout level determined based on actual performance), only if he fully complied with any non-compete, non-disparagement, confidentiality, and other restrictive covenants set forth in any agreement entered into between him and the Company determined, notwithstanding the time periods set forth therein, as if all such restrictive covenants applied at all times while any such awards were outstanding.

Mr. Manley is not eligible for “retirement” treatment under our equity compensation plans.

If we had terminated Mr. Manley’s employment without “cause,” as long as he remained in compliance with the restrictive covenants and confidentiality provisions of his employment agreement and signed a reasonable and mutually acceptable severance agreement (including a release and a covenant of reasonable cooperation), he would have been entitled to receive the same payments and benefits described under “Voluntary Termination for Good Reason” above.

If we had terminated Messrs. Lower’s, Camplone’s, Cannon’s, or Edmunds’s employment for “cause,” they would not have been entitled to any payments triggered by the termination, and all equity awards held by them on the date of termination would have been canceled. In addition, they would not have been eligible for “retirement” treatment under our equity compensation plans.

Pursuant to the terms of the Severance Plan, as described above, if any of Messrs. Lower, Cannon, or Edmunds had voluntarily terminated his employment for “good reason,” as long as (a) he was not in material breach of any restrictive covenant agreement with the Company, (b) he did not breach any such restrictive covenant agreement as if it had been in effect through the 18-month period following the applicable termination date, and (c) he signed a waiver and release of claims, then the executive would have been entitled to receive:

In addition, Messrs. Lower, Cannon, and Edmunds would have continued to vest in the retention RSU awards granted to them in November 2021, only if they fully complied with any non-compete, non-disparagement, confidentiality, and other restrictive covenants set forth in any agreement entered into between them and the Company determined, notwithstanding the time periods set forth therein, as if all such restrictive covenants applied at all times while such awards are outstanding.

In connection with his appointment as our Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Mr. Lower received a sign-on award of restricted stock units on January 13, 2020, subject to a three-year installment vesting schedule. If Mr. Lower had voluntarily terminated his employment for “good reason” (as defined in the 2017 Plan), then his sign-on award would have immediately vested in full.

Pursuant to the terms of our letter agreement with Mr. Camplone, if he had voluntarily terminated his employment for “good reason,” then he would have been entitled to receive a lump sum cash severance payment equal to the sum of his annual base salary and his annual target bonus, his outstanding time-based equity awards would have immediately vested, and his outstanding performance-based equity awards would have continued to vest on a prorated basis (with the payout level determined based on actual performance). Such severance would have been in lieu of any other severance plan applicable to executive officers and would have been subject to him signing a separation agreement that included a release of claims against the Company and certain non-competition covenant and confidentiality covenants.

Since each of Messrs. Cannon, and Edmunds were “retirement” eligible under our equity compensation plans, they would have been entitled to the benefits described in the “Retirement” paragraph below.

If any of Messrs. Lower, Camplone, Cannon, or Edmunds had terminated his employment with us without “good reason,” he would not have been entitled to any payments triggered by the termination. In addition, the retention RSU awards granted to Messrs. Lower, Cannon, and Edmunds in November 2021 would have been forfeited.

Since each of Messrs. Cannon and Edmunds are eligible for “retirement” treatment (as defined in our equity compensation plans), they would have been entitled to the benefits described in the “Retirement” paragraph below.

If Messrs. Lower’s, Camplone’s, Cannon’s, or Edmunds’s employment had terminated because of death or disability, they would not have been entitled to any payments triggered by the termination.

If their employment had terminated due to death, all RSUs held by them, other than any RSUs granted subject to a three-year performance goal, would have immediately vested, and any RSUs that were granted subject to a three-year performance goal would have continued to vest on a prorated basis (with the payout level determined based on actual performance).

If their employment had terminated due to disability, then they would have continued to vest in any RSUs held by them (provided that in the case of any RSUs subject to a three-year performance goal, they would have continued to vest in a prorated portion, with the payout level determined based on actual performance), only if they fully complied with any non-compete, non-disparagement, confidentiality, and other restrictive covenants set forth in any agreement entered into between them and the Company, determined, notwithstanding the time periods set forth therein, as if all such restrictive covenants applied at all times while any such awards are outstanding.

If Messrs. Cannon or Edmunds had retired on December 31, 2022, they would have continued to vest in any RSUs held by them (provided that in the case of any RSUs subject to a three-year performance goal, they would have continued to vest in a prorated portion, with the payout level determined based on actual performance), only if they fully complied with any non-compete, non-disparagement, confidentiality, and other restrictive covenants set forth in any agreement entered into between them and the Company determined, notwithstanding the time periods set forth therein, as if all such restrictive covenants applied at all times while any such awards were outstanding. The one-time RSU awards awarded to Messrs. Cannon and Edmunds in November 2021 would have been forfeited.

If we had terminated Messrs. Lower’s, Camplone’s, Cannon’s, or Edmunds’s employment without “cause,” then they would have been entitled to receive the same payments and other benefits described under the section “Voluntary Termination for Good Reason” above.

James Bender, our former President and Chief Operating Officer, retired from the Company on March 4, 2022. His separation of employment did not constitute a termination without “cause” nor a resignation for “good reason” under our Severance Plan, and he did not receive any benefits thereunder. Since he was eligible for “retirement” treatment under our equity compensation plans, Mr. Bender will continue to vest in RSUs that were granted to him subject to a four-year installment vesting schedule and in a prorated portion of RSUs that were granted to him subject to a three-year performance goal (with the payout level determined based on actual performance), only if he fully complies with any non-compete, non-disparagement, confidentiality, and other restrictive covenants set forth in any agreement entered into between him and the Company determined, notwithstanding the time periods set forth therein, as if all such restrictive covenants applied at all times while such awards are outstanding. For additional information regarding the equity awards held by Mr. Bender as of December 31, 2022, please refer to the “Outstanding Equity Awards at End of Fiscal Year 2022” table above. Mr. Bender forfeited the retention RSU award he received in November 2021 effective upon his retirement.

As required by Section 953(b) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, and Item 402(u) of Regulation S-K, the Compensation Committee determined that the total annual compensation paid to our Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Manley, in respect of 2022 was approximately 206 times the median of the total annual compensation of all of our employees (other than Mr. Manley) in respect of 2022. We believe that the pay ratio disclosed above is a reasonable estimate calculated in a manner consistent with Item 402(u) of Regulation S-K. SEC rules for identifying the median employee and calculating the pay ratio allow companies to apply various methodologies and assumptions, and, as a result, the pay ratio reported by us may not be comparable to the pay ratio reported by other companies.

We identified the median employee by examining 2022 total compensation for all individuals who were employed by us on December 31, 2022, excluding the compensation received by Mr. Manley in 2022. We included all individuals employed by us on December 31, 2022, whether employed on a full-time or part-time basis, and excluded independent contractors. We calculated annual total compensation for all employees using the same methodology we use for our named executive officers as set forth in the “Summary Compensation Table” above and annualized the compensation of employees who were not employed for the entire year. The annual total compensation of our median employee was $65,519.

As required by Section 953(a) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, and Item 402(v) of Regulation S-K, we are providing the following information about the relationship between executive compensation actually paid to our named executive officers and certain financial performance of the Company. For further information concerning the Company’s variable pay-for-performance philosophy and how the Company aligns executive compensation with the Company’s performance, refer to “Executive Compensation – Compensation Discussion and Analysis.”