UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
SCHEDULE 14A
PROXY STATEMENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 14(a) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
(Amendment No. )
Filed by the Registrant ☒
Filed by a Party other than the Registrant ☐
Check the appropriate box:
☐ | Preliminary Proxy Statement | |
☐ | Confidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2)) | |
☒ | Definitive Proxy Statement | |
☐ | Definitive Additional Materials | |
☐ | Soliciting Material Pursuant to §240.14a-12 |
THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORPORATION
(Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)
(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if other than the Registrant)
Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):
☒ | No fee required. | |||
☐ | Fee computed on table below per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(1) and 0-11.
| |||
(1) | Title of each class of securities to which transaction applies: | |||
| ||||
(2) | Aggregate number of securities to which transaction applies:
| |||
| ||||
(3) | Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction computed pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11 (Set forth the amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how it was determined): | |||
| ||||
(4) | Proposed maximum aggregate value of transaction: | |||
| ||||
(5) | Total fee paid: | |||
| ||||
☐ | Fee paid previously with preliminary materials. | |||
☐ | Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration statement number, or the Form or Schedule and the date of its filing. | |||
(1) | Amount Previously Paid: | |||
| ||||
(2) | Form, Schedule or Registration Statement No.: | |||
| ||||
(3) | Filing Party: | |||
| ||||
(4) | Date Filed: | |||
|
2018 NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING AND PROXY STATEMENT
Page 1 | ||||
Page 2 | ||||
Page 3 | ||||
Page 7 | ||||
Page 8 | ||||
Page 9 | ||||
Page 18 | ||||
Page 31 | ||||
Page 33 | ||||
Page 34 | ||||
Page 35 | ||||
Executive Compensation Tables and Other Compensation Disclosure |
Page 58 | |||
Page 70 | ||||
Page 70 | ||||
Page 71 | ||||
Page 72 | ||||
Page 73 | ||||
Page 73 | ||||
Page 74 | ||||
ITEM 5
STOCKHOLDER PROPOSAL REGARDING PROXY |
Page 76 | |||
Page 76 | ||||
Page 77 | ||||
Page 78 | ||||
Page 79 | ||||
Page 80 | ||||
Page 82 | ||||
Page 85 | ||||
Page 88 | ||||
Page 89 |
LETTER FROM THE CEO |
Dear Fellow Stockholder:
On behalf of the Board of Directors, we cordially invite you to our 2018 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held on Tuesday, April 10, 2018 at 9 a.m., Eastern time, at 101 Barclay Street, New York, New York 10286.
At this years Annual Meeting, you will be asked to vote on several items, including the election of directors, our 2017 executive compensation program (the say-on-pay vote), and stockholder proposals, if properly presented. Detailed information about the director nominees, including their specific experience and qualifications, begins on page 7. Our Compensation Discussion and Analysis, which explains our continued commitment to pay for performance, alignment with stockholders interests and appropriate risk-taking in the context of our 2017 incentive compensation decisions, begins on page 35. We appreciate the opportunity to provide you with these details of your Boards actions in 2017 and recommendations for 2018. We encourage you to read the proxy statement carefully for more information.
Your vote is important to us, and we hope that you will participate in the Annual Meeting, either by attending and voting in person or by voting as promptly as possible through any of the acceptable means described in this proxy statement. Instructions on how to vote begin on page 82. You may also listen to the meeting at https://www.bnymellon.com/us/en/investor-relations/index.jsp.
Thank you for your continued support of BNY Mellon, and we look forward to seeing you at the Annual Meeting.
Sincerely,
CHARLES W. SCHARF Chairman and CEO
March 9, 2018 |
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 1 |
NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING |
TUESDAY, APRIL 10, 2018
9:00 a.m., Eastern time
101 Barclay Street, New York, New York 10286
Record Date: February 9, 2018
AGENDA | BOARD RECOMMENDATION |
1. To elect the 12 nominees named in this proxy statement to serve on our Board of Directors until the 2019 annual meeting |
FOR each director nominee |
2. To provide an advisory vote for approval of the 2017 compensation of our named executives, as disclosed in this proxy statement |
FOR |
3. To ratify the appointment of KPMG LLP as our independent auditor for 2018 |
FOR |
4. To consider a stockholder proposal regarding written consent, if properly presented |
AGAINST |
5. To consider a stockholder proposal regarding a proxy voting review report, if properly presented |
AGAINST |
We will also act on any other business that is properly raised.
March 9, 2018
By Order of the Board of Directors,
CRAIG T. BEAZER
Corporate Secretary
IT IS IMPORTANT THAT YOU CAREFULLY READ YOUR PROXY STATEMENT AND VOTE.
|
VIA THE INTERNET Visit the website listed on your proxy card
|
|
BY TELEPHONE Call the telephone number listed on your proxy card
|
IN PERSON Attend the annual meeting (see page 82 for more information)
|
BY MAIL Mail in a completed proxy card
|
Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the Stockholder Meeting to be held on April 10, 2018: Our 2018 proxy statement and 2017 Annual Report to stockholders are available at https://www.bnymellon.com/proxy.
|
2 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
INTRODUCTION |
The following information is presented to provide context for the operation of our pay program which is discussed in more detail on page 6 of this introduction and throughout our Compensation Discussion and Analysis beginning on page 35 of this proxy statement.
2017 Performance Highlights
Earnings Per Share (EPS) | Operating Earnings Per Share (OEPS)* | |
|
| |
Strong Multi-Year Total Stockholder Return (TSR) | Returned Significant Value to Stockholders | |
|
|
Awards and Recognition
Investment Services Collateral Manager of the Year Global Investor/ISF, 2017
Best Global Corporate Trust Service Provider Global Finance, 2017
Best Global Bank for Depositary Receipts Global Finance, 2017
Best Middle-Office Solution and Best Buy-Side Operations Solution FTF News, 2017
Best Managed Accounts Platform Hedgeweek, 2017
Best ETF Fund Accounting and Administration Provider ETF Innovation Awards, 2017
Treasury Services Best Bank for Financial Institutions Global Finance, 2017
Best Global Trade Correspondent Bank Global Trade Review Magazine, 2017 |
Investment Management Best Private Bank in the U.S. for Customer Service Professional Wealth Management/The Banker, 2017
Winner, Global Fixed Income Newton Investment Management Financial Times, 2017
Best Mutual Funds: International Bond Standish Mellon Investors Business Daily, 2017
LDI Manager of the Year Insight Investment Financial News, 2017
Fixed Income Manager of the Year Insight Investment UK Pension Awards, 2017 |
Technology Top Companies for Women Technologists Leadership Index Anita Borg Institute, 2017
NOVA Award for Innovation in Technology NICSA, 2017
Best Enterprise Data Management Initiative WatersTechnology, 2017
Workplace Top 50 Employers for Women The Times, 2017
100% Corporate Equality Index Human Rights Campaign, 2018
Gender-Equality Index Bloomberg, 2018
Corporate Social Responsibility Dow Jones Sustainability World Index 2017 | ||||||
* | For a reconciliation and explanation of this non-GAAP measure, see Annex A. |
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 3 |
INTRODUCTION |
DIRECTOR NOMINEES
Our directors contribute to the strength of our Board through the variety of their experience, diversity, differing perspectives and institutional knowledge.
|
Skills and Expertise
| |||||||
|
Finance
|
|
Leadership | |||||
|
Technology
|
|
Global |
Governance | ||||
|
Risk |
|
Financial |
Diversity |
COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIPS | ||||||||||||||||||||
Name and Occupation(1)
|
Director Since
|
Independent | Audit | Corp. Gov. & Nom. | Corp. Social Resp. | Finance | Human Res. & Comp. | Risk | Technology | Other Current Public Company Boards | ||||||||||
Steven D. Black(2) Co-CEO of Bregal Investments
|
N/A | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||
Linda Z. Cook Managing Director of EIG Global Energy Partners and CEO of Harbour Energy, Ltd.
|
2016 | 0 | ||||||||||||||||||
Joseph J. Echevarria Retired CEO of Deloitte LLP
|
2015 | (3) | (4) | 3 | ||||||||||||||||
Edward P. Garden Chief Investment Officer and Founding Partner of Trian Fund Management, L.P.
|
2014 | 2 | ||||||||||||||||||
Jeffrey A. Goldstein CEO, SpringHarbor Financial Group LLC and
|
2014 | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||
John M. Hinshaw Former EVP and Chief Customer Officer of Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company
|
2014 | 0 | ||||||||||||||||||
Edmund F. Ted Kelly Retired Chairman of Liberty Mutual Group
|
2004 | 0 | ||||||||||||||||||
Jennifer B. Morgan Executive Board member of SAP and President of SAP Americas and Asia Pacific Japan, Global Customer Operations
|
2016 | 0 | ||||||||||||||||||
Mark A. Nordenberg Chancellor Emeritus, Chair of the Institute of Politics and Distinguished Service Professor of Law of the University of Pittsburgh
|
1998 | 0 | ||||||||||||||||||
Elizabeth E. Robinson Retired Global Treasurer of The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
|
2016 | 0 | ||||||||||||||||||
Charles W. Scharf(5) Chairman & CEO of The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation
|
2017 | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||
Samuel C. Scott III Retired Chairman, President & CEO of Ingredion Incorporated
|
2003 | (4) | 2 |
(1) | Gerald Hassell retired as our Chairman of the Board effective December 31, 2017. Nicholas M. Donofrio, a member of our Corporate Governance and Nominating, Corporate Social Responsibility and Risk Committees, retired as a director of our company effective September 30, 2017. John A. Luke, Jr., currently a member of our Audit, Corporate Governance and Nominating and Corporate Social Responsibility Committees, is retiring as a director of our company immediately after our Annual Meeting. |
(2) | Steven D. Black is a nominee who does not currently serve on our Board of Directors. |
(3) | Lead Director. |
(4) | Financial expert. |
(5) | Mr. Scharf was appointed as a director of our company effective July 17, 2017 in connection with his appointment as CEO, and became Chairman of the Board effective January 1, 2018. |
4 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
INTRODUCTION |
COMMITTEES
Audit
|
Finance
| |||
Chair: Joseph J. Echevarria
Members: John A. Luke, Jr., Jennifer B. Morgan, Mark A. Nordenberg, Samuel C. Scott III
2017 Meetings: 13
Key Responsibilities: Overseeing our registered independent public accountants, internal audit function, and internal controls over financial statements and reports. |
Chair: Jeffrey A. Goldstein
Members: Joseph J. Echevarria, Edward P. Garden, Elizabeth E. Robinson
2017 Meetings: 7
Key Responsibilities: Monitoring and overseeing our financial resources and strategies; and reviewing forecasts and budgets, net interest revenue plans, investment portfolio activities, capital structure, capital raising and capital distribution initiatives that exceed our Corporate Governance Guidelines thresholds.
| |||
Corporate Governance and Nominating
|
Human Resources and Compensation
| |||
Chair: Mark A. Nordenberg
Members: Linda Z. Cook, Joseph J. Echevarria, Edward P. Garden, John A. Luke, Jr.
2017 Meetings: 6
Key Responsibilities: Identifying and reviewing potential directors, and reviewing non-employee director compensation; maintaining our Corporate Governance Guidelines; overseeing annual Board and committee evaluations; and reviewing structure, responsibilities and membership of committees.
|
Chair: Edward P. Garden
Members: Jeffrey A. Goldstein, Edmund F. Ted Kelly, Samuel C. Scott III
2017 Meetings: 10
Key Responsibilities: Overseeing employee compensation and benefits, management development and succession and diversity and inclusion programs; and administering our incentive compensation plans, including equity incentive compensation plans.
| |||
Corporate Social Responsibility
|
Risk
| |||
Chair: Samuel C. Scott III
Members: John A. Luke, Jr., Mark A. Nordenberg, Elizabeth E. Robinson
2017 Meetings: 4
Key Responsibilities: Promoting culture of exemplary corporate citizenship; overseeing our philanthropy, community involvement, and advocacy; assessing the impact of our businesses, operations and programs from a social responsibility perspective reflecting varied stakeholders interests; and overseeing Community Reinvestment Act and Fair Lending compliance.
|
Chair: Edmund F. Ted Kelly
Members: Linda Z. Cook, Edward P. Garden, Jeffrey A Goldstein, John M. Hinshaw, Elizabeth E. Robinson
2017 Meetings: 5
Key Responsibilities: Approving enterprise-wide risk management practices, our risk appetite statement and our global risk management framework; evaluating risk exposure and tolerance; and reviewing policies and practices regarding risk assessment and risk management. | |||
Technology
| ||||
Chair: John M. Hinshaw
Members: Jennifer B. Morgan, Mark A. Nordenberg
2017 Meetings: 5
Key Responsibilities: Approving our technology planning and strategy; reviewing significant technology investments; and monitoring technology trends relative to our business strategy.
|
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 5 |
INTRODUCTION |
GOVERNANCE AND COMPENSATION
Robust Stockholder Rights | Active, Independent Board | Our Culture | ||
No staggered board
Special meeting of independent directors may be called by our Lead Director
Special meeting rights for stockholders, individually or in a group, holding 20% of our outstanding common stock
Proxy access allows stockholders, individually or in a group of up to 20, holding 3% of our outstanding stock for at least 3 years to nominate up to 20% of the Board
No plurality voting in uncontested director elections (each director must be elected by majority of votes cast)
No supermajority voting: stockholder actions require only majority of votes cast (not majority of shares present and entitled to vote)
No poison pill (stockholders rights plan) |
Active engagement with stakeholders
Independent board: comprised solely of independent directors, other than our CEO, and meets in regular executive sessions
Independent Lead Director: annually selected by independent directors, empowered with broad authority
Board succession and refreshment: led by the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee recruiting efforts, our Board has added seven independent directors since 2014 and recommended an independent nominee for election at our 2018 Annual Meeting
Lead Director and Committee Chairman rotation at five-year intervals
High rate of attendance: average 2017 attendance at Board and committee meetings was 97%
A substantial portion of director compensation is paid in equity all of which is required to be retained until retirement |
Risk-aware: we protect against excessive risk-taking through multiple lines of defense, including Board oversight
Honest and accountable: our codes of conduct apply to all employees and directors, providing a framework for ethical conduct
Innovative and evolving: we encourage directors to participate in continuing education programs, and continue to enhance our integrated learning and development platform for employees through BNY Mellon University (BKU) |
Awarded 2017 Total Direct Compensation(1)
Named Executives (NEOs) | Salary | Incentive Compensation | Total Incentive as % of Target |
Awarded Total Direct Compensation(1) | ||||||||
Cash | PSUs(2) | RSUs(2) | ||||||||||
Charles W. Scharf(3) Chairman & CEO
|
$572,917 |
$1,754,000 |
$7,625,000 |
$1,754,000 |
100%(5) |
$11,705,917(6) | ||||||
Gerald L. Hassell(4) Former Chairman & CEO
|
$1,000,000 |
$3,500,000 |
$ |
$10,500,000 |
100% |
$15,000,000 | ||||||
Thomas P. (Todd) Gibbons Vice Chairman & CFO
|
$650,000 |
$1,943,100 |
$2,914,650 |
$1,619,250 |
102% |
$7,127,000 | ||||||
Brian T. Shea Former Vice Chairman & CEO of Investment Services
|
$650,000 |
$1,188,495 |
$ |
$2,773,155 |
98% |
$4,611,650 | ||||||
Mitchell E. Harris CEO of Investment Management
|
$650,000 |
$2,626,155 |
$3,939,232 |
$2,188,463 |
119% |
$9,403,850 | ||||||
Bridget E. Engle Senior Executive Vice President & Chief Information Officer
|
$339,611 |
$2,350,000 |
$1,175,000 |
$1,175,000 |
100% |
$5,039,611 |
1 | The amounts reported as Awarded Total Direct Compensation differ substantially from the amounts determined under SEC rules as reported for 2017 in the Total column of the Summary Compensation Table set forth on page 58. The above table is not a substitute for the Summary Compensation Table. |
2 | Performance-based restricted stock units (PSUs) are generally earned between 0% 150% based on the achievement of performance metrics over the 2018 2020 performance period. 50% of Mr. Scharfs incentive PSUs were granted upon his commencement of employment and are earned between 0% 150% based on the achievement of performance metrics over the 2017 2019 performance period. Restricted stock units (RSUs) generally vest in equal installments over three years. |
3 | Mr. Scharf was appointed as Chief Executive Officer, effective July 17, 2017, and as Chairman of the Board, effective January 1, 2018. |
4 | Mr. Hassell stepped down as Chief Executive Officer effective July 17, 2017 and retired as Chairman of the Board effective December 31, 2017. |
5 | Mr. Scharfs 2017 incentive compensation was earned at 100% of target, and the cash and RSU components were pro-rated to reflect the time period in 2017 that he was employed by us. |
6 | Does not include Mr. Scharfs $7,625,000 award of sign-on PSUs, which were a one-time award granted in connection with his commencement of employment on July 17, 2017. |
6 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
ITEM 1. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS | > Resolution |
Proposal
We are asking stockholders to elect the 12 nominees named in this proxy statement to serve on the Board of Directors of The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation (the company, BNY Mellon, we or us) until the 2019 Annual Meeting of stockholders or until their successors have been duly elected and qualified.
Background
11 nominees currently serve on our Board of Directors. Mr. Black is a nominee who does not currently serve on our Board of Directors.
11 nominees are independent, and one nominee serves as the companys Chairman and Chief Executive Officer.
John A. Luke, Jr., currently a director of our company, will not be standing for reelection at our Annual Meeting.
| ||
The Board and the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee (CG&N Committee) have concluded that each of our nominees should be recommended for nomination or re-nomination as a director as described on page 16 after considering, among other things, the nominees (1) professional background and experience, (2) senior level policy-making positions, (3) other public company board experience, (4) diversity, (5) intangible attributes, (6) prior BNY Mellon Board experience, and (7) Board attendance and participation, as applicable.
The nominees have skills and expertise in a wide range of areas, including technology, accounting, private equity, financial regulation, financial services, global management, insurance, risk management and legal matters.
The nominees are able to devote the necessary time and effort to BNY Mellon matters. |
||
The Board of Directors recommends that you vote FOR each of the nominees described below.
| ||
Voting
We do not know of any reason why any nominee named in this proxy statement would be unable to serve as a director if elected. If any nominee is unable to serve, the shares represented by all valid proxies will be voted for the election of such other person as may be nominated in accordance with our by-laws, as described on page 17. Proxies cannot be voted for a greater number of persons than the number of nominees named in this proxy statement.
Each director will be elected if more votes are cast for the directors election than are cast against the directors election, with abstentions and broker non-votes not being counted as a vote cast either for or against the directors election. Pursuant to our Corporate Governance Guidelines, if any incumbent director fails to receive a majority of the votes cast, the director will be required to tender his or her resignation promptly after the certification of the stockholder vote. Our CG&N Committee will promptly consider the tendered resignation and recommend to the Board whether to accept or reject it, or whether other actions should be taken. More information on our voting standard and the CG&N Committees consideration of tendered resignations is provided on page 17 below.
8 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
ITEM 1. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS > Nominees |
Finance |
Leadership | Technology | Global | Governance | Risk | Financial Services Experience | Diversity |
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 11 |
ITEM 1. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS > Nominees |
Finance |
Leadership | Technology | Global | Governance | Risk | Financial Services Experience | Diversity |
12 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
ITEM 1. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS > Nominees |
Finance |
Leadership | Technology | Global | Governance | Risk | Financial Services Experience | Diversity |
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 13 |
ITEM 1. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS > Nominees |
Finance |
Leadership | Technology | Global | Governance | Risk | Financial Services Experience | Diversity |
14 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
ITEM 1. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS > Nominees |
Steven D. Black* | Linda Z. Cook | Joseph J. Echevarria | Edward P. Garden | Jeffrey A. Goldstein | John M. Hinshaw | Edmund F. Ted Kelly | Jennifer B. Morgan | Mark A. Nordenberg | Elizabeth E. Robinson | Charles W. Scharf | Samuel C. Scott III | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Skills and Experience
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Finance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||
Leadership |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||
Technology |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Global |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||
Governance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Risk |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Financial Services Experience |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Demographic Background
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Board Tenure
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Years |
|
N/A
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
14
|
| ||||||||||||
Gender
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Male |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Female |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Age
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Years old |
|
65
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
69
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
73
|
| ||||||||||||
Race/Ethnicity
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
African American/Black |
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
White/Caucasian |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
Hispanic/Latino |
|
|
|
* | Mr. Black is a nominee who does not currently serve on our Board of Directors. |
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 15 |
ITEM 1. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS > Nominees |
16 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
ITEM 1. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS | > Corporate Governance and Board Information |
Our Corporate Governance Practices
We believe that the strength of BNY Mellons business reflects the high standards set by our governance structure. It provides guidance in managing the company from the Board of Directors on down for the benefit of all our stakeholders including our investors, clients, employees and communities. Several of our key governance practices are:
INDEPENDENCE
|
ü Our Board is comprised entirely of independent directors (other than our Chief Executive Officer) who regularly meet in executive sessions led by our Lead Director at Board and committee meetings.
ü Our independent Lead Director, selected annually by our independent directors, has broad powers, including the right to call a special meeting of the independent directors, approval of Board meeting agendas, materials and schedules, leading executive sessions and consulting with the Chairman of the Human Resources and Compensation Committee (HRC Committee) on CEO performance, compensation and succession.
ü All Board committees are composed entirely of independent directors.
|
ACTIVE ENGAGEMENT
|
ü We had a high rate of director attendance at Board and committee meetings in 2017, averaging 97%.
ü We actively engage with our stakeholders through multiple initiatives, reaching out to investors representing over 47% of our outstanding common shares as well as proxy advisory firms and other stakeholders.
ü Stockholders and other interested parties can directly contact our Board (see Helpful Resources on page 88).
|
ONGOING IMPROVEMENTS
|
ü Our Corporate Governance Guidelines require that the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee rotate the Lead Director and committee Chairmen at five-year intervals and consider enhanced director qualifications in connection with director nominations.
ü Our Board and each of our standing committees conduct annual self-evaluations that have resulted in enhancements to Board functioning (see Evaluation of Board and Committee Effectiveness on page 19), and in 2017 we added individual interviews to the self-evaluation process. Following engagement with stockholders, in 2017 we continued to enhance our Board and committee self-evaluation process and expand our related disclosure.
ü Our by-laws permit holders in the aggregate of 20% of our outstanding common stock to call a special stockholder meeting.
ü We redesigned our committee structure, for implementation following the Annual Meeting, to refine the allocation of committee responsibilities and to utilize our directors time more efficiently.
ü Our Board participates in information sessions during regularly scheduled and special meetings, receiving business, regulatory and other updates from senior management, including risk executives and our General Counsel.
|
18 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
ITEM 1. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS > Corporate Governance and Board Information |
ROBUST PROGRAMS
|
ü A significant portion of director compensation is paid in deferred stock units, which must be held as long as the director serves on the Board.
ü Our codes of conduct apply to our directors, as well as all of our employees, providing a framework for the highest standards of professional conduct and fostering a culture of honesty and accountability.
ü We continue to enhance our robust director orientation program in which new directors participate in their first six months as a director, and all directors are encouraged to participate in continuing education programs for which expenses are reimbursed.
|
WHAT WE DONT DO
|
× No staggered board.
× No poison pill (stockholders rights plan).
× No supermajority voting. Action by stockholders requires only a majority of the votes cast (not a majority of the shares present and entitled to vote).
× No plurality voting in uncontested director elections. Each director must be elected by a majority of the votes cast.
|
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 19 |
ITEM 1. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS > Corporate Governance and Board Information |
20 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
ITEM 1. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS > Corporate Governance and Board Information |
Our Board has reviewed its current leadership structure consisting of a combined Chairman and Chief Executive Officer with an independent Lead Director in light of the Boards composition, the companys size, the nature of the companys business, the regulatory framework under which the company operates, the companys stockholder base, the companys peer group and other relevant factors. Our Board has determined that a combined Chairman and Chief Executive Officer position, with an independent Lead Director, continues to be the most appropriate Board leadership structure for the company because it promotes Board effectiveness, provides for continuity of expertise in both business and corporate governance and ensures that the company has a clear public face. As described under Succession Planning on page 30, to facilitate an orderly transition of duties following Mr. Scharfs appointment as Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Hassell continued to serve as Chairman of the Board through his retirement, effective December 31, 2017. Mr. Scharf assumed responsibilities as Chairman as of January 1, 2018.
EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE ACTION
|
A combined Chairman/Chief Executive Officer:
Is in the best position to be aware of major issues facing the company on a day-to-day and long-term basis, and to identify and bring key risks and developments facing the company to the Boards attention (in coordination with the Lead Director as part of the agenda-setting process), and
Eliminates the potential for uncertainty as to who leads the company, providing the company with a single public face in dealing with stockholders, employees, regulators, analysts and other constituencies.
A substantial majority of our peers also utilize a similar board structure with a combined Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, as well as a lead or presiding independent director.
| |
STRONG COUNTERBALANCES
|
As set forth in our Corporate Governance Guidelines, our Lead Director:
Reviews and approves, in coordination with the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, agendas for Board meetings, materials, information and meeting schedules,
Has the authority to add items to the agenda for any Board meeting,
Presides at executive sessions of independent directors, which are held at each regular Board and committee meeting,
Serves as a non-exclusive liaison between the other independent directors and the Chairman/Chief Executive Officer,
Can call special meetings of the independent directors in his discretion and chairs any meeting of the Board or stockholders at which the Chairman is absent,
Is available to meet with major stockholders and regulators under appropriate circumstances,
Consults with the HRC Committee regarding its consideration of Chief Executive Officer compensation,
In conjunction with the chairman of the HRC Committee, discusses with the Chairman/Chief Executive Officer the Boards annual evaluation of his performance as Chief Executive Officer,
Consults with the HRC Committee on Chief Executive Officer succession planning, and
Consults with the Chairman of the CG&N Committee on the Boards annual performance evaluation. In practice, our Lead Director is a member of the CG&N Committee, which we believe is a governance best practice.
In addition, the powers of the Chairman under our by-laws are limited other than chairing meetings of the Board and stockholders, the powers conferred on the Chairman (e.g., ability to call special meetings of stockholders or the Board) can also be exercised by the Board or a specified number of directors or, in some cases, the Lead Director, or are administrative in nature (e.g., authority to execute documents on behalf of the company).
|
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 21 |
ITEM 1. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS > Corporate Governance and Board Information |
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 23 |
ITEM 1. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS > Corporate Governance and Board Information |
Successful management of our company requires understanding, identification and management of risk. We oversee risk through multiple lines of defense.
Entity | Primary Responsibilities for Risk Management | |
Risk Committee, consisting entirely of independent directors |
Review and approval of the enterprise-wide risk management practices of the company.
Review and approval of the companys risk appetite statement on an annual basis, and approval of any material amendment to the statement.
Review of significant financial and other risk exposures and the steps management has taken to monitor, control and report such exposures.
Evaluation of risk exposure and tolerance, and approval of Board level limits or exceptions.
Review and evaluation of the companys policies and practices with respect to risk assessment and risk management.
Review, with respect to risk management and compliance, of (1) reports and significant findings of the companys Risk Management and Compliance department (the Risk department) and the Internal Audit department (Internal Audit), (2) significant reports from regulatory agencies and managements responses, and (3) the Risk departments scope of work and its planned activities.
| |
Audit Committee, consisting entirely of independent directors |
Review and discussion of policies with respect to risk assessment and risk management.
Oversight responsibility with respect to the integrity of our companys financial reporting and systems of internal controls regarding finance and accounting, as well as our financial statements.
Review of the Risk Committees annual report summarizing its review of the companys methods for identifying and managing risks.
Review of the Risk Committees semi-annual reports regarding corporate-wide compliance with laws and regulations.
Review of any items escalated by the Risk Committee that have significant financial statement impact or require significant financial statement/regulatory disclosures.
| |
Management | Chief Risk Officer: Implement an effective risk management framework and daily oversight of risk.
Internal Audit: Provide reliable and timely information to our Board and management regarding our companys effectiveness in identifying and appropriately controlling risks.
Senior Risk Management Committee: Provide a senior focal point within the company to monitor, evaluate and recommend comprehensive policies and solutions to deal with all aspects of risk and to assess the adequacy of any risk remediation plans in our companys businesses.
|
24 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
ITEM 1. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS > Corporate Governance and Board Information |
Board Meetings and Committee Information
Board Meetings
Our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that our directors are expected to attend our Annual Meeting of stockholders and all regular and special meetings of our Board and committees on which they sit. All of our directors then in office attended our 2017 Annual Meeting of stockholders.
Our Board held 15 meetings in 2017. Each incumbent director attended at least 75% of the aggregate number of meetings of our Board and of the committees on which he or she sat, and the average attendance rate was 97%.
Committees and Committee Charters
Our Board has established several standing committees, and each committee makes recommendations to our Board as appropriate and reports periodically to the entire Board. Our committee charters are available on our website (see Helpful Resources on page 88).
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 25 |
ITEM 1. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS > Corporate Governance and Board Information |
Audit Committee
Independent 13 Meetings in 2017 |
|
Joseph J. Echevarria (Chair), John A. Luke, Jr., Jennifer B. Morgan, Mark A. Nordenberg, Samuel C. Scott III
Independent Registered Public Accountant. Our Audit Committee has direct responsibility for the appointment, compensation, annual evaluation, retention and oversight of the work of the registered independent public accountants engaged to prepare an audit report or to perform other audit, review or attestation services for us. The Committee is responsible for the pre-approval of all audit and permitted non-audit services performed by our independent registered public accountants and each year, the Committee recommends that our Board request stockholder ratification of the appointment of the independent registered public accountants.
Overseeing Internal Audit Function. The Committee acts on behalf of our Board in monitoring and overseeing the performance of our internal audit function. The Committee reviews the organizational structure, qualifications, independence and performance of Internal Audit and the scope of its planned activities, at least annually. The Committee also approves the appointment of our internal Chief Auditor, who functionally reports directly to the Committee and administratively reports to the CEO, and annually reviews his or her performance and, as appropriate, replaces the Chief Auditor.
Internal Controls over Financial Statements and Reports. The Committee oversees the operation of a comprehensive system of internal controls covering the integrity of our financial statements and reports, compliance with laws, regulations and corporate policies. Quarterly, the Committee reviews a report from the companys Disclosure Committee and reports concerning the status of our annual review of internal control over financial reporting, including (1) information about (a) any significant deficiencies or material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting that are reasonably likely to adversely affect our ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information and (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in our internal control over financial reporting, and (2) managements responses to any such circumstance. The Committee also oversees our managements work in preparing our financial statements, which will be audited by our independent registered public accountants.
Members and Financial Expert. The Committee consists entirely of directors who meet the independence requirements of listing standards of the NYSE, Rule 10A-3 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act) and the rules and regulations of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). All members are financially literate, have accounting or related financial management expertise within the meaning of the NYSE listing standards as interpreted by our Board and are outside directors, independent of management, under the FDICs rules and regulations. Our Board has determined that each of Mr. Echevarria and Mr. Scott satisfies the definition of audit committee financial expert as set out in the rules and regulations under the Exchange Act, based upon their experience actively supervising a principal accounting or financial officer or public accountant and has banking and financial management expertise as set out in the FDICs rules and regulations. |
26 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
ITEM 1. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS > Corporate Governance and Board Information |
Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee
Independent 6 Meetings in 2017
|
|
Mark A. Nordenberg (Chair), Linda Z. Cook, Joseph J. Echevarria, Edward P. Garden, John A. Luke, Jr.
Corporate Governance Matters. As further described on page 16, our CG&N Committee assists our Board of Directors in reviewing and identifying individuals qualified to become Board members. The Committee periodically considers the size of our Board and recommends changes to the size as warranted and is responsible for developing and recommending to our Board our Corporate Governance Guidelines and proposing changes to these guidelines from time to time as may be appropriate. In addition, the Committee oversees evaluations of our Board and its committees, reviews the structure and responsibilities of the Boards committees and annually considers committee assignments, recommending changes to those assignments as necessary.
Oversight of Director Compensation and Benefits. The Committee reviews non-employee director compensation and benefits on an annual basis and makes recommendations to our Board on appropriate compensation, and is responsible for approving compensation arrangements for non-employee members of the Boards of our significant subsidiaries.
Following our Annual Meeting, the Committee will assume the responsibilities currently overseen by our Corporate Social Responsibility Committee and will be renamed the Corporate Governance, Nominating and Social Responsibility Committee, reflecting our continued commitment to the principles of corporate social responsibility. | ||
Corporate Social Responsibility Committee
Independent 4 Meetings in 2017 |
|
Samuel C. Scott III (Chair), John A. Luke, Jr., Mark A. Nordenberg, Elizabeth E. Robinson
Our Corporate Social Responsibility Committees purpose is to promote a culture that emphasizes and sets high standards for corporate citizenship and to review corporate performance against those standards. The Committee is responsible for providing oversight of the companys programs regarding strategic philanthropy and employee community involvement, public policy and advocacy, including lobbying and political contributions, environmental management, corporate social responsibility of suppliers, corporate social responsibility governance and reporting and human rights. The Committee also provides oversight for the companys compliance with the Community Reinvestment Act and Fair Lending laws and considers the impact of the companys businesses, operations and programs from a social responsibility perspective, taking into account the interests of stockholders, clients, suppliers, employees, communities and regulators.
Following our Annual Meeting, the Committee will be dissolved, and its responsibilities assumed by the CG&N Committee (to be renamed the Corporate Governance, Nominating and Social Responsibility Committee, reflecting our continued commitment to the principles of corporate social responsibility). For additional information regarding the companys commitment to corporate social responsibility and the Committees recent initiatives, see Helpful Resources on page 88. | ||
Finance Committee
Independent 7 Meetings in 2017
|
|
Jeffrey A. Goldstein (Chair), Joseph J. Echevarria, Edward P. Garden, Elizabeth E. Robinson
The Finance Committee assists the Board in fulfilling its responsibilities with respect to the monitoring and oversight of the companys financial resources and strategies. The Committees responsibilities and duties include reviewing: (1) financial forecasts, operating budgets, capital expenditures and expense management programs and progress relative to targets and relative to competitors; (2) plans with regard to net interest revenue, investment portfolio activities and progress relative to such plans and activities; (3) the companys capital structure, capital raising and capital distributions; and (4) any initiatives, including investments, mergers, acquisitions, and dispositions, that exceed the thresholds in our Corporate Governance Guidelines and, as necessary, making recommendations to the Board regarding those initiatives. |
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 27 |
ITEM 1. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS > Corporate Governance and Board Information |
Human
Independent |
Edward P. Garden (Chair), Jeffrey A. Goldstein, Edmund F. Ted Kelly,
Compensation and Benefits. The HRC Committee is generally responsible for overseeing our employee compensation and benefit policies and programs, our management development and succession programs, the development and oversight of a succession plan for the CEO position and our diversity and inclusion programs. The Committee also administers and makes equity and/or cash awards under plans adopted for the benefit of our employees to the extent required or permitted by the terms of these plans, establishes any related performance goals and determines whether and the extent to which these goals have been attained. The Committee also evaluates and approves the total compensation of the CEO and all other executive officers and makes recommendations concerning equity-based plans, which recommendations are subject to the approval of our entire Board. The Committee also oversees certain retirement plans that we sponsor to ensure that: (1) they provide an appropriate level of benefits in a cost-effective manner to meet our needs and objectives in sponsoring such plans; (2) they are properly and efficiently administered in accordance with their terms to avoid unnecessary costs and minimize any potential liabilities to us; (3) our responsibilities as plan sponsor are satisfied; and (4) financial and other information with respect to such plans is properly recorded and reported in accordance with applicable legal requirements.
CEO Compensation. The Committee reviews and approves corporate goals and objectives relevant to the compensation of our CEO, his performance in light of those goals and objectives, and determines and approves his compensation on the basis of its evaluation. With respect to the performance evaluation and compensation decisions regarding our CEO, the Committee reports its preliminary conclusions to the other independent directors of our full Board in executive session and solicits their input prior to finalizing the Committees decisions.
Delegated Authority. The Committee has delegated to our CEO the responsibility for determining equity awards to certain employees, other than himself, who are eligible to receive grants under our Long-Term Incentive Plan (LTIP). This delegated authority is subject to certain limitations, including: (1) total aggregate shares represented by plan awards in any calendar year (1,100,000), (2) aggregate shares represented by plan awards that may be granted to any one individual in any calendar year (100,000), and (3) a sub-limit of shares represented by full value awards that may be granted in any calendar year (550,000). In addition, the Committee may delegate limited authority to our CEO to grant awards under the LTIP beyond these limits in connection with specific acquisitions or similar transactions.
Management Involvement. Our management provides information and recommendations for the Committees decision-making process in connection with the amount and form of executive compensation, except that no member of management will participate in the decision-making process with respect to his or her own compensation. The Compensation Discussion and Analysis starting on page 35 discusses the role of our CEO in determining or recommending the amount and form of executive compensation. In addition, we address the role of our management and its independent compensation consultants and the role of the Committees independent outside compensation advisor in determining and recommending executive compensation on page 29. |
28 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
ITEM 1. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS > Corporate Governance and Board Information |
Risk Committee
Independent |
Edmund F. Ted Kelly (Chair), Linda Z. Cook, Edward P. Garden,
See Oversight of Risk on page 24 above for a discussion of the Risk Committees duties and responsibilities, which include: (1) review and approval of enterprise-wide risk management practices; (2) review and approval of the companys risk appetite statement; (3) review of significant financial and other risk exposures; (4) evaluation of risk exposure and tolerance; (5) review and evaluation of the companys policies and practices with respect to risk assessment and risk management; and (6) review, with respect to risk management and compliance, of certain significant reports. Our Board has determined that Mr. Kelly satisfies the independence requirements to serve as Chairman of the Risk Committee set out in the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System rules and has experience in identifying, assessing, and managing risk exposures of large, complex financial firms based upon his senior leadership experience of a multi-line insurance company. | |||
Technology Committee
Independent |
John M. Hinshaw (Chair), Jennifer B. Morgan, Mark A. Nordenberg
Technology Planning and Strategy. The Technology Committee is responsible for reviewing and approving the companys technology planning and strategy, reviewing significant technology investments and expenditures, and monitoring and evaluating existing and future trends in technology that may affect our strategic plans, including monitoring overall industry trends. The Committee receives reports from management concerning the companys technology and approves related policies or recommends such policies to the Board for approval, as appropriate. The Committee also oversees risks associated with technology. |
Compensation Consultants to the HRC Committee
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 29 |
ITEM 1. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS > Corporate Governance and Board Information |
Succession planning is a priority for the Board and our senior management, with the goal of ensuring a strong pipeline of leaders for the future. The HRC Committee, and ultimately the entire Board, reviews the succession plan for our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer on a regular basis. This plan identifies a readiness level and ranking for internal candidates and incorporates the flexibility to define an external hire as a succession option. In 2017 we executed on our established succession plan and transitioned to a new Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. To ensure an orderly transition, this succession was implemented in two phases, with Mr. Scharf assuming responsibilities as Chief Executive Officer and director mid-year and then assuming additional responsibilities as Chairman effective January 1, 2018 upon Mr. Hassells retirement. Formal succession planning for the balance of our management Executive Committee members is also a regular process, which includes identifying a rank and readiness level for potential internal candidates and strategically planning for external hires for positions where, for example, capability gaps are identified. The HRC Committee and the Board review the succession plans for all management Executive Committee positions.
Interested parties may send communications to our Board or our independent directors or any Board committee through our Lead Director in accordance with the procedures set forth on our website (see Helpful Resources on page 88).
Our Corporate Secretary is authorized to open and review any mail or other correspondence received that is addressed to the Board or any individual director unless the item is marked Confidential or Personal. If so marked and addressed to the Board, it will be delivered unopened to the Lead Director. If so marked and addressed to an individual director, it will be delivered to the addressee unopened. If, upon opening an envelope or package not so marked, the Corporate Secretary determines that it contains a magazine, solicitation or advertisement, the contents may be discarded. Any written communication regarding accounting matters to our Board of Directors are processed in accordance with procedures adopted by the Audit Committee with respect to the receipt, review and processing of, and any response to, such matters.
In addition, all directors are expected to attend each Annual Meeting of stockholders. While our by-laws, consistent with Delaware law, permit stockholder meetings to occur by remote communication, we intend this to be used only in exigent circumstances. Our Board believes that an in-person Annual Meeting provides an important opportunity for stockholders to ask questions.
30 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
ITEM 1. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS > Director Compensation |
Director Compensation Table
The following table provides information concerning the compensation of each independent director who served in 2017. Messrs. Scharf and Hassell did not receive any compensation for their services as a director. Mr. Garden has advised us that, pursuant to his arrangement with Trian, he transfers to Trian, or holds for the benefit of Trian, all director compensation paid to him.
Name |
Fees Earned or Paid in Cash ($) |
Stock Awards ($)(3) |
Change in Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings(4) |
All Other Compensation ($)(5) |
Total ($) | |||||
Linda Z. Cook |
$130,321 | $129,965 | $0 | $0 | $260,286 | |||||
Nicholas M. Donofrio(1)(2) |
$102,500 | $129,965 | $0 | $1,234 | $233,699 | |||||
Joseph J. Echevarria(2) |
$200,000 | $129,965 | $0 | $0 | $329,965 | |||||
Edward P. Garden |
$145,000 | $129,965 | $0 | $0 | $274,965 | |||||
Jeffrey A. Goldstein(2) |
$140,000 | $129,965 | $0 | $0 | $269,965 | |||||
John M. Hinshaw(2) |
$135,000 | $129,965 | $0 | $0 | $264,965 | |||||
Edmund F. Ted Kelly |
$150,000 | $129,965 | $0 | $0 | $279,965 | |||||
John A. Luke, Jr. |
$120,000 | $129,965 | $0 | $0 | $249,965 | |||||
Jennifer B. Morgan(2) |
$131,373 | $129,965 | $0 | $0 | $261,338 | |||||
Mark A. Nordenberg |
$167,200 | $129,965 | $5,985 | $3,381 | $306,531 | |||||
Catherine A. Rein(1) |
$40,556 | $0 | $0 | $2,657 | $43,213 | |||||
Elizabeth E. Robinson |
$120,000 | $129,965 | $0 | $125,000 | $374,965 | |||||
Samuel C. Scott III |
$140,000 | $129,965 | $0 | $675 | $270,640 |
(1) | Mr. Donofrio retired as a director effective September 30, 2017. Ms. Rein did not stand for reelection as a director at our 2017 Annual Meeting. |
(2) | Elected to defer all or part of cash compensation in the Director Deferred Compensation Plan. |
(3) | Amount shown represents the aggregate grant date fair value computed in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Boards Accounting Standards Codification (or FASB ASC) 718 Compensation-Stock Compensation for 2,780 deferred stock units granted to each independent director in April 2017, using the valuation methodology for equity awards set forth in note 15 to the consolidated financial statements in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017. As of December 31, 2017, each of Mses. Cook, Morgan and Robinson and Messrs. Echevarria, Garden, Goldstein, Hinshaw, Kelly, Luke, Nordenberg and Scott owned 2,817 unvested deferred stock units. Mr. Donofrio forfeited his 2017 grant of deferred stock units as a result of his retirement in September 2017. |
(4) | The amount disclosed in this column for Mr. Nordenberg represents the sum of the portion of interest accrued (but not currently paid or payable) on deferred compensation above 120% of the applicable federal long-term rate at the maximum rate payable under the Mellon Directors Plan. Under the Mellon Directors Plan, deferred amounts receive earnings based on (i) the declared rate, reflecting the return on the 120-month rolling average of the 10-year T-Note rate enhanced based on years of service and compounded annually, (ii) variable funds, which are credited with gains or losses that mirror the market performance of market-style funds or (iii) the companys phantom stock. The fully enhanced declared rate for 2017 was 3.93%. The present value of Ms. Reins accumulated pension benefit under The Bank of New York Retirement Plan for Non-Employee Directors decreased by $2,271. Ms. Rein was the only director serving during 2017 who participated in this plan. Participation in this plan was frozen as to participants and benefit accruals as of May 11, 1999. |
(5) | The amounts disclosed for Messrs. Donofrio and Scott and Ms. Rein reflect the amount of a 5% discount on purchases of phantom stock when dividend equivalents are reinvested under the Bank of New York Directors Plan. The amount disclosed for Mr. Nordenberg reflects the estimated cost of the legacy Mellon Directors Charitable Giving Program, which remains in effect for him and certain other legacy Mellon directors. Upon such legacy Mellon directors death, the company will make an aggregate donation of $250,000 to one or more charitable or educational organizations of the directors choice. The donations are paid in 10 annual installments to each organization. The amount disclosed for Ms. Robinson reflects compensation paid in connection with her role as Chair of the Board of Directors of BNY Mellon Government Securities Services Corp. |
32 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION |
Quick Reference Guide
Page 34 | ||
Page 35 | ||
Page 35 | ||
Page 37 | ||
Page 38 | ||
Page 50 | ||
Page 57 | ||
Page 57 | ||
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION TABLES AND OTHER COMPENSATION DISCLOSURE |
Page 58 | |
Page 58 | ||
Page 60 | ||
Page 61 | ||
Page 63 | ||
Page 63 | ||
Page 65 | ||
Page 66 | ||
Page 69 |
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 33 |
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION | > Resolution |
Proposal
We highly value dialogue and engagement with our stakeholders, including stockholders, employees, clients and the communities we serve, with respect to our executive compensation program. Consistent with that, and in accordance with SEC rules, we are asking our stockholders to approve the following resolution:
RESOLVED, that the stockholders approve the 2017 compensation of the named executive officers, as disclosed in this proxy statement pursuant to Item 402 of Regulation S-K of the Securities and Exchange Commission (including the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, the compensation tables and other narrative executive compensation disclosures).
Background
Since 2009, we have provided our stockholders with the opportunity for an advisory vote on our executive compensation program each year. We have consistently received support for our executive compensation program, with stockholder approval at our 2017, 2016 and 2015 Annual Meetings of 98%, 97% and 95%, respectively.
To ensure that we also have direct stockholder feedback on our executive compensation program and other issues of importance to our investors, we have continued our annual investor outreach process in 2017, reaching out to investors representing over 47% of our outstanding common shares as well as proxy advisory firms and other stakeholders.
Our approach to compensation continues to be designed to directly link pay to performance, recognize both corporate and individual performance, promote long-term stock ownership and balance risk and reward, while taking into consideration stakeholder feedback and market trends and practices to refine our program. |
The Board of Directors recommends that you vote FOR the approval of the 2017 compensation of our named executive officers.
|
Voting
Your vote on this resolution is advisory. Although the Board is not required to take any action in response, the Board values our stockholders opinions. As in prior years, the Board intends to evaluate the results of the 2018 vote carefully when making future decisions regarding the compensation of our named executive officers.
At last years Annual Meeting, we provided stockholders with an advisory vote as to how often the company should hold a say-on-pay vote, and 91% of the votes cast voted in favor of an annual vote. Accordingly, we intend to continue to hold an advisory vote each year on our executive compensation program until the next stockholder advisory vote on its frequency, which we expect will occur at our 2022 Annual Meeting.
34 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION | > Compensation Discussion & Analysis |
Chairman and CEO Transition and Compensation
Mr. Scharf was appointed CEO of the company effective July 17, 2017 and Chairman effective January 1, 2018. He succeeds Mr. Hassell, who retired as our Chairman effective December 31, 2017 after 44 years of dedicated service to BNY Mellon, including 6 years as CEO and Chairman.
The compensation package for Mr. Scharf was designed to create alignment with our stockholders interests, directly link pay to performance and promote long-term stock ownership. His annual target total direct compensation was set by the HRC Committee at $16.5 million for 2017, which considered the competitive market for top tier talent, including peer CEO compensation and our historical CEO compensation. His target incentive opportunity of $15,250,000 was structured in a manner consistent with how we have historically awarded incentive compensation for our CEO (25% in cash, 50% in PSUs and 25% in RSUs).
Recognizing that 2017 was Mr. Scharfs first year with BNY Mellon, the HRC Committee structured this package to give Mr. Scharf significant stake in the company from day one. Accordingly, Mr. Scharfs 2017 compensation was delivered in two phases: first, a grant of PSUs and RSUs upon commencement of employment, providing immediate alignment with our stockholders and the management team; and second, payment of the balance of Mr. Scharfs 2017 incentive award in the ordinary course in February 2018. In addition, subsequent to his appointment as CEO, Mr. Scharf purchased approximately $10 million of shares of our common stock to enhance alignment with our stockholders.
The PSUs granted to Mr. Scharf upon his commencement of employment consisted of two awards, both subject to the same performance metrics as those granted in February 2017 to other executives: a special one-time sign-on award of PSUs, and a pre-grant of 50% of the PSU component of his target incentive compensation. The RSUs awarded to Mr. Scharf upon his commencement of employment were a pre-grant of the RSU component of his target incentive compensation and pro-rated to reflect the time period in 2017 that he was employed by us.
Mr. Scharf received the balance of his 2017 incentive award in February 2018. This consisted of the remaining half of Mr. Scharfs incentive PSUs (calculated as 50% of the PSU component of his target incentive compensation), earned based on 2018 2020 performance, and the entire cash component of his incentive compensation (calculated based on actual 2017 performance and pro-rated to reflect the time period in 2017 he was employed by us).
Mr. Scharfs 2018 annual target direct compensation was set at $16.5 million, unchanged from 2017, and actual compensation for 2018 will be determined in early 2019 based on established performance criteria.
The following chart shows Mr. Scharfs actual 2017 total direct compensation. For more information regarding Mr. Scharfs target direct compensation structure, including target incentive compensation elements, see page 39.
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 35 |
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION > Compensation Discussion & Analysis |
2017 Program Enhancements
Objectives | Enhancement | |
Focus on growth driven by earnings and revenue | Eliminated the operating leverage metric, making OEPS the sole performance metric for the corporate component of the 2017 balanced scorecard
| |
Strengthen tie between pay and performance | By eliminating the operating leverage metric (previously earned at 100% or 0%), subjected an incremental 25% of the corporate component earnout to 3:1 upside leverage and 4:1 downside leverage
Maintained HRC Committee discretion to consider other factors in assessing the strength of the companys OEPS results, including various relative performance measures |
2017 Incentive Award Outcome
Considerations | Impact | |
Objective Metric | OEPS: OEPS was 2.6% above budget.
| |
Discretionary Factors | Relative Performance: Multi-year TSR performance and 1-year EPS growth were generally at median relative to the S&P Financials Index and peers.
Earnings Drivers: OEPS results above budget driven by higher equity market performance and a lower effective tax rate. |
Corporate Component Payout |
2017 Executive Pay Practice Highlights
What we do: | What we dont do: | |
ü Directly link pay to performance
ü Require sustained financial performance to earn full amount of long-term awards
ü Promote long-term stock ownership through deferred equity compensation
ü Balance risk and reward in compensation
ü Use a balanced approach for determining incentives with both corporate and individual goals
ü Balance incentives for short- and long-term performance with a mix of fixed and variable, cash and equity compensation
ü Conduct a robust stakeholder outreach program |
× No fixed-term employment agreements
× No single-trigger change-in-control benefits
× No excessive severance benefits
× No excessive perquisites or benefits
× No tax gross-ups
× No hedging or short sales of our stock
× No dividend equivalents paid on unearned incentive PSUs or RSUs |
36 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
$7.63 PSUs $7.63 Sign-on PSUs $1.75 Cash $1.75 RSUs BASE SALARY $0.57 DEFERRED EQUITY About 88% of actual 2017 total direct compensation was equity-linked and will be realized on a deferred basis 100% of sign-on compensation was granted in the form of PSUs, establishing alignment with stockholders and management and linking all sign-on compensation to performance Sign-on PSUs and pre-granted incentive PSUs will be earned based on 2017 2019 performance to establish alignment with stockholders and management Incentive PSUs granted on the standard schedule will be earned based on 2018 2020 performance Incentive RSUs vest on the generally applicable schedule despite being pre-granted INCENTIVE COMPENSATION Cash incentive was pro-rated and 100% subject to performance Incentive RSUs were pro-rated and 100% pre-granted upon commencement of employment to establish alignment with stockholders 50% of incentive PSUs were pre-granted upon commencement of employment to establish alignment with stockholders 100% of incentive compensation (and sign-on PSUs) is subject to clawback
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION > Compensation Discussion & Analysis |
The following information summarizes key highlights of our 2017 performance, including year-over-year growth. For a more detailed discussion of our 2017 performance, see Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations in our 2017 Annual Report to stockholders.
2017 | 2016 | Change (%) | ||||
EPS |
$3.72 | $3.15 | 18% | |||
OEPS |
$3.57 | $3.17 | 13% |
EPS | OEPS | |
|
| |
Strong Multi-Year TSR | Returned Significant Value to Stockholders | |
|
|
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 37 |
OEPS above budget, resulting in above-target earnout calculation of 107.8% Median multi-year TSR performance and EPS growth relative to S&P Financials Index and peers Corporate component payout reduced by 7.8 percentage points to reflect that equity market performance and lower effective tax rate drove OEPS results 110% 100% 107.8% 107.8% 100% 90%
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION > Compensation Discussion & Analysis |
Compensation of Named Executives
2017 Target Direct Compensation Structure
2017 Target Incentive Compensation Elements
* | Includes both our current CEO, Mr. Scharf, and our former CEO, Mr. Hassell, who stepped down as CEO effective July 17, 2017 and retired as Chairman of the Board effective December 31, 2017. Mr. Hassells 2017 incentive award was paid 25% in cash and, in light of his retirement effective December 31. 2017, 75% in RSUs. |
** | Excludes Ms. Engle, whose 2017 target incentive compensation elements were determined in connection with her commencement of employment as 50% cash, 25% PSUs and 25% RSUs. |
38 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
PSUs Cash RSUs BASE SALARY About 8% of target total direct compensation Sole fixed source of cash compensation DEFERRED EQUITY
Deferred equity is subject to forfeiture based on annual risk assessments Dividend equivalents are paid only at vesting INCENTIVE COMPENSATION About 92% of target total direct compensation Determined at between 0% - 150% of target using a
balanced scorecard As a condition of funding, subject to a threshold common equity Tier 1 ratio of at least 8.5% 100% of incentive compensation is subject to reduction and clawback CEO* Other NEOs** Cash 25% 30% PSUs 50% 45% RSUs 25% 25%
PSUs are earned between 0% 150% based on the achievement of performance metrics over a 3-year performance period. RSUs generally vest in equal installments over three
years.
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION > Compensation Discussion & Analysis |
2017 Annual Target Direct Compensation
In the first quarter of each year, the HRC Committee considers competitive data, executive position and level of responsibility and, for executives other than our CEO, our CEOs recommendation, and establishes annual target total direct compensation for each executive. Targets are reviewed annually but only adjusted if determined appropriate by the HRC Committee.
For Messrs. Hassell, Gibbons and Harris, target total direct compensation for 2017 remained unchanged compared to the prior year. For Ms. Engle, target total direct compensation was determined in connection with her commencement of employment. For Mr. Shea, target total direct compensation was increased by $1 million to reflect increased responsibilities.
Name
|
Salary
|
Target Incentive
|
Annual Target Total Direct Compensation
| |||
Hassell
|
$1,000,000
|
$14,000,000
|
$15,000,000
| |||
Gibbons
|
$650,000
|
$6,350,000
|
$7,000,000
| |||
Shea
|
$650,000
|
$7,350,000
|
$8,000,000
| |||
Harris
|
$650,000
|
$7,350,000
|
$8,000,000
| |||
Engle
|
$600,000
|
$4,700,000
|
$5,300,000
|
In the third quarter of 2017, the HRC Committee determined Mr. Scharfs target total direct compensation for 2017 in connection with his appointment as our CEO effective July 17, 2017. In determining Mr. Scharfs compensation, the HRC Committee sought input and advice from its independent compensation consultant, Compensation Advisory Partners LLC, on competitive levels of pay for top tier talent, including with respect to our historical CEO compensation and CEO compensation in our peer group, and designed an overall compensation package intended to create alignment with our stockholders, directly link pay to performance and promote long-term stock ownership. Mr. Scharfs target compensation consists of an annual base salary of $1,250,000 and a target incentive opportunity of $15,250,000, structured in a manner consistent with how we have historically awarded incentive compensation to our CEO (25% in cash, 50% in PSUs and 25% in RSUs). For more information regarding Mr. Scharfs actual 2017 direct compensation, including the timing of payments, pro-ration of certain incentive compensation components and the grant of sign-on PSUs, see Chairman and CEO Transition and Compensation on page 35.
Name
|
Salary
|
Target Incentive
|
Annual Target Total Direct Compensation(1)
| |||||||
Cash
|
PSUs
|
RSUs
|
||||||||
Scharf
|
$1,250,000
|
$3,812,500
|
$7,625,000
|
$3,812,500
|
$16,500,000
|
(1) | Does not reflect proration of salary and the cash and RSU components of the target incentive and does not include Mr. Scharfs $7,625,000 award of sign-on PSUs. Sign-on PSUs were a one-time performance-based award granted in connection with Mr. Scharfs commencement of employment and are not considered a component of his annual target direct compensation. |
2017 Incentive Awards
Under our one decision incentive structure, total incentive compensation is based on a single incentive award decision based on the balanced scorecard results and then delivered in the form of cash, PSUs and RSUs. One hundred percent of the total incentive award is conditional upon meeting a minimum funding requirement and subject to reduction or elimination based on a risk assessment.
Minimum Funding Requirement
A common equity Tier 1 ratio of at least 8.5% was established as a minimum funding requirement for our incentive compensation. Payment of incentive compensation is conditioned upon our meeting this goal. This threshold funding goal was met, with an estimated common equity Tier 1 ratio of 11.5%* at December 31, 2017, calculated under the Standardized Approach.
* | For a reconciliation and explanation of this non-GAAP measure see Annex A. |
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 39 |
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION > Compensation Discussion & Analysis |
Balanced Scorecard
We use a balanced scorecard approach for our incentive compensation determinations. Our approach is designed to be a comprehensive analysis of corporate and individual performance determined based on quantitative metrics as appropriate, but with considerable discretion by the HRC Committee. Our balanced scorecard provides for the following:
| Corporate Component. The corporate component of the balanced scorecard is based on a single set of objective company-wide performance metrics that are designed to drive achievement of near-term business strategies. The HRC Committee establishes the applicable metric or metrics at the start of the performance period and has discretion to consider other factors to obtain a holistic picture of our performance. |
| Individual Component (including business unit component where applicable). The individual component of the balanced scorecard focuses on individual performance and consists of (1) a business unit goal (as applicable) based on pre-tax income of the specific business unit for which the individual is responsible and (2) an individual modifier to recognize and differentiate individual actions and contributions in final pay decisions. |
The HRC Committee determines the corporate component payout and the business unit payout, then applies the individual modifier to increase or decrease the total incentive award by up to ±25%. Finally, the HRC Committee has the discretion to reduce an individuals corporate component, individual component and/or total incentive award based on an assessment of the individuals risk profile, as described on page 46. Incentive awards, including the effect of the individual modifier, can range from 0% up to 150% of the individuals target award.
As illustrated below, incentive awards are paid out in a combination of cash, PSUs (earned between 0% 150% based on the achievement of performance metrics over a three-year performance period) and RSUs deferred over three years. Percentages in the graphic below reflect Mr. Hassells and Mr. Scharfs target incentive awards. For our other named executives, incentive awards are generally paid 30% in cash, 45% in PSUs and 25% in RSUs. Mr. Hassells incentive award was paid 25% in cash and 75% in RSUs in light of his retirement effective December 31, 2017. This treatment is consistent with past practice for other retiring executives, who receive RSUs in lieu of their PSU component. As described below on page 55, in connection with his termination of employment effective December 31, 2017, Mr. Sheas target incentive award was reduced by 45% and his actual incentive award was paid 30% in cash and 70% in RSUs. Ms. Engles incentive award was paid 50% in cash, 25% in PSUs and 25% in RSUs, as determined in connection with her commencement of employment.
* | In calculating the number of PSUs and RSUs to grant, the HRC Committee divided the value of PSUs and RSUs awarded by $57.23, the average closing price of our common stock on the NYSE for the 15 trading days from January 12, 2018 through February 2, 2018, to mitigate the impact of short-term volatility in our stock price (with the exception of Mr. Scharfs sign-on PSUs, pre-granted PSUs and pre-granted RSUs, the number of which was determined by dividing the value of PSUs and RSUs awarded by $47.74, the average closing price of our common stock on the NYSE for the 25 trading days from May 12, 2017 through June 16, 2017). |
For Messrs. Scharf, Hassell and Gibbons and Ms. Engle, the corporate component weighting was 100%. For Messrs. Shea and Harris, the corporate component and business unit were weighted equally (50% each).
40 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
Individual Target Award Corporate Component Payout Percentage Weighting Business Unit Payout Percentage (if applicable) Weighting Individual Modifier Incentive Award Risk Assessment Cash 25% PSUs 50%* RSUs 25%*
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION > Compensation Discussion & Analysis |
Corporate Component
The corporate component metrics are reviewed annually by the HRC Committee to select a measure or set of measures that align with our strategy and are appropriate for measuring annual performance. The same corporate component metrics and goals apply to each named executive officer. In February 2017, the HRC Committee determined to focus management on OEPS to reinforce our focus on driving quality earnings growth, which we believe is the key to ensure both revenue and costs are optimized. As a result, the HRC Committee established OEPS as the sole corporate component metric, weighted 100%, and eliminated adjusted operating leverage (previously weighted 25%) as a corporate component metric. The HRC Committee retains discretion to consider other factors (including, for example, our performance relative to our peers, market conditions and interest rate environment) in determining the earnout within the OEPS earnout range and also in determining the overall corporate component payout.
OEPS. OEPS is defined as reported earnings per share excluding merger and integration, restructuring, litigation expense and other significant, unusual items considered by the HRC Committee in its discretion. Our 2017 OEPS budget was set at $3.48 and, in February 2017, the HRC Committee established the guidelines below for a range of incentive payouts. These guidelines include the intended upside and downside leverage, which is the amount by which each percentage point difference between our budgeted and actual OEPS is magnified to determine the OEPS earnout portion of the corporate component.
OEPS |
Percent of Budget ($3.48) | Earnout Range as a Percent of Target |
Intended Leverage | |||
> $4.18 |
> 120% | 150% | ||||
$3.48 $4.18 |
100% 120% | 100% 150% | 3:1 | |||
$2.96 $3.48 |
85% 100% | 40% 110% | 4:1 | |||
< $2.96 |
< 85% | 0% |
HRC Committee Determinations. Our actual 2017 OEPS was $3.57 and 2.6% above our operating budget, resulting in an earnout range of 100% to 150% per the guidelines shown above. The HRC Committee calculated an earnout of 107.8%, which reflected an earnout of 3 percentage points above target for each percentage point by which actual 2017 OEPS exceeded our operating budget (consistent with our intended leverage shown above).
After determining that the pre-established objective performance metric yielded a corporate component earnout of 107.8%, the HRC Committee then exercised its discretion to review the following factors with respect to our 2017 performance:
| Above-budget OEPS results were driven by higher equity market performance and a lower effective tax rate. |
| TSR results relative to the S&P Financials Index over a 1, 3 and 5-year period were at the 49th, 53rd and 62nd percentiles, respectively, and TSR results relative to peers over a 1, 3 and 5-year period were at the 41st, 41st and 41st percentiles, respectively. |
| EPS growth results relative to the S&P Financials Index and peers over a 1-year period were at the 62nd and 75th percentiles, respectively, at the time the HRC Committee made its determination (and based on final results with all companies reporting, were at the 56th and 65th percentiles, respectively). |
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 41 |
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION > Compensation Discussion & Analysis |
Notwithstanding actual 2017 OEPS results that yielded a corporate component of 107.8% based solely on objective performance metrics, the HRC Committee determined to limit the corporate component payout to 100% to reflect that 2017 earnings were driven by higher equity market performance and a lower effective tax rate.
Objective Performance Metric
|
Earnout Based on Objective Performance Metric:
|
107.8%
| |||||||||
Discretionary Factors
| ||||||||||
OEPS results driven by higher equity market performance and lower effective tax rate
Median multi-year TSR performance relative to the S&P Financials Index and peers
1-year EPS growth relative to the S&P Financials Index and peers at or above median
| ||||||||||
Actual Corporate Component Payout:
|
100%
|
Individual Component (Business Unit Payout and Individual Modifier)
In February 2017, the HRC Committee approved the pre-tax income goal for each business unit and determined to apply the same payout range guidelines and the same intended leverage ratios as those applicable to the corporate component, as set forth above. The HRC Committee approved and recommended to the Board individual modifier strategic and leadership objectives for Mr. Hassell in February 2017 and for Mr. Scharf in August 2017, and approved individual modifier strategic and leadership objectives for Ms. Engle in August 2017. For our other named executive officers, the HRC Committee approved individual modifier strategic and leadership objectives, which were set by Mr. Hassell after discussion with the HRC Committee, in February 2017. None of the individual strategic and leadership objectives had any specific weighting; the objectives are intended to be used, together with other information the HRC Committee determines relevant, to develop a holistic evaluation of individual performance.
In December 2017, the HRC Committee reviewed and considered each named executive officers performance, including considering recommendations and performance summaries from both Mr. Scharf and Mr. Hassell for each of the other named executive officers. In the first quarter of 2018, the HRC Committee evaluated 2017 business unit performance and determined each named executive officers individual modifier. For each of Mr. Scharf and Mr. Hassell, the HRC Committee reviewed his performance self-assessment, obtained feedback from each independent director, and finalized its decision after reporting its preliminary evaluation to the other independent directors and soliciting their input. For each of the other named executive officers, the HRC Committee reviewed his or her performance self-assessment, considered the December 2017 feedback from Mr. Scharf and Mr. Hassell, and finalized its decision after soliciting input from the other independent directors.
42 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
2017 OEPS Budget Threshold $2.96 Target $3.48 Maximum $4.18 Potential Earnout (as % of target) 100%150% Intended Leverage 3:1 2017 OEPS Performance $3.57
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION > Compensation Discussion & Analysis |
In determining the individual component for Mr. Scharf, the HRC Committee considered the following key results:
Based on the above strategic and leadership results, the HRC Committee approved an individual modifier of 100% for Mr. Scharf.
The HRC Committee then granted Mr. Scharf 25% of his total target incentive award, pro-rated to reflect the time period in 2017 that he was employed by us, in the form of cash. The HRC Committee also granted Mr. Scharf 50% of the PSU component of his target incentive compensation (based on target performance). The remaining 50% of the PSU component of his target incentive award and the entire RSU component of his target incentive award were pre-granted upon his commencement of employment, as described on page 35.
In determining the individual component for Mr. Hassell, the HRC Committee considered the following key results:
Based on the above strategic and leadership results, the HRC Committee approved an individual modifier of 100% for Mr. Hassell.
The HRC Committee then granted Mr. Hassell 25% of his total incentive award in the form of cash and, in light of his retirement effective December 31, 2017, 75% in the form of RSUs.
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 43 |
[100% corporate component payout × 100% weighting] × 100% individual modifier = 100% of target earned [100% corporate component payout × 100% weighting] × 100% individual modifier = 100% of target earned
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION > Compensation Discussion & Analysis |
In determining the individual component for Mr. Gibbons, the HRC Committee considered the following key results:
Based on the above strategic and leadership results, the HRC Committee approved an individual modifier of 102% for Mr. Gibbons.
The HRC Committee then granted Mr. Gibbons 30% of his total incentive award in the form of cash, 45% in the form of PSUs and 25% in the form of RSUs.
In determining the individual component for Mr. Shea, the HRC Committee considered the following key results:
Based on the above strategic and leadership results, the HRC Committee approved an individual modifier of 100% for Mr. Shea.
The HRC Committee reduced Mr. Sheas total target incentive award by 45% and then granted him his actual incentive award 30% in the form of cash and 70% in the form of RSUs, as described below on page 55.
44 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
[100% corporate component payout × 50% weighting + 96% business unit payout × 50% weighting] × 100% individual modifier = 98% of target earned
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION > Compensation Discussion & Analysis |
In determining the individual component for Mr. Harris, the HRC Committee considered the following key results:
Based on the above strategic and leadership results, the HRC Committee approved an individual modifier of 110% for Mr. Harris.
The HRC Committee then granted Mr. Harris 30% of his total incentive award in the form of cash, 45% in the form of PSUs and 25% in the form of RSUs.
In determining the individual component for Ms. Engle, the HRC Committee considered the following key results:
Based on the above strategic and leadership results, the HRC Committee approved an individual modifier of 100% for Ms. Engle.
The HRC Committee then granted Ms. Engle 50% of her total incentive award in the form of cash, 25% in the form of PSUs and 25% in the form of RSUs.
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 45 |
[100% corporate component payout × 50% weighting + 116.5% business unit pwayout × 50% weighting] × 110%
individual modifier = 119% of target earned
[100% corporate component payout × 100% weighting] × 100% individual modifier = 100% of target earned
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION > Compensation Discussion & Analysis |
2017 Incentive Award Payouts
Based on the corporate component and individual component determinations described above, the actual value of incentive compensation awarded to each of our named executives in respect of 2017 was as follows:
Incentive Compensation
|
Total Incentive Compensation |
Total Incentive as % of Target | ||||||||
Cash | PSUs | RSUs | ||||||||
Scharf |
$1,754,000 | $7,625,000 | $1,754,000 | $11,133,000(1) | 100%(2) | |||||
Hassell |
$3,500,000 | $(3) | $10,500,000 | $14,000,000 | 100% | |||||
Gibbons |
$1,943,100 | $2,914,650 | $1,619,250 | $6,477,000 | 102% | |||||
Shea |
$1,188,495 | $(4) | $2,773,155 | $3,961,650 | 98% | |||||
Harris |
$2,626,155 | $3,939,232 | $2,188,463 | $8,753,850 | 119% | |||||
Engle |
$2,350,000 | $1,175,000 | $1,175,000 | $4,700,000 | 100% |
(1) | Does not include Mr. Scharfs $7,625,000 award of sign-on PSUs, which were a one-time award granted in connection with his commencement of employment on July 17, 2017. |
(2) | Mr. Scharfs 2017 incentive compensation was earned at 100% of target, and the cash and RSU components were pro-rated to reflect the time period in 2017 that he was employed by us. |
(3) | In connection with his retirement effective December 31, 2017, Mr. Hassells incentive award was paid 25% in cash and 75% in RSUs. |
(4) | In connection with his termination of employment effective December 31, 2017, Mr. Sheas target award was reduced by 45% and his total incentive award was paid 30% in cash and 70% in RSUs, as described below on page 55. |
Risk Assessment
We use a risk scorecard to formally connect compensation and appropriate risk-taking. The risk scorecard takes into account liquidity, operational, reputational, market, credit and technology risk categories by measuring:
| maintenance of an appropriate compliance program, including adhering to our compliance rules and programs; |
| protection of the companys reputation, including reviewing our business practices to ensure that they comply with laws, regulations and policies, and that business decisions are free from actual or perceived conflicts; |
| management of operational risk, including managing operational losses and maintaining proper controls; |
| compliance with all applicable credit, market and liquidity risk limits, including understanding and monitoring risks associated with relevant businesses and new client acceptance, as well as appropriately resolving or escalating risk issues to minimize losses; and |
| meeting Internal Audit expectations, including establishing an appropriate governance culture, achieving acceptable audit results and remediating control issues in a timely manner. |
The HRC Committees review of the risk scorecard results for each named executive was taken into account by the HRC Committee in determining each of the corporate and individual components of the balanced scorecard. The HRC Committee has the ability to reduce or fully eliminate the incentive award if the risk scorecard result is significantly below expectation. No downward adjustments were made for 2017.
Reduction or Forfeiture in Certain Circumstances
The company may cancel all or any portion of the RSUs and PSUs that constitute a portion of our named executives incentive award if, directly or indirectly, the named executive (1) engages, or is discovered to have engaged, in conduct that is materially adverse to the companys interests during his or her employment, (2) violates certain non-solicitation or non-competition restrictions during his or her employment and for a certain period thereafter, (3) violates any post-termination obligation or duties owed to the company or (4) has received, or may receive, compensation that is required to be forfeited and/or repaid to the company pursuant to applicable regulatory requirements. In addition, in the event that the named executives risk scorecard rating is lower than acceptable risk tolerance, any unvested RSUs and PSUs will be subject to review and potential forfeiture, as determined by our HRC Committee.
46 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION > Compensation Discussion & Analysis |
Outstanding PSUs
As part of our incentive compensation program, we grant PSUs each year based on prior-year performance. We consider PSUs granted during a given year to be part of the prior years compensation; for example, we consider the February 2017 PSU grant to be part of 2016 earned compensation. Any earned PSUs cliff vest after the end of three-year performance periods based on continued service with certain exceptions. The PSUs granted in 2015 were earned at 114%, as described below. The PSUs granted in 2016 and 2017 are earned between 0% 150%, in each case based on the achievement of performance metrics over the applicable three-year performance period. Granting awards annually with overlapping, multi-year performance periods allows the HRC Committee to annually review and update, as appropriate, the structure and performance metrics that we use in our PSU program.
February 2017 PSUs, Sign-On PSUs and Pre-Granted Incentive PSUs
PSUs granted in February 2017, the amounts of which were determined based on 2016 performance as discussed in last years proxy statement, are earned based on 2019 OEPS, with the potential of a negative risk modifier should risk-weighted assets (RWA) grow at an unacceptable rate. In July 2017, in connection with Mr. Scharfs appointment as CEO, the HRC Committee granted him a sign-on award of PSUs and 50% of the PSU component of his 2017 incentive compensation as described above in Chairman and CEO Transition and Compensation on page 35. These sign-on PSUs and pre-granted incentive PSUs are earned based on the same performance metrics and were granted with generally the same terms as the February 2017 PSUs.
To emphasize our focus on paying for performance, the HRC Committee pre-established two sets of 2019 OEPS targets (one set for a normalizing rate scenario, where the daily average Fed target rate is greater than or equal to 125 basis points in 2019, and one set for an alternative flat rate scenario):
2019 OEPS in a Flat Rate Scenario
|
2019 OEPS in a Normalizing Rate Scenario
|
Payout Range
| ||
> $4.11
|
> $4.25
|
150%
| ||
$3.99 $4.11
|
$4.13 $4.25
|
100% 150%
| ||
$3.99
|
$4.13
|
100%
| ||
$3.87 $3.99
|
$4.01 $4.13
|
50% 100%
| ||
< $3.87
|
< $4.01
|
0%
|
The actual percentage of PSUs that are earned will be determined in the HRC Committees discretion within the payout range set forth above. In addition, the percentage may be adjusted downward by a risk-based modifier should risk-weighted assets grow at an unacceptable rate during the three-year performance period as set forth below:
Compound Annual Growth Rate of RWA
|
Risk-Based Modifier
| |
> 11%
|
0% 75%
| |
11% 9%
|
75% 100%
| |
< 9%
|
100%
|
For 2017, our OEPS was $3.57 and the three-year compound annual growth rate of our RWA was 2.24%.
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 47 |
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION > Compensation Discussion & Analysis |
Our outstanding PSU awards are illustrated below:
2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | ||||||||
February 2015 PSU Award |
Earned at 114% as described below | cliff vested in 2018 based on continued service |
||||||||||||
February 2016 PSU Award |
OEPS, with the potential of a negative risk modifier should risk-weighted assets grow at an unacceptable rate |
cliff vests in 2019 based on continued service |
||||||||||||
February 2017 PSU Award |
OEPS, with the potential of a negative risk modifier should risk-weighted assets grow at an unacceptable rate |
cliff vests in 2020 based on continued service |
||||||||||||
February 2018 PSU Award |
Average revenue growth and average operating margin |
cliff vests in 2021 based on continued service | ||||||||||||
RWA is generally defined as, for each fiscal year, the simple average of the preceding four quarter-end risk-weighted assets (estimated on a fully phased-in basis in Basel III using, for PSUs granted in 2015, the Advanced Approach, for PSUs granted in 2016, the higher of the Advanced or Standardized Approach, and for PSUs granted in 2017, the Standardized Approach) based on existing assumptions at the commencement of the performance period and as reported in the companys SEC filings.
February 2015 PSUs
As previously disclosed in our 2016 proxy statement, the PSUs granted in February 2015 were to be earned between 0% 125% based on 2017 OEPS, with the potential of a negative risk modifier should RWA grow at an unacceptable rate. Consistent with our Investor Day goals, two sets of 2017 OEPS targets were pre-established for these awards (one set for a normalizing rate scenario, where interest rates moved a minimum of 100 basis points during the three-year performance period, and an alternative set for a flat rate scenario). The HRC Committee applied targets under the normalizing rate scenario because interest rates rose 125 basis points during 2015 2017. Actual 2017 OEPS was $3.57, resulting in an earnout range of 75% to 125%. The terms of the 2015 PSUs provide that the percentage of the earned award will be determined in the HRC Committees discretion. Accordingly, the HRC Committee determined it was appropriate to use a linear interpolation between 75% and 125% (the minimum and maximum of the applicable earnout range) and calculated an earnout of 114%, without making any further discretionary adjustments. The HRC Committee then considered RWA, which for December 2014 December 2017 had a compound annual growth rate of 2.24%, resulting in no risk modifier being applied based on RWA growth. Accordingly, the February 2015 PSUs were earned at 114%.
February 2018 PSUs
The HRC Committee determined that the 2018 PSUs will be earned based on average revenue growth (as adjusted) and average operating margin (as adjusted) over a three-year period. In connection with establishing the performance metrics for the 2018 PSUs, the HRC Committee considered the fact that OEPS had been used as the primary performance metric for the corporate component of the 2017 balanced scorecard and recognized that use of average revenue growth and average operating margin would introduce complimentary performance metrics that are consistent with the Companys emphasis on organic growth over market-related factors.
Other Compensation and Benefits Elements
Retirement and Deferred Compensation Plans
After the merger in 2007, we assumed certain existing arrangements affecting the provision of retirement benefits to certain of our named executives, maintaining qualified and non-qualified defined benefit and defined contribution plans in which eligible employees, including our named executives, may participate. Our named executives are eligible to participate in deferred compensation plans, which enable eligible employees to defer the payment of taxes on a portion of their compensation until a later date. To limit pension accruals, we froze all accruals under the Legacy BNY SERP as of December 31, 2014 and under our other U.S. defined benefit pension plans (including the BNY Mellon
48 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION > Compensation Discussion & Analysis |
Tax-Qualified Retirement Plan and the Legacy BNY Excess Plan) as of June 30, 2015. For a description of these plans and our named executive officers participation therein, see Pension Benefits and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation below.
Perquisites
Our named executives are eligible to participate in company-wide benefit plans. In addition, we provide certain benefits, consistent with market practices, that are reportable under SEC rules as perquisites (see footnotes to the Summary Compensation Table below).
Our policy regarding corporate aircraft usage provides that the CEO should make reasonable use of the company aircraft for security purposes and to make the most efficient use of his time. The HRC Committee receives and reviews an aircraft usage report on a semi-annual basis.
Certain named executives have historically had access to a pool of company cars and drivers for security purposes and to allow for more effective use of travel time. This car and driver perquisite was available during 2017, but has been discontinued for 2018.
Additionally, under our charitable gifts matching program, in 2017 our named executive officers were eligible for an additional match of up to $30,000 above the level of charitable gift matching to which all of our employees are entitled. As of January 1, 2018, our named executive officers are no longer eligible for a charitable gift match.
Lastly, Messrs. Hassell and Gibbons are covered by legacy life insurance plans assumed in the merger.
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 49 |
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION > Compensation Discussion & Analysis |
Stakeholder Engagement
We believe it is important to consider feedback and input from our stakeholders, including stockholders, employees, clients and the communities we serve.
We have consistently received support for our executive compensation program, with stockholder approval at our 2017, 2016 and 2015 Annual Meetings of 98%, 97% and 95%, respectively. We continue to actively engage with our stakeholders throughout the year (including webcasting our Annual Meeting to allow broader stockholder participation).
In total, in advance of our 2018 Annual Meeting and as a result of our annual outreach process, we reached out to investors representing over 47% of our outstanding common shares, and we actively engaged |
|
with proxy advisory firms and other stakeholders on governance and performance matters. We further engaged stockholders and analysts at industry conferences, in meetings at our offices or at our stockholders offices, through conference calls and at our Investor Day conferences held on October 28, 2014 and March 8, 2018.
Key Compensation Practices
Our 2017 compensation program for the named executives has the following features:
Directly link pay to performance |
Incentive compensation is based on balanced scorecard results, including operating performance, and comprises about 92% of target total direct compensation
Incentive compensation deferred in the form of PSUs comprises 50% of target total incentive compensation for our CEO and generally comprises 45% for other continuing named executives
Incentive compensation deferred in the form of RSUs comprises 25% of target total incentive compensation for all our continuing named executives | |
Balanced approach for incentive compensation | Incentive compensation earned based on a combination of corporate and individual goals, including business unit goals, as applicable
Corporate component based on OEPS, with the HRC Committee retaining discretion to consider other factors (including performance relative to our peers)
Business unit goals use quantitative financial measures to establish a payout range
Individual modifier allows the HRC Committee to recognize and differentiate individual contributions | |
Promote long-term stock ownership |
Deferred equity (PSUs and RSUs) as a percentage of target total incentive compensation: 75% for our CEO and generally 70% for our other continuing named executives
Earned PSUs cliff vest after the end of a three-year performance period, and RSUs vest in equal installments over three years
Our CEO must acquire and retain company stock equal to six times base salary, and other named executives must acquire and retain stock equal to four times base salary, plus an additional amount equal to one times base salary to provide a cushion against stock volatility | |
What we dont do | No single-trigger change-in-control benefits
No excessive severance benefits
No excessive perquisites or benefits
No tax gross-ups
No hedging or short sales of our stock
No dividend equivalents paid on unearned incentive PSUs or RSUs
No stock option grants | |
50 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
98% of stockholders approved our 2017 say-on-pay proposal
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION > Compensation Discussion & Analysis |
HRC Committee Role and Process
In 2017, the HRC Committee led the search for, and recruitment of, Mr. Scharf as the successor to Mr. Hassell. In addition to overseeing our succession program, the HRC Committee also oversaw our executive compensation program. In the first quarter of 2017, for each named executive other than Mr. Scharf, the HRC Committee approved base salary levels; established target amounts for the 2017 incentive award to be earned or granted, as applicable, in the first quarter of 2018 based on 2017 performance; and granted the PSU and RSU components of awards earned for 2016 performance.
In setting 2017 compensation targets, the HRC Committee, assisted by its independent compensation consultant, considered a variety of factors over multiple meetings, including our financial performance and data concerning peer companies executive compensation programs. Factors were considered holistically, and no one factor had an assigned or specific quantifiable impact on the target compensation levels established by the HRC Committee.
In the third quarter of 2017, in connection with the appointment of Mr. Scharf as CEO, the HRC Committee approved his base salary; established his 2017 target total direct compensation; and granted certain of his equity awards (consisting of the sign-on PSUs, pre-granted incentive PSUs and pre-granted RSUs) to provide immediate alignment with our stockholders and the management team.
During the year, the HRC Committee received regular updates on performance forecasts versus performance goals, regulatory and legislative developments and other relevant matters. In the first quarter of 2018, the HRC Committee evaluated 2017 corporate performance, using a combination of financial and qualitative measures, as well as each named executives individual performance to make 2017 incentive compensation determinations as described above. During this period, the HRC Committee also determined the payout for PSUs granted in February 2015 in accordance with the terms of such awards, as described above.
The HRC Committee also provided each continuing named executive with incentive compensation targets for their 2018 incentive award, with the actual award amount to be determined in the first quarter of 2019 based on prior-year performance.
With respect to Mr. Scharf and Mr. Hassell, the HRC Committee reported its preliminary conclusions and compensation decisions, and information on the process used by the HRC Committee, to the other independent members of our Board in executive session and solicited their input prior to finalizing determinations. With respect to our other named executive officers, the HRC Committee also advised and discussed with the other independent directors compensation decisions and the process used by the HRC Committee.
Role of Compensation Consultants
Since February 2014, the HRC Committee has retained Compensation Advisory Partners LLC (CAP) as its independent compensation consultant. CAP regularly attends HRC Committee meetings and assists the committee in its analysis and evaluation of compensation matters related to our executive officers. For more information on CAP, see page 29.
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 51 |
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION > Compensation Discussion & Analysis |
Benchmarking
Peer Group
The HRC Committee and our management use a peer group to provide a basis for assessing relative company performance and to provide a competitive reference for pay levels and practices. In evaluating and selecting companies for inclusion in the peer group, the HRC Committee targets complex financial companies with which we typically compete for executive talent and business. In particular, the HRC Committee selected these companies based on:
mix of businesses (e.g., asset management, asset servicing and clearing services) and other financial services companies with similar business models that operate in a similar regulatory environment;
relative size in terms of revenue, market capitalization and assets under management, as well as total assets and net income;
position as competitors for customers and clients, executive talent and investment capital; and
global presence. |
BlackRock, Inc. The Charles Schwab Corporation Franklin Resources, Inc. JPMorgan Chase & Co. Morgan Stanley Northern Trust Corporation The PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. Prudential Financial, Inc. State Street Corporation U. S. Bancorp Wells Fargo & Company |
The 2017 peer group selected by the HRC Committee was unchanged from 2016.
Compensation Benchmarking
Compensation information is collected from the peer group proxy statements to provide data for the HRC Committee to assess the competitiveness of targeted and actual compensation. Peer group information is also used to analyze market trends and compensation program practices. For certain named executive officers, data relating to the peer group is supplemented with industry data from surveys conducted by national compensation consulting firms and other data to assess the compensation levels and practices in the businesses and markets in which we compete for executive talent. Peer group data and other information provided to the HRC Committee by CAP was used by the HRC Committee as a consideration in setting 2017 target compensation levels for our named executives.
Financial Performance Benchmarking
The peer group is also used to provide the HRC Committee with relative financial performance assessments. The metrics reviewed include revenue growth, EPS growth, operating leverage, return on equity, return on tangible common equity as well as TSR on a one- and three-year basis. This analysis provides additional context for the HRC Committee in their review of compensation outcomes as well as compensation program design. When making annual compensation determinations for prior year performance, the HRC Committee reviews additional relative performance metrics as part of their considerations, as discussed above on pages 41 to 42.
Peer group data reviewed by the HRC Committee was considered holistically, and was used as an input, but not the sole input, of their compensation decisions.
52 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION > Compensation Discussion & Analysis |
Stock Ownership Guidelines
Under our stock ownership guidelines, each named executive is required to own a number of shares of our common stock with a value equal to a multiple of base salary within five years of becoming a member of our Executive Committee. The officer cannot sell or transfer to a third party any shares until he or she achieves the ownership guideline.
Stock Ownership Requirement |
Stock Retention Requirement* | |||||
CEO | Must retain shares of our common stock equal to six times base salary |
50% of net after tax shares must be held until age 60 | ||||
Other NEOs | Must retain shares of our common stock equal to four times base salary |
50% of net after tax shares must be held for one year after vesting date | ||||
* | Other than with respect to certain awards granted to Ms. Engle in connection with her commencement of employment, applies to shares received from the vesting of RSUs, PSUs, restricted stock and other long-term equity awards granted after appointment to the Executive Committee and that were unvested as of, or granted after, August 2012. |
Our CEO is subject to a 6-times base salary, and our other named executives are subject to a 4-times base salary, ownership guideline. All of our named executives are also expected to hold, as an administrative practice, an additional amount of company shares above their guideline amount equal to 1 times base salary to provide a cushion against stock volatility. Ms. Engle has until June 2022, 5 years from commencing employment with the company, to meet the stock ownership and administrative guidelines. All of our other continuing named executives meet the stock ownership and administrative guidelines, including Mr. Scharf, who purchased approximately $10 million of shares of our common stock subsequent to his appointment as CEO. To determine each named executives ownership stake we include shares owned directly, shares held in our employee stock purchase and retirement plans and shares held in certain trusts. We include 50% of unvested restricted stock and RSUs that do not have performance conditions or for which the applicable performance conditions have been met. Unearned performance shares, awards that remain subject to performance conditions and stock options are not counted toward compliance with the stock ownership guidelines.
In addition, named executives are subject to a retention requirement relating to shares received from the vesting of RSUs, PSUs, restricted stock and other long-term equity awards that were granted after their respective appointment to the Executive Committee and that were unvested as of, or granted after, August 2012. For the CEO, 50% of the net after-tax shares from these awards must be held until age 60; for other named executive officers, 50% of the net after-tax shares must be held for one year from the vesting date.
Anti-Hedging Policy
Our executive officers, including each named executive officer, and directors are subject to a robust anti-hedging policy which prohibits them from entering into hedging transactions with their company stock and derivative securities relating to BNY Mellon. Prohibited transactions include engaging in short sales of our stock, purchasing our stock on margin and buying or selling any puts, calls or other options involving our securities (other than options granted pursuant to our compensation program). Prior to engaging in any transaction in company stock or derivative securities (including transactions in employee benefit plans, gifts and pledges), our executive officers and directors are required to pre-clear such transaction with our legal department and obtain that departments affirmative approval to enter into the transaction.
Our anti-hedging policy applies to all securities which our executive officers and directors beneficially own and, with the exception of Trian, any entity for which an executive officer or director is attributed ownership.
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 53 |
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION > Compensation Discussion & Analysis |
Clawback and Recoupment Policy
In addition to forfeiture provisions based on risk outcomes during the vesting period, we have a comprehensive recoupment policy administered by the HRC Committee that applies to equity awards granted to our employees, including the named executive officers. Under the policy, the company may cancel all or any portion of unvested equity awards and require repayment of any shares of common stock (or values thereof) or amounts that were acquired from the award if:
| the executive directly or indirectly engages in conduct, or it is discovered that the executive engaged in conduct, that is materially adverse to the interests of the company, including failure to comply with the companys rules or regulations, fraud or conduct contributing to any financial restatements or irregularities; |
| during the course of employment, the executive engages in solicitation and/or diversion of customers or employees and/or competition with the company; |
| following termination of employment with the company for any reason, the executive violates any post-termination obligations or duties owed to the company or any agreement with the company; or |
| any compensation otherwise payable or paid to the executive is required to be forfeited and/or repaid to the company pursuant to applicable regulatory requirements. |
We also have a cash recoupment policy, which provides that the company may claw back some or all of a cash incentive award made to our employees (including named executive officers) if the company determines within three years of the award date that there is a reasonable belief that the employee has engaged in conduct that is materially adverse to the companys interests (including failing to comply with the companys rules or regulations or engaging in fraud or other conduct that directly or indirectly causes or contributes to a financial restatement or other irregularity of BNY Mellon during the award performance period). The company may similarly forfeit, reduce or require repayment of a cash incentive award if (1) required by any applicable law, (2) the employee engages in competition with the company during the course of employment, or (3) the employee violates any post-termination obligations or duties owed to the company under any agreement with the company.
The company continues to monitor regulatory requirements as may be applicable to its recoupment policies.
Severance Benefits
Stockholder Approval of Future Senior Officer Severance Arrangements. In July 2010, the Board adopted a policy regarding stockholder approval of future senior officer severance arrangements. The policy provides that the company will not enter into a future severance arrangement with a senior executive that provides for severance benefits (as defined in the policy) in an amount exceeding 2.99 times the sum of annual base salary and target bonus for the year of termination (or, if greater, for the year before the year of termination), unless such arrangement receives stockholder approval.
54 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION > Compensation Discussion & Analysis |
Executive Severance Plan. The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation Executive Severance Plan (the Executive Severance Plan) was adopted in July 2010 and amended in August 2016 and February 2018. Under the Executive Severance Plan, as amended, participants terminated by the company without cause after August 11, 2017, will be eligible to receive severance in the amount of 1 times base salary. In addition, for participants terminated by the company without cause after August 7, 2016, eligibility for a pro-rata annual bonus for the year of termination is determined on a case by case basis and if awarded, paid at year end after an evaluation of corporate, business unit and individual performance, among other considerations. The following table sets forth the severance benefits available under the Executive Severance Plan, both before and after the HRC Committees August 2016 amendment.
Reason for Termination |
Severance Payment |
Bonus | Benefit Continuation |
Outplacement Services | ||||||
By the company without cause |
Original | 2 times base salary | Pro-rata annual bonus for the year of termination |
Two years | One year | |||||
Revised | Reduced to 1 times base salary |
Pro-rata annual bonus paid at year end at the discretion of management and the HRC Committee |
Reduced to one year |
No change | ||||||
By the company without cause or by the executive for good reason within two years following a change in control |
Original | 2 times base salary and 2 times target annual bonus |
Pro-rata target annual bonus for the year of termination |
Two years | One year | |||||
Revised | No change | No change | No change | No change |
Executive Severance Plan participants are selected by the HRC Committee and include each of our named executives. To receive benefits under the plan, the participant must sign a release and waiver of claims in favor of the company and agree not to compete against the company, or solicit our customers and employees, for so long as they are receiving benefits under the plan.
We do not provide any severance-related tax gross-ups. If any payment under the Executive Severance Plan would cause a participant to become subject to the excise tax imposed under Section 4999 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (IRC), then payments and benefits will be reduced to the amount that would not cause the participant to be subject to the excise tax if such a reduction would put the participant in a better after-tax position than if the participant were to pay the tax. In addition, the amount of payments and benefits payable under the plan will be reduced to the extent necessary to comply with our policy regarding stockholder approval of future senior officer severance arrangements as described above.
Retirement Benefits for Mr. Hassell
Mr. Hassell retired as Chairman effective December 31, 2017 following a 44-year career with the company, including 6 years as our CEO and Chairman. Pursuant to the standard retirement vesting provisions in our LTIP and the applicable award agreements, Mr. Hassell is eligible to vest in his unvested February 2015, February 2016 and February 2017 PSU and RSU awards. At December 31, 2017, and using the same assumptions as used for the Table of Other Potential Payments on page 68, the estimated value of such vesting was $41,445,373. Subsequent to his retirement, Mr. Hassell vested in his February 2015 RSU award and 114% of his February 2015 PSU award based on the companys actual performance as described above. The number of shares under the February 2016 and February 2017 PSU awards in which Mr. Hassell will vest will be based on the companys actual performance as determined by the HRC Committee at the end of the applicable performance periods. Mr. Hassell will also have the use of an office and administrative/IT support for 2 years following his retirement.
Separation Benefits for Mr. Shea
Mr. Shea left the company effective December 31, 2017. In connection with his departure, the company determined that he was eligible to receive payments under the Executive Severance Plan for a termination by the company without cause. In accordance with the plan, Mr. Shea received a severance payment of $650,000, equal to one times his base salary payable over one year, and benefits continuation and outplacement services for one year. The
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 55 |
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION > Compensation Discussion & Analysis |
HRC Committee also exercised its discretion under the plan to grant Mr. Sheas 2017 incentive award. The HRC Committee reduced his target incentive award by 45% pursuant to the Executive Severance Plan and determined his actual incentive award would be granted solely in the form of cash and RSUs, based on actual corporate and individual performance. The HRC Committee further exercised its discretion to pay 30% of Mr. Sheas award in cash and 70% as RSUs, a cash/equity mix consistent with the treatment for similarly situated executives. Because Mr. Sheas employment concluded at the end of the year, no pro-ration was applied.
Mr. Shea is eligible to vest in his unvested February 2015, February 2016 and February 2017 PSU and RSU awards pursuant to the terms of our LTIP and the applicable award agreements regarding age and eligibility to receive separation pay under the Executive Severance Plan. At December 31, 2017, and using the same assumptions as used for the Table of Other Potential Payments on page 68, the estimated value of such vesting was $12,033,667. Subsequent to his departure, Mr. Shea vested in his February 2015 RSU award and 114% of his February 2015 PSU award based on the companys actual performance as described above. The number of shares under the February 2016 and February 2017 PSU awards in which Mr. Shea will vest will be based on the companys actual performance as determined by the HRC Committee at the end of the applicable performance periods.
Tax Considerations
The HRC Committee considers certain tax implications when designing our executive compensation programs and certain specific awards. The HRC Committee considered that Section 162(m) of the IRC generally imposes a $1 million limit on the amount that a public company may deduct for compensation paid to its CEO and the three other most highly compensated officers each year. Prior to the federal tax reform legislation enacted in December 2017, Section 162(m) included an exception to this $1 million limit for qualifying performance-based compensation as defined in the IRC. However, the new tax legislation removed this qualifying performance-based compensation exception. We generally design our compensation programs so that compensation paid to the named executives can qualify for available income tax deductions. Our incentive awards are granted under our stockholder-approved Executive Incentive Compensation Plan and in 2017, as in prior years, were intended to be qualifying performance-based compensation. In that regard, incentive compensation paid to any individual for 2017 could not exceed the sum of $3 million plus 0.5% of our positive pre-tax income from continuing operations, before the impact of the cumulative effect of accounting changes and extraordinary items, as disclosed on our consolidated statement of income for such year included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K.
However, the HRC Committee believes that stockholders interests may best be served by offering compensation that is not fully deductible, where appropriate, to attract, retain and motivate talented executives. Accordingly, the HRC Committee has discretion to authorize compensation that does not qualify for income tax deductibility.
56 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
Regular Review of Compensation Plans and Practices + Direct Link Between Pay and Risk-Taking + Comprehensive Recoupment Policy + Incentive Award Funding Condition
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION > Compensation Discussion & Analysis |
How We Address Risk and Control
On a regular basis, our Chief Risk Officer and our HRC Committee review the companys risk appetite, practices and employee compensation plans, including sales incentives, for alignment with sound risk management. Our Chief Risk Officer also met with the HRC Committee to specifically discuss and review our 2017 compensation plans, including the plans in which members of the Executive Committee participate. With respect to employees broadly, we also monitor the companys compensation plans through a management-level compensation oversight committee that includes our Chief Risk Officer, Chief Human Resources Officer, Chief Financial Officer, General Counsel and the Chief Compliance Officer. This management committee receives regular reports, meets at least on a quarterly basis and reports to the HRC Committee on risk-related compensation issues.
We identify employees who, individually or as a group, are responsible for activities that may expose us to material amounts of risk, using a risk-related performance evaluation program with adjustments determined by a senior management committee responsible for control functions, with such adjustments later reviewed by the HRC Committee. The incentive compensation of identified employees is directly linked to risk-taking either through a risk scorecard or through the inclusion of a standard risk goal as part of our performance management process.
With respect to our named executive officers, a common equity Tier 1 ratio of at least 8.5% was established as a minimum funding requirement for our incentive compensation. Our incentive compensation also takes into account a risk assessment for both the company as a whole and for each individual. In addition, all of our named executive officers equity awards are subject to 100% forfeiture during, and clawback following, the vesting period and all of their cash incentives are subject to 100% clawback within three years following the award date, in each case based on ongoing risk assessments under our comprehensive recoupment policy.
We are also subject to regulation by various U.S. and international governmental and regulatory agencies with respect to executive compensation matters and the consideration of risk in the context of compensation. Our programs have been designed to comply with these regulations, and the HRC Committee regularly monitors new and proposed regulations as they develop to determine if additional action is required.
Based on the above, we believe that our compensation plans and practices are well-balanced and do not encourage imprudent risk-taking that threatens our companys value or create risks that are reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the company.
The HRC Committee has reviewed and discussed the foregoing Compensation Discussion and Analysis with management. On the basis of such review and discussions, the HRC Committee recommended to the Board of Directors that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in the companys Annual Report on Form 10-K and this proxy statement.
By: The Human Resources and Compensation Committee
Edward P. Garden, Chairman | Edmund F. Ted Kelly | Samuel C. Scott III | ||
Jeffrey A. Goldstein |
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 57 |
COMPENSATION |
> Executive Compensation Tables and Other Compensation Disclosure |
The Summary Compensation Table and Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table, on this page 58 and on page 60, are in accordance with SEC rules and do not reflect the manner in which our HRC Committee thinks about and determines compensation. In particular, the SEC rules require that we report equity-based awards for the year that they are granted, even though the equity-based portion of our incentive compensation is awarded for services performed the prior year.
Name and Principal Position
|
Year
|
Salary
|
Bonus
|
Stock Awards(1)(2)
|
Option Awards
|
Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation
|
Change in Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation
|
All Other Compensation(4)
|
Total
| |||||||||
Charles W. Scharf(5) Chairman & Chief Executive Officer |
2017 | $572,917 | $ | $14,741,565 | $ | $1,754,000 | $ | $33,470 | $17,101,952 | |||||||||
Gerald L. Hassell(6) Former Chairman & Chief Executive Officer |
2017 | $1,000,000 | $ | $13,517,892 | $ | $3,500,000 | $867,078 | $196,263 | $19,081,233 | |||||||||
2016 | $1,000,000 | $ | $13,656,477 | $ | $4,326,000 | $ | $183,121 | $19,165,598 | ||||||||||
2015 | $1,000,000 | $ | $9,889,738 | $ | $2,419,200 | $ | $173,496 | $13,482,434 | ||||||||||
Thomas P. Todd Gibbons Vice Chairman & Chief Financial Officer |
2017 | $650,000 | $ | $5,722,582 | $ | $1,943,100 | $360,812 | $99,648 | $8,776,142 | |||||||||
2016 | $650,000 | $ | $4,755,929 | $ | $2,354,580 | $179,290 | $84,360 | $8,024,159 | ||||||||||
2015 | $650,000 | $ | $3,510,949 | $ | $2,426,760 | $ | $76,731 | $6,664,440 | ||||||||||
Brian T. Shea(6) Former Vice Chairman & CEO of Investment Services |
2017 | $650,000 | $ | $5,805,897 | $ | $1,188,495 | $ | $777,398 | $8,421,790 | |||||||||
2016 | $625,000 | $ | $4,812,725 | $ | $2,388,870 | $ | $114,200 | $7,940,795 | ||||||||||
2015 | $575,000 | $ | $3,033,843 | $ | $2,459,646 | $ | $115,616 | $6,184,105 | ||||||||||
Mitchell E. Harris(5) CEO of Investment Management |
2017 | $650,000 | $ | $4,220,202 | $ | $2,626,155 | $104,837 | $18,900 | $7,620,094 | |||||||||
2016 | $625,000 | $ | $3,713,373 | $ | $1,736,438 | $74,252 | $18,550 | $6,167,613 | ||||||||||
Bridget E. Engle(5) Senior Executive Vice President & Chief Information Officer |
2017 | $339,611 | $ | $7,309,402 | $ | $2,350,000 | $ | $10,800 | $10,009,813 | |||||||||
(1) | The amounts disclosed in this column include the grant date fair value of RSUs and PSUs granted in 2017, 2016 and 2015. For 2017, the grant date fair values of PSUs were: $12,781,486 for Mr. Scharf; $9,011,928 for Mr. Hassell; $3,678,803 for Mr. Gibbons; $3,732,369 for Mr. Shea; $2,712,974 for Mr. Harris; and $0 for Ms. Engle. At the maximum level of performance, the PSU values would be: $19,172,229 for Mr. Scharf; $13,517,892 for Mr. Hassell; $5,518,205 for Mr. Gibbons; $5,598,554 for Mr. Shea; $4,069,461 for Mr. Harris; and $0 for Ms. Engle. |
(2) | The amounts disclosed in this column are computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718 (ASC 718) using the valuation methodology for equity awards set forth in note 15 to the consolidated financial statements in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017. |
(3) | The amount disclosed in this column for 2017 represents the amount of increase in the present value of the executives accumulated pension benefit and, for Mr. Harris, also includes $28,589.77 representing the portion of interest accrued on deferred compensation above 120% of the applicable federal long-term rate at the maximum rate payable under the Mellon Elective Deferred Compensation Plan for Senior Officers (see page 66 for additional information about this plan). Present values are determined in accordance with the assumptions used for purposes of measuring our pension obligations under FASB ASC 715 as of December 31, 2017, including a discount rate of 3.97%, with the exception that benefit payments are assumed to commence at the earliest age at which unreduced benefits are payable. |
58 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION |
> Executive Compensation Tables and Other Compensation Disclosure |
(4) | The items comprising All Other Compensation for 2017 are: |
Name
|
Perquisites
|
Contributions
|
Insurance
|
Severance
|
Total
| |||||
Charles W. Scharf
|
$14,570
|
$18,900
|
$
|
$
|
$33,470
| |||||
Gerald L. Hassell
|
$177,363
|
$18,900
|
$
|
$
|
$196,263
| |||||
Thomas P. Todd Gibbons
|
$70,648
|
$18,900
|
$10,100
|
$
|
$99,648
| |||||
Brian T. Shea
|
$88,752
|
$18,900
|
$
|
$669,746
|
$777,398
| |||||
Mitchell E. Harris
|
$0
|
$18,900
|
$
|
$
|
$18,900
| |||||
Bridget E. Engle
|
$0
|
$10,800
|
$
|
$
|
$10,800
|
(a) | Perquisites and Other Personal Benefits are for Mr. Scharf, use of company aircraft ($14,570); for Mr. Hassell, use of company car and driver ($57,358), use of company aircraft ($90,005) and enhanced charitable gift match ($30,000); for Mr. Gibbons, use of company car and driver ($38,343), use of company aircraft ($14,805) and enhanced charitable gift match ($17,500); and for Mr. Shea, use of company car and driver ($58,752) and enhanced charitable gift match ($30,000). |
The amounts disclosed represent aggregate incremental costs as follows: use of the company car and driver determined by the companys net cost associated with the individuals personal use of the pool of vehicles and drivers; personal use of corporate aircraft determined by the direct hourly operating cost for use of the aircraft multiplied by the number of hours of personal use; and the enhanced charitable gift match determined by matching contributions to eligible charities made by the company in excess of those provided for other employees under the companys gift matching programs. |
We calculated the direct hourly operating cost for use of the aircraft by adding the total amount spent by us for fuel, maintenance, landing fees, travel and catering associated with the use of corporate aircraft in 2017 and divided this number by the total number of flight hours logged in 2017. |
(b) | Contributions to Defined Contribution Plans consist of matching contributions under our 401(k) plans and non-discretionary company contributions under The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation Defined Contribution IRC Section 401(a)(17) Plan (the BNY Mellon 401(k) Benefits Restoration Plan). See Nonqualified Deferred Compensation below on page 65 for more details regarding the BNY Mellon 401(k) Benefits Restoration Plan. In addition, for Messrs. Scharf, Hassell, Gibbons, Shea and Harris and Ms. Engle, the amount includes non-discretionary company contributions totaling 2% of base salary under our 401(k) plan. |
(c) | Represent taxable payments made by us for universal life insurance policies. |
(d) | Represents the following severance payments payable pursuant to the Executive Severance Plan: one times base salary ($650,000) and one year of benefits continuation (valued at $19,746). |
(5) | Because Mr. Scharf and Ms. Engle were only each a named executive in 2017, no disclosure is included as to Mr. Scharf or Ms. Engle for 2016 and 2015. Because Mr. Harris was only a named executive beginning in 2016, no disclosure is included as to Mr. Harris for 2015. |
(6) | Mr. Hassell stepped down as the companys CEO effective July 17, 2017, and retired as the Chairman of the Board effective December 31, 2017. Mr. Sheas employment with the company terminated effective December 31, 2017. |
BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement | 59 |
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION |
> Executive Compensation Tables and Other Compensation Disclosure |
Estimated Future Payouts
|
Estimated Future Payouts
|
All
Other
|
||||||||||||||||||
Name
|
Award Type
|
Grant
|
Threshold ($)
|
Target ($)
|
Maximum ($)
|
Threshold
|
Target
|
Maximum
|
Number of (#)
|
Grant Value
of
| ||||||||||
Charles W. Scharf
|
EICP
|
|
|
$1,754,000
|
$2,631,000
|
|
|
|
| |||||||||||
PSUs
|
7/17/2017
|
|
|
|
|
239,578
|
359,367
|
$12,781,486
| ||||||||||||
RSUs
|
7/17/2017
|
36,740
|
$1,960,079
| |||||||||||||||||
Gerald L. Hassell
|
EICP
|
|
|
$3,500,000
|
$5,250,000
|
|
|
|
| |||||||||||
PSUs
|
2/16/2017
|
|
|
|
|
191,458
|
287,187
|
$9,011,928
| ||||||||||||
RSUs
|
2/16/2017
|
95,729
|
$4,505,964
| |||||||||||||||||
Thomas P.
|
EICP
|
|
|
$1,905,000
|
$2,857,500
|
|
|
|
| |||||||||||
PSUs
|
2/16/2017
|
|
|
|
|
78,156
|
117,234
|
$3,678,803
| ||||||||||||
RSUs
|
2/16/2017
|
43,420
|
$2,043,779
| |||||||||||||||||
Brian T. Shea
|
EICP
|
|
|
$1,212,750
|
$1,819,125
|
|
|
|
| |||||||||||
PSUs
|
2/16/2017
|
|
|
|
|
79,294
|
118,941
|
$3,732,369
| ||||||||||||
RSUs
|
2/16/2017
|
44,052
|
$2,073,528
| |||||||||||||||||
Mitchell E. Harris
|
EICP
|
|
|
$2,205,000
|
$3,307,500
|
|
|
|
| |||||||||||
PSUs
|
2/16/2017
|
|
|
|
|
57,637
|
86,456
|
$2,712,974
| ||||||||||||
RSUs
|
2/16/2017
|
32,021
|
$1,507,228
| |||||||||||||||||
Bridget E. Engle
|
EICP
|
|
|
$2,350,000
|
$3,525,000
|
|
|
|
| |||||||||||
RSUs
|
9/1/2017
|
139,679
|
$7,309,402
|
(1) | Represents the cash portion of incentive compensation amounts to be paid for performance during 2017 under The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation Executive Incentive Compensation Plan (the EICP). There was no threshold payout under this plan for 2017. |
(2) | For each of Messrs. Hassell, Gibbons, Shea and Harris, represents the portion of the named executives incentive compensation award granted in the form of PSUs under The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation Long-Term Incentive Plan (the LTIP) for performance during 2016. For Mr. Scharf, represents the sign-on grant of PSUs, and the pre-granted PSUs awarded under the LTIP upon commencement of employment in respect of 50% of the PSU component of his incentive compensation award for performance during 2017. In each case, the amounts shown under the Maximum column represent the maximum payout level of 150% of target; there is no threshold payout level. Upon vesting, the PSUs will be paid out in shares of BNY Mellon common stock. PSUs cannot be sold during the period of restriction. During this period, dividend equivalents on the PSUs will be reinvested and paid to the executives at the same time as the underlying shares. These units will be earned between 0% 150% based on our 2019 OEPS and growth in Risk Weighted Assets from 12/31/2016 to 12/31/2019 with a negative risk modifier should risk-weighted assets grow at an unacceptable rate. The earned units generally will cliff vest after the end of the performance period if the executive remains employed by us. In the event that the named executives risk scorecard rating is lower than acceptable risk tolerance, any unvested PSUs will be subject to review and potential forfeiture, as determined by our HRC Committee. |
(3) | For each of Messrs. Hassell, Gibbons, Shea and Harris, represents the portion of the named executives incentive compensation award granted in the form of RSUs under the LTIP for performance during 2016. The RSUs generally vest in equal installments over three years. For Mr. Scharf, represents the pre-granted RSUs awarded under the LTIP upon commencement of employment in respect of 100% of the RSU component of his incentive compensation award for performance during 2017 (pro-rated to reflect the time period in 2017 that he was employed by us). Mr. Scharfs pre-granted RSUs vest in equal annual installments commencing on 2/15/2019. For Ms. Engle, represents 139,679 RSUs granted under the LTIP upon the commencement of her employment. 71,633 of Ms. Engles RSUs vested on 02/15/2018 and the remaining RSUs will vest in two tranches of 49,694 RSUs and 18,352 RSUs on 02/15/2019 and 02/15/2020, respectively. |
(4) | The aggregate grant date fair value of awards presented in this column is calculated in accordance with ASC 718. |
60 | BNY Mellon | 2018 Proxy Statement |
ITEM 2. ADVISORY VOTE ON COMPENSATION |
> Executive Compensation Tables and Other Compensation Disclosure |
Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End
The market value of unvested or unearned awards is calculated based on $53.86 per share, the closing price of our common stock on the NYSE on December 29, 2017.
Option Awards
|
Stock Awards(2)
| |||||||||||||||||
Year of Performance Period(1)
|
Number of Securities
|
Option
|
Option
|
Number of Shares or
|
Market
|
Equity Plan
|
Equity Payout Value
| |||||||||||
Name
|
Exercisable
|
Unexercisable
|
||||||||||||||||
Charles W. Scharf
|
2017
|
36,740
|
$1,978,816
|
|||||||||||||||
2017-2019
|
242,900(3)
|
$13,082,581
| ||||||||||||||||
Gerald L. Hassell
|
2011
|
295,119
|
|
$30.1300
|
2/23/2021
|
|||||||||||||
2012
|
434,412
|
|
$22.0300
|
2/22/2022
|
||||||||||||||
2015
|
43,901
|
$2,364,508
|
||||||||||||||||
2016
|
182,546
|
$9,831,928
|
||||||||||||||||
2017
|
95,729
|
$5,155,964
|
||||||||||||||||
2015-2017
|
142,869(4)
|
$7,694,925
|
||||||||||||||||
2016-2018
|
121,336(3)
|
$6,535,145
| ||||||||||||||||
2017-2019
|
194,905(3)
|
$10,497,567
| ||||||||||||||||
Thomas P.
|
2011
|
190,124
|
|
$30.1300
|
2/23/2021
|
|||||||||||||
2012
|
128,432
|
|
$22.0300
|
2/22/2022
|
||||||||||||||
2015
|
11,981
|
$645,297
|
||||||||||||||||
2016
|
55,952
|
$3,013,575
|
||||||||||||||||
2017
|
43,420
|
$2,338,601
|
||||||||||||||||
2015-2017
|
63,696(4)
|
$3,430,663
|
||||||||||||||||
2016-2018
|
54,095(3)
|
$2,913,584
| ||||||||||||||||
2017-2019
|
79,563(3)
|
$4,285,263 |