Table of Contents
SCHEDULE 14A
(Rule 14a-101)
INFORMATION REQUIRED IN PROXY STATEMENT
SCHEDULE 14A INFORMATION
Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(Amendment No. )
Filed by the Registrant x
Filed by a Party other than the Registrant ¨
Check the appropriate box:
| ¨ |
Preliminary Proxy Statement | |||||||
| x |
Definitive Proxy Statement | ¨ | Confidential, For Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2)) | |||||
| ¨ |
Definitive Additional Materials | |||||||
| ¨ |
Soliciting Material Pursuant to Rule 14a-11(c) or Rule 14a-12 | |||||||
CVS CAREMARK 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):
| x |
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:
Not Applicable
| |||
| (2) |
Form, Schedule or Registration Statement No.:
Not Applicable
| |||
| (3) |
Filing Party:
Not Applicable
| |||
| (4) |
Date Filed:
Not Applicable
| |||
Table of Contents
CVS Caremark Corporation
NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS
MAY 9, 2013
9:00 A.M.
CVS Caremark Corporation
One CVS Drive
Woonsocket, Rhode Island 02895
To our stockholders:
We are pleased to invite you to attend our 2013 annual meeting of stockholders to:
| n | Elect 9 directors named in the accompanying proxy statement; |
| n | Ratify the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for fiscal 2013; |
| n | Act, by non-binding vote, to approve the Company’s executive compensation as disclosed in this proxy statement; |
| n | Amend the Company’s 2007 Employee Stock Purchase Plan to add shares to the Plan; |
| n | Act on a proposal by the Company to amend the Company’s charter to reduce the threshold for stockholder approval of certain related person business combination transactions under the Charter’s “fair price” provision from 2/3 of shares outstanding to a majority of shares outstanding; |
| n | Act on three stockholder proposals to be presented; and |
| n | Conduct other business properly brought before the meeting. |
Stockholders of record at the close of business on March 13, 2013 may vote at the meeting.
Your vote is important. Whether or not you plan to attend the meeting, please vote your shares. In addition to voting in person or by mail, stockholders of record have the option of voting by telephone or via the Internet. If your shares are held in the name of a bank, broker or other holder of record (i.e., in “street name”), please read your voting instructions to see which of these options are available to you. Even if you are attending the meeting in person, we encourage you to vote in advance by mail, phone or Internet.
By Order of the Board of Directors,
David W. Dorman
Chairman of the Board
Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the Stockholder Meeting to Be Held on May 9, 2013.
The proxy statement and annual report to security holders are available at
http://info.cvscaremark.com/investors and at www.envisionreports.com/cvs.
Table of Contents
PROXY STATEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS
| Page | ||||||
| Information About the Annual Meeting and Voting | 1 | |||||
| 1 | ||||||
| 1 | ||||||
| 1 | ||||||
| 3 | ||||||
| 3 | ||||||
| Corporate Governance and Related Matters | 4 | |||||
| 4 | ||||||
| 4 | ||||||
| 4 | ||||||
| 4 | ||||||
| 5 | ||||||
| 6 | ||||||
| Contact with the Board, the Chairman and Other Independent Directors |
6 | |||||
| 7 | ||||||
| 7 | ||||||
| 10 | ||||||
| 12 | ||||||
| 14 | ||||||
| 15 | ||||||
| 16 | ||||||
| Executive Compensation and Related Matters | 17 | |||||
| 17 | ||||||
| 17 | ||||||
| 20 | ||||||
| 20 | ||||||
| 22 | ||||||
| 24 | ||||||
| 25 | ||||||
| 27 | ||||||
| 35 | ||||||
| 35 | ||||||
| 35 | ||||||
| 37 | ||||||
| 38 | ||||||
| 39 | ||||||
| 39 | ||||||
| 40 | ||||||
| 41 | ||||||
| 43 | ||||||
| 45 | ||||||
| 47 | ||||||
| 47 | ||||||
| 48 | ||||||
| 50 | ||||||
i
Table of Contents
ii
Table of Contents
INFORMATION ABOUT THE ANNUAL MEETING AND VOTING
The Board of Directors of CVS Caremark Corporation (the “Company” or “CVS Caremark”) is soliciting your proxy to vote at our 2013 annual meeting of stockholders (or at any adjournment of the meeting; the “Meeting” or “Annual Meeting”). This proxy statement summarizes the information you need to know to vote at the Meeting.
We began mailing this proxy statement and the enclosed proxy card on or about April 4, 2013 to all stockholders entitled to vote. The Company’s 2012 Annual Report, which includes our financial statements, is being sent with this proxy statement.
Date, Time and Place of the Annual Meeting
| Date: |
May 9, 2013 | |
| Time: |
9:00 a.m. Eastern Time | |
| Place: |
CVS Caremark Customer Support Center (Company Headquarters) One CVS Drive Woonsocket, Rhode Island 02895 | |
Stockholders must present a form of personal photo identification in order to be admitted to the Annual Meeting. No cell phones, cameras, recording equipment, electronic devices, large bags, briefcases or packages will be permitted in the Meeting.
Stockholders entitled to vote are those who owned CVS Caremark common stock at the close of business on the record date, March 13, 2013. As of the record date, there were 1,241,647,389 shares of common stock outstanding. Each share of CVS Caremark common stock that you own entitles you to one vote.
The Bank of New York Mellon presently holds shares of common stock as Trustee under the 401(k) Plan and the Employee Stock Ownership Plan of CVS Caremark Corporation and Affiliated Companies (the “ESOP”). Each participant in the ESOP instructs the Trustee of the ESOP how to vote his or her shares. As to shares with respect to which the Trustee receives no timely voting instructions, the Trustee, pursuant to the ESOP Trust Agreement, votes these shares in the same proportion as it votes all the shares as to which it has received timely voting instructions. The results of the voting will be held in strict confidence by the Trustee. Please note that the cut-off date by which participants of the ESOP must submit their vote to the tabulator in order to be counted is 5:00 P.M. Eastern Time on May 6, 2013.
Whether or not you plan to attend the Annual Meeting, we urge you to vote. You may vote by calling a toll-free telephone number, by using the Internet or by mailing your signed proxy card in the postage-paid envelope provided. If you vote by telephone or the Internet, you do NOT need to return your proxy card. Returning the proxy card by mail or voting by telephone or Internet will not affect your right to attend the Annual Meeting and change your vote, if desired.
If your shares are held in the name of a bank, broker or other holder of record (a “nominee”), you will receive instructions from the nominee that you must follow in order for your shares to be voted. Certain of these institutions offer telephone and Internet voting.
The enclosed proxy card indicates the number of shares that you own as of the record date.
Voting instructions are included on your proxy card. If you properly fill in your proxy card and send it to us in time to vote, or vote by telephone or the Internet, one of the individuals named on your proxy card
1
Table of Contents
(your “proxy”) will vote your shares as you have directed. If you sign the proxy card but do not make specific choices, your proxy will follow the Board’s recommendations and vote your shares:
| n | “FOR” the election of all 9 nominees for director (as described beginning on page 56); |
| n | “FOR” the ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for fiscal 2013 (as described on page 59); |
| n | “FOR” approval of the Company’s executive compensation as disclosed in this proxy statement (as described beginning on page 60); |
| n | “FOR” approval of a proposal to amend of the Company’s 2007 Employee Stock Purchase Plan to add shares to the Plan (as described beginning on page 62); |
| n | “FOR” the adoption of a proposal by the Company to amend the Company’s charter to reduce the voting thresholds in the fair price provision (as described on page 66); and |
| n | “AGAINST” each of the stockholder proposals to be presented (as described beginning on page 67). |
The Board of Directors and the Company’s management have not received notice of, and are not aware of, any business to come before the Meeting other than the agenda items referred to in this proxy statement.
Revoking your proxy card
You may revoke your proxy card by:
| n | sending in another signed proxy card with a later date; |
| n | providing subsequent telephone or Internet voting instructions; |
| n | notifying our Corporate Secretary in writing before the Annual Meeting that you have revoked your proxy card; or |
| n | voting in person at the Annual Meeting. |
Voting in person
If you plan to attend the Annual Meeting and vote in person, we will give you a ballot when you arrive. However, if your shares are held in the name of a nominee, you must bring an account statement or letter from the nominee indicating that you were the beneficial owner of the shares on March 13, 2013, the record date for voting.
Appointing your own proxy
If you want to give your proxy to someone other than the individuals named as proxies on the proxy card, you may cross out the names of those individuals and insert the name of the individual you are authorizing to vote. Either you or that authorized individual must present the proxy card at the Annual Meeting to vote.
Proxy solicitation
We are soliciting this proxy on behalf of our Board of Directors and will bear the solicitation expenses. We are making this solicitation by mail but we may also solicit by telephone, e-mail or in person. We have hired Morrow & Co., LLC, 470 West Avenue, Stamford, CT 06902, for a fee of $25,000, plus out-of-pocket expenses, to provide customary assistance to us in the solicitation. We will reimburse banks, brokerage houses and other institutions, nominees and fiduciaries, if they so request, for their expenses in forwarding proxy materials to beneficial owners.
2
Table of Contents
Householding
Under U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) rules, a single set of annual reports and proxy statements may be sent to any household at which two or more Company stockholders reside if they appear to be members of the same family. Each stockholder continues to receive a separate proxy card. This procedure, referred to as “householding,” reduces the volume of duplicate information stockholders receive and reduces mailing and printing expenses for the Company. Brokers with accountholders who are Company stockholders may be householding our proxy materials. As indicated in the notice previously provided by these brokers to our stockholders, a single annual report and proxy statement will be delivered to multiple stockholders sharing an address unless contrary instructions have been received from an affected stockholder. Once you have received notice from your broker that it will be householding communications to your address, householding will continue until you are notified otherwise or until you revoke your consent. If, at any time, you no longer wish to participate in householding and would prefer to receive a separate annual report and proxy statement, please notify your broker so that separate copies may be delivered to you. Stockholders who currently receive multiple copies of the annual report and proxy statement at their address who would prefer that their communications be householded should contact their broker.
A quorum of stockholders is necessary to hold a valid meeting. The presence in person or by proxy at the Annual Meeting of holders of shares representing a majority of shares entitled to vote constitutes a quorum. Abstentions and broker “non-votes” are counted as present for establishing a quorum. A broker non-vote occurs on an item when a broker is not permitted to vote on that item absent instruction from the beneficial owner of the shares and no instruction is given.
Vote Necessary to Approve Proposals
| n | Item 1, election of directors. Each director is elected by a majority of the votes cast with respect to that director’s election (at a meeting for the election of directors at which a quorum is present) by the holders of shares of common stock present in person or by proxy at the meeting and entitled to vote. |
A “majority of votes cast” means that the number of votes “for” a director’s election must exceed 50% of the votes cast with respect to that director’s election. Votes “against” a director’s election will count as a vote cast, but “abstentions” and “broker non-votes” will not count as a vote cast with respect to that director’s election and will have no effect.
| n | Item 5, Amendment of the Company’s Charter to reduce the threshold for stockholder approval of certain related person business combination transactions under the Charter’s “fair price” provision from 2/3 of shares outstanding to a majority of shares outstanding. Approval is by an affirmative vote (at a meeting at which a quorum is present) of the holders of two-thirds (2/3) of the shares of common stock outstanding. Abstentions are counted as shares present or represented and voting and have the effect of a vote against. Broker non-votes are not counted as shares present or represented and voting and have the effect of a vote against. |
| n | All other items. For Items 2, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 8, approval is by affirmative vote (at a meeting at which a quorum is present) of a majority of the votes represented by the shares of common stock present at the meeting in person or by proxy and entitled to vote. Abstentions are counted as shares present or represented and voting and have the effect of a vote against. Broker non-votes are not counted as shares present or represented and voting and have no effect on the vote. |
| n | Broker voting. Under current New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) rules, if the record holder of your shares (usually a bank, broker or other nominee) holds your shares in its name, your record holder is permitted to vote your shares on Item 2, Ratification of Auditors, in its discretion, even if it does not receive voting instructions from you. On all other Items, your record holder is not permitted to vote your shares without your instructions and such uninstructed shares are considered broker non-votes. |
3
Table of Contents
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE AND RELATED MATTERS
Corporate Governance Guidelines
The Company’s Board of Directors acts as the ultimate decision-making body of the Company and advises and oversees management, who are responsible for the day-to-day operations and management of the Company. In carrying out its responsibilities, the Board reviews and assesses the Company’s long-term strategy and its strategic, competitive and financial performance. The Board has adopted Corporate Governance Guidelines, which are available on our investor relations website at http://info.cvscaremark.com/ investors and are also available to stockholders at no charge upon request to the Company’s Corporate Secretary. These Guidelines meet or exceed the listing standards adopted by the NYSE, on which the Company’s common stock is listed.
During 2012, there were eight meetings of the Board of Directors. Directors are expected to make every effort to attend the Annual Meeting, all Board meetings and the meetings of the Committees on which they serve. All but one of our directors at the time of the Company’s 2012 annual meeting of stockholders attended that annual meeting. In 2012, each director attended at least 75% of the meetings of the Board and of the Committees of which he or she was a member.
One Board meeting was our annual meeting of independent directors. The independent directors also regularly hold executive sessions during which the Company’s management does not participate.
The Board’s Leadership Structure
Mr. David W. Dorman is our independent Chairman of the Board. The independent Chairman presides at all meetings of the Board, and works with the Company’s Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) to set Board meeting agendas and the schedule of Board meetings. In addition, the independent Chairman has the following duties and responsibilities: the authority to call, and to lead, independent director sessions; the ability to retain independent legal, accounting or other advisors in connection with these sessions; facilitation of communication and service as a liaison between the CEO and the other independent directors; and the duty to advise the CEO of the informational needs of the Board.
The Board believes that Board independence and oversight of management will be effectively maintained through the independent Chairman, the Board’s composition and its Committee system. Consistent with past practice, if in the future the Board decides that a non-independent Chairman should lead, then it will appoint an independent Lead Director. The Board also believes that it is not necessary to adopt a rigid policy restricting its discretion in selecting the Chairman of the Board (as well as restricting the ability to combine the positions of Chairman and CEO if future circumstances warrant), because this would deprive the Board of the ability to select the most qualified and appropriate individual to lead the Board as Chairman at any particular point in time.
The Board’s Role in Risk Oversight
The Board of Directors’ role in risk oversight involves both the full Board of Directors and its Committees. The Audit Committee is charged with the primary role in carrying out risk oversight responsibilities on behalf of the Board. Pursuant to its charter, the Audit Committee annually reviews the Company’s policies and practices with respect to risk assessment and risk management, including discussing with management the Company’s major risk exposures and the steps that have been taken to monitor and mitigate such exposures. As part of CVS Caremark’s ongoing Enterprise Risk Management process, each of the Company’s major business units is responsible for identifying risks that could affect achievement of business goals and strategies, assessing the likelihood and potential impact of significant risks, prioritizing risks and actions to be taken in mitigation and/or response, and reporting to management’s Executive Risk Steering Committee on actions to monitor, manage and mitigate significant risks. Additionally, the Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”), Chief Compliance Officer (“CCO”) and General
4
Table of Contents
Counsel (“GC”) periodically report on the Company’s risk management policies and practices to relevant Board Committees and to the full Board. The Audit Committee reviews CVS Caremark’s major financial risk exposures as well as major operational, compliance, reputational and strategic risks, including steps to monitor, manage and mitigate those risks. In addition, each of the other Board Committees is responsible for oversight of risk management practices for categories of risks relevant to their functions. For example, the Management Planning and Development Committee has oversight responsibility for the Company’s overall compensation structure, including review of its compensation practices, with a view to assessing associated risk. See “Executive Compensation and Related Matters – Compensation Discussion and Analysis – Risk Assessment.” The Board as a group is regularly updated on specific risks in the course of its review of corporate strategy, business plans and reports to the Board by its respective Committees.
The Board considers its role in risk oversight when evaluating the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines and its leadership structure. Both the Corporate Governance Guidelines and the Board’s leadership structure facilitate the Board’s oversight of risk and communication with management. Our Chairman and our CEO are focused on the Company’s risk management efforts and ensure that risk matters are appropriately brought to the Board and/or its Committees for their review.
Under the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee recommends to the Board criteria for Board membership and recommends individuals for membership on the Company’s Board of Directors. Director Qualification Criteria used by the Committee in nominating directors are found in the Committee’s charter and are attached to this proxy statement as Exhibit A. Although there is no specific policy on diversity, the Committee values diversity, which it broadly views in terms of, among other things, gender, race, background and experience, as a factor in selecting members to serve on the Board, and believes that the diversity of the Board’s current composition provides significant benefits to the Company. When considering current directors for re-nomination to the Board, the Committee takes into account the performance of each director. The Committee also reviews the composition of the Board in light of the current challenges and needs of the Board and the Company, and determines whether it may be appropriate to add or remove individuals after considering, among other things, the need for audit committee expertise and issues of independence, judgment, age, skills, background and experience. As desired, the Committee may confer with the Chairman and other directors as to the foregoing matters.
The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will consider any director candidates recommended by stockholders who submit a written request to the Corporate Secretary of the Company. The candidates should meet the Director Qualification Criteria noted above. The Committee evaluates all director candidates and nominees in the same manner regardless of the source. If a stockholder would like to nominate a person for election or re-election to the Board, he or she must provide notice to the Company as provided in our by-laws. Such notice must be addressed to the Corporate Secretary and must arrive at the Company in a timely manner, between 90 and 120 days prior to the anniversary of our last annual meeting of stockholders. The notice must include (i) the name and address, as they appear in the Company’s books, of the stockholder giving the notice, (ii) the class and number of shares of the Company that are beneficially owned by the stockholder (including information concerning derivative ownership and other arrangements concerning our stock as described in our by-laws), (iii) a written consent indicating that the candidate is willing to be named in the proxy statement as a nominee and to serve as a director if elected, and (iv) any other information that the SEC would require to be included in a proxy statement when a stockholder submits a proposal. See “Other Matters – Stockholder Proposals and Other Business for our Annual Meeting in 2014” for additional information related to our 2014 annual meeting.
The retirement age for CVS Caremark directors is 72. The Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that no director who is or would be over the age of 72 at the expiration of his or her current term may be nominated to a new term, unless the Board waives the retirement age for a specific director in exceptional circumstances.
5
Table of Contents
Independence Determinations for Directors
Under the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines, a majority of our Board must be comprised of directors who meet the director independence requirements set forth in the Corporate Governance Rules of the NYSE applicable to listed companies. Under the NYSE Corporate Governance Rules, no director qualifies as “independent” unless the Board affirmatively determines that the director has no material relationship with the Company (either directly or as a partner, stockholder or officer of an organization that has a relationship with the Company). The basis for a Board’s determination that a relationship is not material must be disclosed in the Company’s annual proxy statement. In this regard, the Board has adopted categorical standards to assist it in making determinations of independence, which are attached to this proxy statement as Exhibit B.
The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee of the Board undertook its annual review of director independence in March 2013, and determined that each of C. David Brown II, David W. Dorman, Anne M. Finucane, Kristen Gibney Williams, Jean-Pierre Millon, Richard W. Swift and Tony L. White, is independent. Ms. Heard and Mr. Piccolo, each of whom is retiring at the time of the Annual Meeting, also were determined to be independent during their 2012-13 Board year service. Mr. Merlo is considered an inside director because of his current employment as President and CEO of the Company.
In March 2013, Mr. William C. Weldon, the retired Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Johnson & Johnson, a global health care products company, was elected to the Company’s Board of Directors by the members of our Board. Consideration of Mr. Weldon as a candidate was in anticipation of the retirement of Ms. Heard and Mr. Piccolo. Mr. Dorman, the Company’s independent Chairman of the Board, initially identified Mr. Weldon to the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee as a potential candidate for election, due to Mr. Weldon’s deep knowledge of the global health care market across multiple sectors. The Committee then reviewed Mr. Weldon’s qualifications against the criteria set forth above and in Exhibit A to this proxy statement and recommended Mr. Weldon’s election.
In the course of its review as to the independence of each director, the Committee considered transactions and relationships, if any, between each director or any member of his or her immediate family, on the one hand, and the Company and its subsidiaries, on the other. In that regard, the Committee in making its recommendation and the Board in making its determination as to Mr. Weldon’s independence considered that, consistent with the categorical standards, Mr. Weldon is a former executive officer of an entity with which the Company has had ordinary course, arm’s-length business dealings that do not implicate any of the NYSE bright-line tests, and with respect to which he was not directly involved in such entity’s business dealings with the Company. See “Certain Transactions with Directors and Officers”, below.
Contact with the Board, the Chairman and Other Independent Directors
Stockholders and other parties interested in communicating directly with the Board, the independent Chairman of the Board or with the independent directors as a group may do so by writing to them care of CVS Caremark Corporation, One CVS Drive, Woonsocket, RI 02895. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee has approved a process for handling letters received by the Company and addressed to the Board, the Chairman of the Board or to independent members of the Board. Under that process, the Corporate Secretary of the Company reviews all such correspondence and regularly forwards to the Board a summary of all such correspondence and copies of all correspondence that, in the opinion of the Corporate Secretary, deals with the functions of the Board or Committees thereof or that he otherwise determines requires their attention. Directors shall from time to time review a log of all correspondence received by the Company that is addressed to members of the Board and may request copies of any such correspondence. Concerns relating to accounting, internal accounting controls or auditing matters will be promptly brought to the attention of the Company’s internal audit department and handled in accordance with procedures established by the Audit Committee with respect to such matters.
6
Table of Contents
The Company has adopted a Code of Conduct that applies to all of our directors, officers and employees, including our CEO, CFO and Chief Accounting Officer. The Company’s Code of Conduct is available on the Company’s website at http://info.cvscaremark.com/investors, and will be provided to stockholders without charge upon request to the Company’s Corporate Secretary. The Company intends to post amendments to or waivers from its Code of Conduct (to the extent applicable to the Company’s executive officers or directors) at that location on its website within the timeframe required by SEC rules.
Audit Committee
Richard J. Swift, Chair
Kristen Gibney Williams
Jean-Pierre Millon
The Audit Committee met nine times during 2012. Mr. Edwin M. Banks was a member of the Committee until his retirement from the Board and the Committee at the time of our 2012 Annual Meeting of Stockholders. Each member of the Committee is financially literate and independent of the Company and management under the standards set forth in applicable SEC rules and the Corporate Governance Rules of the NYSE. The Board has designated each of Mr. Swift and Mr. Millon as an audit committee financial expert, as defined under applicable SEC rules. The Board has approved a charter for the Committee, a copy of which can be viewed on the Company’s website at http://info.cvscaremark.com/investors, and also is available to stockholders without charge upon request to the Company’s Corporate Secretary. Pursuant to its charter, the Committee assists the Board in its oversight of: (i) the integrity of the financial statements of the Company; (ii) the qualifications, independence and performance of the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm, for whose appointment the Committee bears principal responsibility; (iii) the performance of the Company’s internal audit function; (iv) the Company’s policies and practices with respect to risk assessment and risk management, including discussing with management the Company’s major financial risk exposures and the steps that have been taken to monitor and control such exposures; (v) compliance with the Company’s Code of Conduct; (vi) the review of the Company’s information governance framework, including its privacy and information security programs, as well as the cybersecurity aspects of the information security program; (vii) review and ratification of any related person transactions pursuant to the Company’s policy on such matters; and (viii) compliance by the Company with legal and regulatory requirements. The Committee also approved the Audit Committee Report that is found on page 14 of this proxy statement.
Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee
David W. Dorman, Chair
C. David Brown II
Anne M. Finucane
Marian L. Heard
C.A. Lance Piccolo
The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee met five times during 2012. Each member of the Committee is independent of the Company and management under the standards set forth in the Corporate Governance Rules of the NYSE. The Board has approved a charter for the Committee, a copy of which can be viewed on the Company’s website at http://info.cvscaremark.com/investors, and also is available to stockholders without charge upon request to the Company’s Corporate Secretary. Pursuant to its charter, the Committee has responsibility for: (i) identifying individuals qualified to become Board members; (ii) recommending to the Board director nominees for election at the next annual or special meeting of stockholders at which directors are to be elected or to fill any vacancies or newly-created directorships that may occur between such meetings; (iii) recommending directors for appointment to Board
7
Table of Contents
Committees; (iv) making recommendations to the Board as to determinations of director independence; (v) evaluating Board and Committee performance; and (vi) reviewing and assessing the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines and overseeing compliance with such Guidelines.
Management Planning and Development Committee
C. David Brown II, Chair
David W. Dorman
Marian L. Heard
Tony L. White
The Management Planning and Development Committee met five times during 2012. Mr. Terrence Murray was a member of the Committee until his retirement from the Board and the Committee at the time of our 2012 Annual Meeting of Stockholders. Each member of the Committee is independent of the Company and management under the standards set forth in the Corporate Governance Rules of the NYSE. No Committee member participates in any of the Company’s employee compensation programs and none is a current or former officer or employee of CVS Caremark or its subsidiaries. At its meetings, non-members, such as the CEO, the CFO, the Chief Human Resources Officer, the GC, other senior human resources and legal officers, or external consultants, may be invited to provide information, respond to questions and provide general staff support. However, no CVS Caremark executive officer is permitted to be present during any discussion of his or her compensation or performance, and the Committee may exercise its prerogative to meet in executive session without non-members.
The Committee’s responsibilities are specified in its charter. The charter, as approved by the Board, may be viewed on the Company’s website at http://info.cvscaremark.com/investors, and also is available to stockholders without charge upon request to the Company’s Corporate Secretary. These responsibilities fall into six broad categories. Pursuant to its charter, the Committee: (i) oversees the Company’s compensation and benefits policies and programs generally; (ii) evaluates the performance of designated senior executives, including the CEO, and reviews the Company’s management succession plan; (iii) in consultation with the other independent directors of the Company, oversees and sets compensation for the CEO; (iv) oversees and sets compensation for the Company’s designated senior executives; (v) reviews and recommends to the Board compensation (including cash and equity-based compensation) for the Company’s directors; and (vi) prepares and recommends to the full Board the inclusion of Management Planning and Development Committee Report found on page 40 of this proxy statement. The Committee may delegate its authority relating to employees other than executive officers and directors as it deems appropriate and may also delegate its authority relating to ministerial matters.
In addition to the responsibilities defined above, the Committee is also responsible for reviewing and assessing any potential risk arising from the Company’s compensation policies and practices for its employees. During 2012, the Committee oversaw a risk assessment of the Company’s compensation policies and practices with specific focus on incentive programs across the organization to ascertain any potential material risks that may be created by the compensation programs. The Committee considered the findings of the assessment and concluded that the Company’s compensation programs are designed and administered with the appropriate balance of risk and reward in relation to its overall business strategy, do not encourage employees or officers to take unnecessary or excessive risks and any level of risk is not reasonably likely to have a material adverse impact on the Company. For non-executives, incentives represent a small percentage of total compensation so participants would not be rewarded for excessive risk-taking. The exception would be in sales where commission income can represent a significant portion of total compensation. In that case, our assessment looked at the goal setting process. No sales plan participants establish sales goals; sales goals are established by members of management who do not participate in the sales commission plans. The assessment also looked at the cost of non-executive incentive plans across the organization and determined it is not material to the Company’s financial performance.
A discussion of risk assessment with respect to the executive compensation programs is included in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis section of this proxy statement, which begins on page 17.
8
Table of Contents
As provided in its charter, the Committee has the sole authority to retain an external compensation consultant, determine the scope of the compensation consultant’s services and terminate the engagement at any time. The external compensation consultant reports to the Committee Chair. Exequity LLP is the Committee’s independent compensation consultant. Pursuant to the Company’s policy, Exequity provides no other services to the Company other than consulting services provided to the Committee related to the Company’s executive compensation programs. Exequity’s fees for executive compensation consulting to the Committee for fiscal year 2012 were $216,429. During fiscal 2012, Exequity:
| n | Collected, organized and presented quantitative competitive market data for a relevant competitive peer group with respect to executive officers’ target, annual and long-term compensation levels; |
| n | Developed and delivered an annual Committee briefing on executive compensation legislative and regulatory developments and trends and their implications for CVS Caremark; and |
| n | Collected market data and provided recommendations for non-employee director compensation to the Committee for approval by the Board. |
The Committee believes that the advice it receives from Exequity is objective and not influenced by any other business relationship. The Committee and Exequity have policies and procedures in place to preserve the objectivity and integrity of the executive compensation consulting advice, including:
| n | The Committee has the sole authority to retain and terminate the executive compensation consultant; |
| n | The consultant has direct access to the Committee without management involvement; |
| n | While it is necessary for the consultant to interact with management to gather information, the Committee determines if and how the consultant’s advice can be shared with management; and |
| n | The Committee may choose to meet with the consultant in executive session, without management present, to discuss recommendations. |
The Committee conducts an annual review of the independence of its compensation consultant, taking into account the standards above and applicable rules and regulations, and has determined that its consultant’s work does not raise any conflicts.
Executive Committee
C. David Brown II
David W. Dorman
Larry J. Merlo
Richard W. Swift
The Executive Committee did not meet in 2012. At all times when the Board is not in session, the Executive Committee may exercise most of the powers of the Board, as permitted by applicable law.
9
Table of Contents
The Company’s approach to compensating outside directors for Board service is to provide directors with an annual retainer mix comprised of a mandatory 75% paid in shares of Company common stock, and 25% paid in cash (or 100% stock at the director’s election). The payment of a significant portion of annual retainers, and additional chairperson retainers as outlined below, in Company common stock is consistent with our policy of using equity compensation to better align directors’ interests with stockholders and enhances the directors’ ability to meet and continue to comply with the stock ownership guidelines described below.
Each non-employee director receives shares of the Company’s stock valued at $195,000 (the mandatory annual stock retainer) and a cash payment of $65,000 (unless the director elects to receive 100% of the annual retainer in shares of Company stock). The total annual retainer for outside directors is $260,000 annually.
The Management Planning and Development Committee and the Board believe that this approach reflects the ongoing accountability of directors. Service on the Board requires directors to commit significant amounts of time to Company matters year-round, not only at meetings. This approach also facilitates administration of the directors’ compensation program, and aligns with the manner in which director compensation is paid in our peer group, where it is common to pay directors with an annual cash retainer and an annual equity award.
Additional chairperson retainers are paid as follows: Chairs of the Nominating and Corporate Governance and Management Planning and Development Committees, $10,000 each; Chair of the Audit Committee, $20,000; and independent Chairman of the Board, $190,000. Each of these additional chairperson retainers is paid semi-annually; at least 75% of each retainer must be paid in shares of Company common stock, with the remaining 25% paid in either shares or cash at the directors’ election. Directors may elect to defer receipt of shares for the annual retainer and additional chairperson retainers; deferred shares will be credited with dividend equivalents.
10
Table of Contents
Director Stock Ownership Requirements
All non-employee directors must own a minimum of 10,000 shares of CVS Caremark common stock, which is worth approximately $480,000 based on the December 31, 2012 stock price of $48.35, or approximately seven times the amount of the annual cash retainer ($65,000). Directors must attain this minimum ownership level within five years of being elected to the Board and must retain this minimum ownership level for at least six months after leaving the Board. The current level of mandatory stock provided in the director’s mix of annual compensation enhances the director’s ability to meet the ownership level within this timeframe. Each of our directors has attained the minimum ownership level, except Mr. Weldon, who has five years from the date of his election to attain the minimum ownership level.
All Other Compensation and Benefits
Directors are eligible to receive stock options, but typically do not receive them and did not receive them in 2012. They do not participate in a pension plan or nonqualified deferred compensation plan with above market earnings. Directors are eligible to participate in the employee discount program and are subject to the same terms of the program as Company employees. Directors are generally reimbursed for business expenses incurred directly in connection with their roles and duties on the CVS Caremark Board, such as services provided by an executive assistant, travel, meals and lodging. The Company has extended to all directors the option to enroll themselves and their eligible dependents in the Company’s prescription drug benefit program, paying the same premium rates as employees. If a director retires from the Board with at least five years of service, the Company will allow continued participation in the prescription drug benefit plan, but the director must bear the full cost of the premium.
The following chart shows amounts paid to each of our non-employee directors in fiscal 2012.
Non-Employee Director Compensation – Fiscal Year 2012
| Name |
Fees Earned ($) |
Cash Fees Elected to be Paid in Stock (2) ($) |
Stock Awards (2) ($) |
All Other Compen- sation (3) ($) |
Total ($) |
|||||||||||||||
| C. David Brown II |
60 | 67,440 | 202,500 | 1,658 | 271,658 | |||||||||||||||
| David W. Dorman |
44 | 114,956 | 345,000 | — | 460,000 | |||||||||||||||
| Anne M. Finucane |
65,087 | — | 194,913 | 1,982 | 261,982 | |||||||||||||||
| Kristen Gibney Williams |
65,087 | — | 194,913 | 1,498 | 261,498 | |||||||||||||||
| Marian L. Heard |
65,000 | — | 195,000 | 1,658 | 261,658 | |||||||||||||||
| Jean-Pierre Millon |
65,087 | — | 194,913 | 1,658 | 261,658 | |||||||||||||||
| C. A. Lance Piccolo |
65,087 | — | 194,913 | 5,935 | 265,935 | |||||||||||||||
| Richard J. Swift |
70,000 | — | 210,000 | 1,658 | 281,658 | |||||||||||||||
| Tony L. White |
65,087 | — | 194,913 | 789 | 260,789 | |||||||||||||||
| (1) | The amounts shown include cash payments made in lieu of fractional shares to Mmes. Finucane and Gibney Williams and Messrs. Brown, Dorman, Millon, Piccolo and White. |
| (2) | These awards are fully vested at grant and the amounts shown represent both the fair market value and the full fair value at grant. During 2012, each director received 4,219 shares of stock with a total value of $195,000 (the mandatory annual stock retainer) on the date of grant; each director electing to receive the remaining annual retainer in stock also received 1,406 shares valued at $65,000 on the date of grant. Some directors elected to receive their additional chairperson retainers in stock in lieu of cash. As of December 31, 2012, our directors had deferred receipt of shares of Company common stock as follows: Mr. Brown, 30,893; Mr. Dorman, 15,159; Ms. Heard, 85,113; and Mr. Swift, 40,212. |
| (3) | Represents Company contributions for director health and prescription benefits. Amount also includes split dollar life insurance for Mr. Piccolo in the amount of $4,277 and Ms. Gibney Williams in the amount of $709. |
11
Table of Contents
Certain Transactions with Directors and Officers
In accordance with SEC rules, the Board has adopted a written Related Person Transaction Policy (the “Policy”). The Audit Committee of the Board has been designated as the Committee responsible for reviewing, approving or ratifying any related person transactions under the Policy.
Pursuant to the Policy, all executive officers, directors and director nominees are required to notify the Company’s GC or Corporate Secretary of any financial transaction, arrangement or relationship, or series of similar transactions, arrangements or relationships, involving the Company in which an executive officer, director, director nominee, 5% beneficial owner or any immediate family member of such a person has a direct or indirect material interest. Such officers, directors, nominees, 5% beneficial owners and their immediate family members are considered “related persons” under the Policy.
For the above purposes, “immediate family member” includes a person’s spouse, parents, siblings, children, in-laws, step-relatives and any other person sharing the household (other than a tenant or household employee).
The GC or the Corporate Secretary will present any reported new related person transactions, and proposed transactions involving related persons, to the Audit Committee at its next regular meeting, or earlier if appropriate. The Committee shall review transactions to determine whether the related person involved has a direct or indirect material interest in the transaction. The Committee may conclude, upon review of all relevant information, that the transaction does not constitute a related person transaction, and thus that no further review is required under the Policy. On an annual basis, the Committee shall review previously approved related person transactions, under the standards described below, to determine whether such transactions should continue.
In reviewing the transaction or proposed transaction, the Committee shall consider all relevant facts and circumstances, including without limitation the commercial reasonableness of the terms, the benefit and perceived benefit, or lack thereof, to the Company, the availability and/or opportunity costs of alternate transactions, the materiality and character of the related person’s direct or indirect interest, and the actual or apparent conflict of interest of the related person. The Committee will not approve or ratify a related person transaction unless it shall have determined that, upon consideration of all relevant information, the transaction is in, or not inconsistent with, the best interests of the Company and its stockholders.
If after the review described above, the Committee determines not to approve or ratify a related person transaction (whether such transaction is being reviewed for the first time or has previously been approved and is being re-reviewed), the transaction will not be entered into or continued, as the Committee shall direct.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the following types of transactions are deemed not to create or involve a material interest on the part of the related person and will not be reviewed, nor will they require approval or ratification, under the Policy:
| (i) | Transactions involving the purchase or sale of products or services in the ordinary course of business, not exceeding $120,000. |
| (ii) | Transactions in which the related person’s interest derives solely from his or her service as a director of another corporation or organization that is a party to the transaction. |
| (iii) | Transactions in which the related person’s interest derives solely from his or her ownership of less than 10% of the equity interest in another entity (other than a general partnership interest) which is a party to the transaction. |
| (iv) | Transactions in which the related person’s interest derives solely from his or her ownership of a class of equity securities of the Company and all holders of that class of equity securities received the same benefit on a pro rata basis. |
12
Table of Contents
| (v) | Transactions in which the related person’s interest derives solely from his or her service as a director, trustee or officer (or similar position) of a not-for-profit organization or charity that receives donations from the Company, which donations are made in accordance with the Company’s matching program that is available on the same terms to all employees of the Company. |
| (vi) | Compensation arrangements of any executive officer, other than an individual who is an immediate family member of a related person, if such arrangements have been approved by the Management Planning and Development Committee. |
| (vii) | Director compensation arrangements, if such arrangements have been approved by the Board. |
| (viii) | Indemnification payments and payments made under directors and officers indemnification insurance policies or made pursuant to the charter or by-laws of the Company or any of its subsidiaries or pursuant to any policy, agreement or instrument. |
The Board reviews the Policy on an annual basis and will make changes as appropriate.
Additionally, under the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines and its Code of Conduct, with respect to any transaction in which a director or executive officer has a personal interest, such that a potential conflict of interest could arise, the director or executive officer must report the matter immediately to the Company’s GC or the CCO who will, where appropriate, report the matter to the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee for evaluation and appropriate resolution.
If a director has a personal interest in a matter before the Board, the director must disclose the interest to the full Board, will recuse himself or herself from participation in the discussion and will not vote on the matter.
Furthermore, proposed charitable contributions by the Company within any given fiscal year in an aggregate amount exceeding $120,000, to an entity for which a director or a member of his or her immediate family serves as a director, officer, or member of such entity’s fund-raising organization or committee, will be subject to prior review and approval by the Audit Committee (with notification to the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee).
In addition, under the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee’s charter, such Committee shall evaluate the possibility that a director’s independence may be compromised or impaired for Board or Committee purposes if director compensation exceeds customary levels, if the Company makes substantial charitable contributions to an organization with which a director is affiliated, or if the Company enters into consulting contracts with (or provides other indirect forms of compensation to) a director (which consulting contracts or other indirect forms of compensation are expressly prohibited for Audit Committee members).
As noted above, in March 2013, Mr. William C. Weldon, the retired Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Johnson & Johnson, a global health care products company, was elected to the Company’s Board of Directors by the members of our Board. Mr. Weldon served as Chief Executive Officer of Johnson & Johnson until he retired from that role in April 2012, and served as Chairman of the Board of Johnson & Johnson until he retired from the board in December 2012. At the time of his election to the Board of Directors of CVS Caremark, he no longer had any affiliation with Johnson & Johnson.
CVS Caremark directly purchased approximately $740 million of products from Johnson & Johnson during the 2012 calendar year. CVS Caremark also purchased Johnson & Johnson products through various third parties, such as drug wholesalers. All of such purchases were made in the ordinary course of business based on arm’s length negotiations between Johnson & Johnson or such third parties and CVS Caremark. In addition, during 2012 Johnson & Johnson paid CVS Caremark certain rebates for prescription drug dispenses made by CVS Caremark. Such rebates are usual and customary in the industry and were based on arm’s length negotiations. The majority of such rebates were passed on to various clients of CVS Caremark’s prescription benefit management business. Mr. Weldon was not involved in the negotiation of the terms of any purchases, sales, contracts or business arrangements between the two companies.
13
Table of Contents
The Audit Committee of the Board of Directors (for purposes of this report, the “Committee”) is composed of three independent directors. Set forth below is the report of the Committee on its activities with respect to CVS Caremark’s audited financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012 (the “audited financial statements”).
| n | The Committee has reviewed and discussed the audited financial statements with management; |
| n | The Committee has discussed with Ernst & Young LLP (“Ernst & Young”), the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm, the matters required to be discussed by Statement on Auditing Standards No. 61, as amended and as adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“PCAOB”) in Rule 3200T; |
| n | The Committee has received the written disclosures and the letter from Ernst & Young pursuant to applicable requirements of the PCAOB regarding Ernst & Young’s communications with the Committee concerning independence, and has discussed with Ernst & Young its independence from the Company; and |
| n | Based on the review and discussions referred to above and relying thereon, the Committee recommended to the Board of Directors that the audited financial statements be included in CVS Caremark’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012, for filing with the SEC. |
Richard J. Swift, Chair
Kristen Gibney Williams
Jean-Pierre Millon
14
Table of Contents
Share Ownership of Directors and Certain Executive Officers
The following table shows the share ownership, as of March 7, 2013, of each director, each executive officer appearing in the Summary Compensation Table found on page 41 and all directors and executive officers as a group, based on information provided by these individuals. Each individual beneficially owns less than 1% of our common stock and, except as described in the footnotes to the table, each person has sole investment and voting power over the shares. None of the shares listed below has been pledged as collateral.
| Ownership of Common Stock (1) | ||||||||
|
Name |
Number | Percent | ||||||
| C. David Brown II |
172,281 | (6) | * | |||||
| Mark S. Cosby |
183,722 | (1)(2) | * | |||||
| David M. Denton |
403,015 | (1)(2)(4) | * | |||||
| David W. Dorman |
61,351 | (6) | * | |||||
| Anne M. Finucane |
11,783 | (7) | * | |||||
| Kristen Gibney Williams |
71,623 | (8) | * | |||||
| Marian L. Heard |
96,842 | (6) | * | |||||
| Per G.H. Lofberg |
1,231,142 | (1)(3)(9) | * | |||||
| Larry J. Merlo |
1,885,682 | (1)(2)(3)(4)(5) | * | |||||
|
Jean-Pierre Millon |
75,511 | (10) | * | |||||
| C.A. Lance Piccolo |
181,461 | * | ||||||
| Jonathan C. Roberts |
514,983 | (1)(2)(3)(4)(5) | * | |||||
| Richard J. Swift |
44,799 | (6) | * | |||||
| Tony L. White |
11,504 | (11) | * | |||||
|
All directors and executive officers as a group (22 persons) |
|
6,213,371 (7 |
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6) )(8)(9)(10)(11)(12) |
0.50 | % | |||
*Less than 1%.
| (1) | Includes the following shares of common stock not currently owned, but subject to options which were outstanding on March 7, 2013 and were exercisable within 60 days thereafter: Mr. Cosby, 74,140; Mr. Denton, 278,456; Mr. Lofberg, 790,888; Mr. Merlo, 822,551; Mr. Roberts, 372,155; and all executive officers as a group, 3,214,440. |
| (2) | Includes the following shares of common stock granted under the Company’s 1997 Incentive Compensation Plan and/or 2010 Incentive Compensation Plan (together, the “ICPs”) that remain subject to certain restrictions regarding employment and transfer as provided in the ICPs: Mr. Cosby, 58,564; Mr. Denton, 68,970; Mr. Merlo, 288,004; Mr. Roberts, 78,201; and all executive officers as a group, 734,915. |
| (3) | Includes the following shares of common stock that were receivable upon the lapse of restrictions on restricted stock units or the exercise of options, but the actual receipt of which was deferred pursuant to the Company’s Deferred Stock Compensation Plan, and which do not have current voting rights: Mr. Lofberg, 217,454; Mr. Merlo, 308,483; Mr. Roberts, 34,385; and all executive officers as a group, 591,843. |
| (4) | Includes shares of common stock held by the Trustee of the ESOP that are allocated to the executive officers as follows: Mr. Denton, 1,604; Mr. Merlo, 6,309; Mr. Roberts, 5,053; and all executive officers as a group, 17,381. |
| (5) | Includes the following hypothetical shares of common stock held in notional accounts in the Company’s unfunded Deferred Compensation Plan, which do not have current voting rights: Mr. Merlo, 5,189; Mr. Roberts, 1,433 and all executive officers as a group, 7,094. |
| (6) | Includes the following shares of common stock constituting deferred non-employee director compensation, which do not have current voting rights: Mr. Brown, 31,029; Mr. Dorman, 15,226; Ms. Heard, 85,489; Mr. Swift, 40,390; and all non-employee directors as a group, 172,134. |
| (7) | Includes 11,783 shares held in a family trust. |
| (8) | Includes 71,623 shares held in a family trust. |
| (9) | Includes 162,000 shares held in a family partnership and 14,400 held by trusts. Mr. Lofberg disclaims beneficial ownership of these securities. |
15
Table of Contents
| (10) | Includes 75,511 shares held in a family trust. |
| (11) | Includes 7 shares held by Mr. White’s wife. |
| (12) | As of the most recent practicable date of March 7, 2013 Mr. Weldon held no shares of Company stock; however, he subsequently purchased 1,000 shares of Company stock, and following his election to the Board in late March 2013 he will receive a grant of shares in payment of a pro rata portion of his annual retainer for the 2012-2013 Board year. |
Share Ownership of Principal Stockholders
We have been notified by the entity in the following table that it is the beneficial owner (as defined by the rules of the SEC) of more than five percent (5%) of our common stock. According to the most recent Schedule 13G filed by the beneficial owner with the SEC, these shares were acquired in the ordinary course of business, and were not acquired for the purpose of, and do not have the effect of, changing or influencing control over us.
| Title of Class |
Name and Address of Beneficial Owner |
No. of Shares Beneficially Owned (1) |
Percent of Class Owned (1) |
|||||||
| Common Stock |
BlackRock, Inc.(1) 40 East 52nd Street New York, NY 10022 |
76,766,294 | 6.2% | |||||||
| (1) | Information based on a Schedule 13G filed January 30, 2013. BlackRock, Inc. (“BlackRock”) is the parent holding company of a number of subsidiaries that hold CVS Caremark common stock for the benefit of various investors. BlackRock has sole voting power and sole dispositive power with respect to all of these shares. |
16
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION AND RELATED MATTERS
COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
At CVS Caremark, our executive compensation philosophy and practice reflects our strong commitment to paying for performance – both short- and long-term. Performance is defined as the achievement of results against our challenging internal financial targets, which take into account relative financial measures of our external peer group as well as industry and market conditions. We believe that our multi-faceted executive compensation plans, with their integrated focus on short- and long-term metrics, provide an effective framework by which progress against our strategic goals may be appropriately measured and rewarded.
2012 was a very strong performance year for the Company with record net revenues of $123.1 billion and healthy profitable growth in all of the businesses. The Company believes its efforts during the past three years set the stage for our 2012 results and continued strong performance in the future. CVS Caremark performed favorably against its peer group on several critical measures including revenue, operating income and EPS growth along with a total shareholder return of 20.3%. The positive results of 2012 are reflected in the 2012 Management Incentive Plan payouts to our named executive officers (“Named Executive Officers” or “NEOs”). However, the performance challenges in 2010 through 2011 are reflected in the three year long-term incentive plan performance results. Consistent with our pay-for-performance philosophy and the terms of our incentive plans, incentive compensation paid to our NEOs under the three-year Long-Term Incentive Plan (“LTIP”) reflects the below-target performance results.
Throughout this Compensation Discussion and Analysis, we refer to EPS, EBIT (or Operating Profit), free cash flow and RoNA (or return on net assets). When we use these terms, unless we specifically refer to them as “GAAP” (which stands for “U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles”), we are referring to non-GAAP financial measures. Exhibit C to this proxy statement contains an explanation of how we calculate these measures.
In 2012 CVS Caremark had its second-non-binding stockholder vote on our executive pay programs for our Named Executive Officers (“say-on-pay”). The vote was overwhelmingly positive, with 94.7% of the stockholders voting in support of our executive pay programs. Although the stockholder vote on our executive pay was very positive, the Management Planning and Development Committee of the Board (the “Committee”) continually assesses our programs and several significant changes were made in 2012 to our executive compensation programs and practices to increase alignment with stockholders. These changes discussed in greater detail in other sections of this report include the following:
| n | Amended the existing employment contract with Mr. Larry J. Merlo, President and Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”), to eliminate the excise tax gross-up in the event of a change in control, with no additional compensation provided to Mr. Merlo in connection with the amendment of his agreement. |
| n | Amended the existing change in control agreements with Mr. David M. Denton, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”), and Mr. Jonathan C. Roberts, Executive Vice President and President – CVS Caremark Pharmacy Services, to eliminate the excise tax gross-ups in the event of a change in control, with no additional compensation provided to either executive in connection with the amendment of his agreement. |
| n | Converted the provisions in the 2010 Incentive Compensation Plan (“2010 ICP”) that allowed for the immediate vesting of equity awards in connection with a change in control from a “single” to a “double trigger”. |
| n | Eliminated the share recycling provisions of the 2010 ICP. |
17
Table of Contents
| n | Added an additional measure – total shareholder return – to our LTIP to complement the return on net assets measure and to demonstrate our commitment to linking pay and performance. We continue to believe that return on net assets is an important and appropriate focus, as successful management of our working capital in the near to medium-term is expected to help drive sustained stockholder value. In addition, we believe including total shareholder return as a measure will result in executive awards that reflect the market’s view of our achievements and further align executive pay with satisfaction of stockholder objectives. |
Business Highlights and Performance Success
We continue to believe that the combination of our industry-leading assets in retail pharmacy, pharmacy benefits management and retail health clinics is an optimal, unmatched and winning strategy.
Each of our best-in-class business units achieved healthy top and bottom line growth and the Company is capitalizing on the power of the combined entity and integrated offerings to drive superior long-term growth, as demonstrated by the following accomplishments:
| n | Executed a disciplined capital allocation strategy and returned more than $5.1 billion to stockholders, reflecting our continued commitment to using our free cash flow to enhance total returns to stockholders through a combination of high-return investments, dividend increases and value-enhancing share repurchases, as evidenced by: |
| n | Announcing an increase of our quarterly dividend by 38% starting in the first quarter of 2013 – our tenth consecutive year of dividend increases; and |
| n | Completing approximately $4.3 billion of share repurchases. |
| n | Increased net revenues 15% to a record $123.1 billion, with our pharmacy services segment up 24.7% and our retail pharmacy segment up 6.8%. |
| n | Generated free cash flow of $5.2 billion, and net cash from operating activities of $6.7 billion. |
| n | Continued to increase our share of the retail pharmacy market, reaching a 21% share. |
| n | Delivered on working capital improvement targets. |
| n | Continued the successful execution of our ongoing PBM streamlining and platform consolidation efforts. |
| n | Increased our Medicare Part D business with the acquisition of HealthNet’s stand alone prescription drug plan. |
| n | As of December 31, 2012, our MinuteClinic retail health clinic operation was affiliated with 22 leading health systems and we operated 640 MinuteClinic locations in 25 states and the District of Columbia, of which 633 were located in CVS/pharmacy stores. |
We believe that these successes are the result of the key initiatives of the last several years and have built the foundation for significant growth in the future.
Performance Challenges and Incentive Compensation
Even with all of the successes described above including record revenue and EBIT growth, we did experience a long term performance challenge ending in 2012 that is reflected in the NEO incentive compensation payouts:
| n | The compound annual growth rate of earnings per share (“EPS CAGR”) was the metric for our LTIP for the three-year cycle ending on December 31, 2012. Our strong 2012 performance was not enough to offset the results in 2010 and 2011 and, as a result, the final EPS CAGR was below target, resulting in below target LTIP payouts to the participants. |
| n | As previously stated, 2012 performance resulted in record top and bottom line growth and is reflected in above target award payouts under the Management Incentive Plan for our NEOs. |
18
Table of Contents
Key Corporate Governance and Compensation Practices
While well-designed incentive plans based on meaningful performance metrics are central to an effective executive compensation program, we believe there are additional policies and practices which establish and reinforce the key philosophies and guiding principles critical to creating and sustaining a well-governed corporate environment. Over the last couple of years, the Committee has approved several significant changes to position and reinforce an effective executive compensation program in the current operating environment to align more effectively with stockholders, including:
| n | No Excise Tax Gross-Ups: The Company does not provide any additional cash compensation to any of our executive officers to reimburse them for any tax liability as a result of the receipt of any cash, equity compensation or other benefits, except for certain benefits pursuant to broad-based plans or policies applicable to a large number of employees, such as relocation policies. In 2012, the executives who had pre-existing “golden parachute” excise tax gross-up arrangements related to change in control payments or benefits voluntarily amended their existing contracts or agreements to eliminate these provisions, with no additional compensation provided as a result of the amendments. Therefore, no Company executives are eligible for excise tax gross-ups. |
| n | Double Trigger Vesting of Equity Awards: In 2012, the 2010 ICP was amended to eliminate single trigger vesting of future equity awards in the event of a change in control. Through this change, the Company now requires an involuntary termination following a change in control in order to accelerate the vesting of outstanding equity awards. |
| n | No Recycling of Shares: In addition, in 2012 the 2010 ICP was amended to eliminate the provisions that allowed for shares that were cancelled, expired, forfeited, settled in cash, surrendered for taxes or otherwise terminated without delivery to the award recipient to be available for new awards. Although the Company has not used recycled shares for new awards, this amendment to the 2010 ICP formalized this practice. |
| n | Share Award Retention: Each of our Business Planning Committee (“BPC”) members (which include our NEOs) participates in our long-term target incentive plans. The BPC members are prohibited from selling or trading the shares of stock delivered pursuant to the long-term target incentive plans for two years from the payment date, aligning the interests of our executives with the interests of our stockholders. |
| n | Stock Ownership Guidelines: Each BPC member is subject to stock ownership guidelines, requiring compliance within five years of becoming a member of the BPC. The CEO must own shares of CVS Caremark common stock with a value equal to five times annual salary and all other BPC members must own common stock with a value equal to three times annual salary. |
| n | Recoupment Policy: Incentive compensation should be consistent with the Company’s goal of ensuring financial statement accuracy and encouraging ethical behavior. To that end, CVS Caremark maintains a recoupment policy for all annual and long-term incentive awards granted to executive officers. More information about the Company’s recoupment policy can be found on page 38. |
| n | Anti-Hedging Policy: The Committee, the Board and executive management take very seriously their responsibilities and obligations to exhibit the highest standards of ethical behavior relative to selling and trading Company stock. All transactions in Company stock must be pre-cleared by the Company’s General Counsel (“GC”) or the Corporate Secretary. Further, CVS Caremark’s directors and executive officers may not: |
| n | Trade in Company securities on a short-term basis (Company stock purchased in the open market must be held for at least six months); |
| n | Purchase our stock on margin; |
| n | Engage in short sales of our stock; or |
19
Table of Contents
| n | Buy or sell puts, calls or options (other than compensatory stock options granted by the Company). |
| n | Closed Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan (“SERP”): The Company’s SERP does not admit new participants. Mr. Merlo, a long-tenured executive of the Company, is the only remaining employee participant in the SERP. |
| n | Senior Executive Severance Policy: CVS Caremark has a policy to not enter into future severance agreements with senior executives that provide for cash severance benefits greater than 2.99 years of base pay and target annual incentive. |
This section of the proxy statement explains how our executive compensation programs are designed and operate with respect to our NEOs, who for 2012 are:
| n | Larry J. Merlo, President and CEO; |
| n | David M. Denton, EVP and CFO; |
| n | Mark S. Cosby, EVP and President – CVS/pharmacy; |
| n | Per G.H. Lofberg, EVP and former President – CVS Caremark Pharmacy Services; and |
| n | Jonathan C. Roberts, EVP and President – CVS Caremark Pharmacy Services. |
A primary component of the Company’s human resources strategy – to ensure that we have high caliber leadership – is the identification, recruitment, development and placement of key management and business talent. The CVS Caremark Board of Directors and the executive management team believe that a crucial aspect of successfully executing this strategy is a comprehensive, integrated and well defined executive compensation program, which provides competitive and differentiated levels of pay based on corporate and individual performance and reinforces the alignment of executive interests with those of stockholders. Pay for performance is emphasized in our approach to executive compensation and is measured based on the results of our programs against our financial targets and relative to the external market.
As in previous years, the Committee requested and reviewed a historical assessment of the relationship between CVS Caremark’s performance and executive pay outcomes relative to our 2012 Peer Group (as defined below). The purpose of this assessment was to ensure pay was directionally aligned with performance and to validate the goal setting approach and overall assessment of our pay program effectiveness. The approach is one of several reviewed by the Committee to ensure alignment with stockholders. The following graphs illustrate the results of the Committee’s core assessment and illustrate the relationship between our CEO’s real compensation (defined as base salary earned; incentives earned; value of restricted shares or restricted stock units (“RSUs”) that vest during the period; value of stock options exercised during the period; and changes in value of unvested restricted shares/RSUs and unexercised options held during the period) and the Company’s performance as measured by total shareholder return (“TSR”) – over one-year (2011) and five-year (2007 – 2011) periods. The same analysis was completed for other financial metrics as well, such as EBIT. The analysis was conducted using the most current data available for the periods ending on December 31, 2011. Data points that are within the shaded area illustrate close alignment of pay and performance relative to our Peer Group. Data points below the shaded area illustrate pay that is below the amount estimated based on performance and those data points above the shaded area suggests the opposite.
20
Table of Contents
As shown in the graph above, CVS Caremark’s CEO realized compensation was just below the 60th percentile, while TSR ranked at the 79th percentile, indicating that CEO realized compensation was less than that suggested by peer group practices/results, however closely aligned with Company performance.
Similarly, the graph below illustrates the relationship between CEO pay rank and the relative return to stockholders for CVS Caremark and the Peer Group over a 5-year period from fiscal year 2007 to fiscal year 2011. Relative compensation earned and total shareholder returns are both similarly aligned.
The Committee has requested that this type of analysis be updated annually and include the relationship between other key financial metrics and pay to ensure alignment with our executive compensation philosophy and core principles.
21
Table of Contents
The Committee’s annual assessment of the existing executive compensation plans includes not only the pay-for-performance analysis described above, but also reviews:
| n | The annual incentive and long-term target performance incentive metrics and construct; |
| n | The composition of the Peer Group; and |
| n | Key compensation and governance policies and programs. |
As a result of the assessment, the Committee modified the performance measures under the LTIP for the 2012-2014 performance cycle to include TSR as an additional metric and implemented the policy changes related to excise tax gross-ups, share recycling, and double trigger vesting of equity awards as described in the Key Corporate Governance and Compensation Practices section above.
Executive Compensation Philosophy and Core Principles
The Committee is charged with establishing and implementing CVS Caremark’s executive compensation philosophy as well as its strategies and practices. The Committee has identified five core principles that drive our executive compensation philosophy and which we and the Committee believe motivate our executive officers to continually improve the financial and operating position of the Company, encourage personal responsibility for the performance of the business and drive decisions that deliver long-term stockholder value. Our comprehensive executive compensation program flows from the five core principles and the overall CVS Caremark executive compensation philosophy. Our five core principles are:
1. Support, communicate and drive achievement of CVS Caremark’s business strategies and goals.
2. Attract and retain the highest caliber executive officers by providing compensation opportunities comparable to those offered by other companies with which CVS Caremark competes for business and talent.
3. Motivate high performance among executive officers in an incentive-driven culture by delivering greater rewards for superior performance and reduced awards for underperformance.
4. Closely align the interests of executive officers with stockholders’ interests and foster an equity ownership environment.
5. Reward achievement of short-term results as well as long-term stockholder value creation.
The Committee believes each of the components of our executive compensation program, which will be discussed later in this section, must contribute to the furtherance of one or more of our five core principles, as outlined in the following chart:
| Compensation Element | Objective | Key Features | ||
| Base Salary | Attract and retain high-caliber talent and provide a minimum, fixed level of cash compensation. |
Reviewed annually and adjusted periodically based on comparability to external market peers, position responsibility, individual qualifications, performance and corporate profitability. | ||
| Annual Cash Incentive | Motivate high performance and reward short-term Company and individual performance. | Annual cash incentive targets are set as a percentage of base salary. Payments are based on a formula that includes performance against operating profit target. Minimum performance threshold (below which no payment will be made) and capped maximum payouts. |
22
Table of Contents
| Compensation Element | Objective | Key Features | ||
| Long-Term Incentives | Reward multi-year financial success, which supports the Company’s long-term strategic objectives. Encourage stock ownership and reinforce an alignment of executives’ interests with those of stockholders. | Target awards are established at the start of the cycle based on competitive pay information, level of responsibility in the organization, and desired mix of long term incentive pay relative to other pay components.
Generally paid equally in cash and Company common stock based on meeting pre-established performance goals during specified performance cycles.
Minimum performance threshold (below which no payment will be made) and capped maximum payouts.
The executive is prohibited from selling or trading shares for two years following the payment date. | ||
| Stock Options and RSUs | Align executive and stockholder interests through equity ownership and reward creation of long-term value by encouraging executives to focus on long-term financial progress with the dual objective of enhancing stockholder value and promoting executive retention. | Annual nonqualified stock option grants with seven-year terms that vest in four equal installments on each of the first, second, third and fourth anniversaries of the grant date and return actual value only to the extent that the Company’s stock price appreciates.
Annual RSU awards vest only upon continued employment with the Company. Annual RSU awards for NEOs vest in two equal installments: the first fifty percent of the grant vests on the third anniversary of the grant date; the second fifty percent of the grant vests on the fifth anniversary of the grant date.
Target awards are established based on competitive pay information, level of responsibility in the organization and the emphasis on long term incentive pay as the key component of the executive pay program. | ||
| Supplemental Retirement Plan I For Select Senior Management (“SERP”) | Supplement the retirement benefits of a long-standing officer of the Company. | Unfunded SERP, no longer open to new participants. Mr. Merlo is the only remaining employee participant in the SERP. | ||
| Deferred Compensation Plan (“DCP”) and Deferred Stock Compensation Plan (“DSP”) | Provide savings in a tax-efficient manner and enhance focus on stock ownership. | The DCP offers a variety of investment choices, none of which represents an above-market return, with up to a 5% match on eligible compensation deferred into the DCP, offset by any match provided under the qualified defined contribution plan. The DSP units fluctuate in value based on the performance of the Company’s common stock. |
23
Table of Contents
In consultation with the Company’s executive compensation consultant, the Committee initiates an annual review of the peer group against which financial performance and competitive positioning of compensation programs are assessed. The principal criteria used to determine membership in the peer group include revenue size and industry segment, with consideration also given to geographic scope, diversification of operations and comparability of compensation practices. Our peer group is comprised of large, first-tier companies with national footprints in pharmacy, pharmacy benefit management, insurance, health care, food, general and specialty retailer segments.
2012 Peer Group. At the end of 2011, the Committee reviewed the peer group for purposes of making award recommendations and setting 2012 target compensation levels. Retail companies with revenues generally of $50 to $100 billion and health care companies with revenues of $35 to $125 billion for the most recently completed fiscal year were considered peer companies. CVS Caremark falls in the top quartile when this peer group is ranked by revenue.
The resulting 2012 peer group (the “Peer Group”) consisted of 13 companies:
| Retail Peers | 2012 Revenues ($B) | |||
| Costco Wholesale Corporation | $99.1 | |||
| The Kroger Co. | 96.8 | |||
| The Home Depot, Inc. | 74.8 | |||
| Target Corporation | 73.3 | |||
| Walgreen Co. | 71.6 | |||
| Lowe’s Companies, Inc. | 50.5 | |||
| Health Care Peers | 2012 Revenues ($B) | |||
| McKesson Corporation | $122.7 | |||
| UnitedHealth Group Incorporated | 110.6 | |||
| Cardinal Health, Inc. | 107.6 | |||
| Express Scripts Holding Company | 93.9 | |||
| AmerisourceBergen Corporation | 79.5 | |||
| Wellpoint, Inc. | 61.7 | |||
| Aetna Inc. | 35.5 | |||
| CVS Caremark Corporation | $123.1 | |||
The Committee obtained further insight into market practices by reviewing data relating to 15 large U.S.-based general industry corporations, excluding companies in the financial services, oil and automobile industries, founder companies and companies with unusual ownership structures. Compensation paid to executive officers of the general industry companies is used as a general reference point by the Committee when considering compensation decisions for the Company’s executive officers, but is excluded from the quantitative analyses of compensation levels. This additional reference group includes Archer Daniels Midland, AT&T, Boeing, Caterpillar, Dow Chemical, General Electric, Hewlett-Packard, IBM, Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, Procter & Gamble, Safeway, Time Warner, United Technologies and Verizon.
2013 Peer Group. At the end of 2012, the Committee approved a new peer group used to make award recommendations and set target compensation levels for 2013. The new peer group was constructed to recognize that CVS Caremark competes for talent outside of its specific industry segments, and accounts for CVS Caremark’s size, industry affiliation, and operating and character image. The new peer group incorporates most of the current peer companies, as well as many of the companies currently used as an additional reference from the general industry, and consists of the following companies: AT&T Inc., The Boeing Company, Comcast Corporation, Costco Wholesale Corporation, Express Scripts Holding Company,
24
Table of Contents
The Home Depot, Inc., Johnson & Johnson, Lowe’s Companies, Inc., McKesson Corporation, Merck & Co., Inc., PepsiCo, Inc., Pfizer Inc., The Procter & Gamble Company, Target Corporation, UnitedHealth Group Incorporated, Verizon Communications Inc., Walgreen Co., Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., and The Walt Disney Company.
Annual Executive Compensation Process
General Process. The review of the current year performance and planning for performance targets for the following year generally begins in the fourth quarter of each year. Preliminary financial performance, key financial metrics as compared to the Peer Group, and total compensation market data for the executives is reviewed in November, together with any stockholder comments received. This early review allows the Committee to be prepared in advance once the final performance year results are determined and provides the initial context for decision making. Updated preliminary financial results and associated incentive award payouts for the completed fiscal year are reviewed by the Committee in January and final decisions on actual incentive awards for the prior year performance are made in February. Finally, financial targets for the current year incentive plans are established by the Committee in March, along with any base salary changes and individual target incentive award levels. The annual cycle of reviewing and developing the Company’s executive compensation programs and pay levels is a multi-step process that incorporates peer group information, Say-on-Pay results, and both short and long-term Company objectives.
Following each fiscal year, CVS Caremark’s finance department provides the Committee an overview of the Company’s performance and the CEO and CFO provide context and background about management’s progress and achievements of business objectives and key strategic initiatives. The financial and business overview also includes an annual and multi-year comparison of CVS Caremark’s performance compared to that of the Peer Group. Key financial metrics, including total shareholder return, growth in revenue, GAAP operating profit growth, diluted GAAP EPS growth, as well as return on net assets, are discussed with a focus on the Company’s ranking within the Peer Group. The Committee uses these discussions as a means to guide their decisions relative to the executive officers’ awards in the annual and various long-term incentive plans.
The CEO presents to the independent directors of the Board a self-assessment of his performance against his strategic, operational and financial goals of the Company which were approved by the Board at the beginning of the performance year. The Chairman of the Board and the Committee Chair facilitate a private meeting with all of the independent directors to discuss and assess the performance of the CEO. The Committee’s members consider the independent directors’ assessments in reviewing the CEO’s total compensation and determine his annual incentive compensation award and equity compensation grants. The CEO also discusses with the Committee each executive officer’s performance and contribution, with specific attention to progress toward specific strategic, operational and financial goals assigned at the beginning of the year, as well as a review of each officer’s strengths and areas of opportunity, potential future assignments, development strategies and role in the Company’s management succession plan. The Committee and the Board also may meet with each executive officer during the year to assess performance.
Application of the Process in 2012. The process above was followed in 2012. At its January 2012 meeting, the Committee reviewed competitive market information supplied by the compensation consultant, considered the Peer Group performance results to date, and reviewed preliminary CVS Caremark performance against the incentive targets.
In February 2012, CVS Caremark released its prior year earnings and financial statements; at that time, the Committee assessed the Company’s performance against short- and long-term goals. The CEO presented to the Committee his recommendations for annual cash incentive, stock option and RSU awards for the other executive officers, outlining his assessment of each officer’s performance, contribution and anticipated future role within the Company. The Committee members consulted with other independent directors to determine the appropriate annual cash incentive and equity awards for the CEO within the competitive range established earlier. The Committee took the following actions at the February meeting:
| n | Approved the 2011 performance year annual incentive awards based on all of the relevant performance factors and determined if negative discretion should be applied – all amounts were disclosed in the Summary Compensation Table of the prior year disclosure. |
25
Table of Contents
| n | Approved the value of annual equity awards for each of the executive officers, including the CEO. Awards for each of the executive officers were at or above target levels, reflecting achievement of the Company’s short-term strategic and operational goals and significant progress toward long-term objectives through 2011. |
| n | Set the grant date for annual stock option and RSU awards as the first business day of the Company’s second quarter, which was April 2, 2012. |
| n | Approved the proportion of option value to RSU value for each equity award. All of the NEOs proportion of option value and RSU value was split equally, except for Mr. Lofberg, who received 100% stock options. |
The grant date full fair value of the stock options and RSUs granted to each named executive officer during fiscal 2012 is shown in the Summary Compensation Table on page 41. Additional information about the 2012 awards, including stock option exercise price and the number of shares subject to each award, is shown in the Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table on page 43.
During its March 2012 meeting, the Committee considered total compensation survey data, including information on base salaries, annual bonus award targets and actual awards, long-term incentive pay, including stock option grants, RSU awards and other performance-based compensation, for the named executive officers at companies within the Peer Group and general industry reference companies. This information is compiled by the compensation consultant and discussed with the Committee. The Committee considered this information when making current year base salary decisions and establishing relevant compensation targets. At the March meeting, the Committee approved the following:
| n | Salary increases for certain of the executive officers, including the CEO. Detailed information regarding the increases is found in the Base Salary section of this report. |
| n | Target long term incentive awards for the three-year LTIP and the annual equity awards for the executive officers and the CEO. |
Total Direct Compensation
The Company’s management recommends and the Committee and Board approve financial performance targets that are challenging and, if achieved, can deliver superior value to stockholders. Consistent with the setting of ambitious performance targets, CVS Caremark positions its target total direct compensation (base salary plus annual and long-term incentives) for its executive officers at the median for companies of comparable size, and in some cases at the 75th percentile depending on individual performance, tenure, and level of responsibilities. Because of the ambitious goals set, the Committee believes it is appropriate to reward the executive management team with compensation above the competitive median if the financial targets associated with the variable pay programs are delivered or exceeded. Conversely, if the financial targets are not met, awards are reduced.
Cash versus Non-Cash Compensation
The Committee recognizes the competitive need for an appropriate amount of cash compensation, comprised of base salary, annual incentive and the cash portion of a long-term target incentive award. As part of its annual review of the competitiveness and efficacy of the CVS Caremark compensation program, the Committee monitors the relative levels of cash and non-cash compensation to ensure the mix includes an appropriate percentage of non-cash components.
Fixed versus Variable Compensation
The annual incentive program, long-term target incentive plans and service-based equity award program tie a significant amount of variable compensation to an executive’s continued employment (subject to the vesting and forfeiture provisions of the stockholder-approved incentive plan and their equity grant
26
Table of Contents
agreements) and the performance of CVS Caremark common stock over the vesting and option exercise periods. The performance metrics for the annual incentive and long-term target incentive plans and the range of opportunity relative to target are consistent for all the NEOs, including the CEO. However, in determining individual awards the Committee considers the appropriate individual target incentive opportunity.
For fiscal year 2012, the percentage of target total direct compensation represented by at-risk pay (short- and long-term incentives) for CVS Caremark’s NEOs was as follows:
Components of Executive Compensation Program
The Committee believes a well-balanced executive compensation program must motivate and reward participants for delivering annual financial results. It must also focus the executives’ attention on long-term goals that track financial progress and value creation. These long-term goals include profitability and total stockholder value, typically measured by returns on the Company’s common stock. The Committee recognizes that while stock prices are generally a good indicator of corporate performance over time, external factors that are beyond CVS Caremark’s influence may also have an impact on its stock price. Consequently, the Committee believes that in addition to stock price, other performance indicators including profitability and sound financial management of our working capital should also be measured and factored into payments under our executive compensation program. The Committee has designed its executive compensation program in a manner intended to achieve these objectives.
CVS Caremark’s executive compensation program currently consists of the following: base salary; an annual cash incentive; a three-pillar long-term incentive program; SERP (for only one executive participant); and other benefits, including very limited perquisites.
The three-pillar long-term incentive program – consisting of long-term target performance incentives, stock options and time-vested RSUs generally settled in cash and stock – represents the majority of the compensation opportunity and actual rewards for the executive management team. The Committee believes that this approach, complemented by the annual incentive plan, provides an optimal pay mix to achieve the financial objectives of stockholders while extending to executive management competitive cash compensation and a wealth creation opportunity derived from value created through stock price growth.
Base Salary
A competitive base salary is designed to attract and retain high-caliber talent and provide a minimum, fixed level of cash compensation. The Committee annually reviews the base salaries of the NEOs and
27
Table of Contents
considers adjustments based on position responsibility, individual qualifications and performance, and Company performance. This review includes a comparison of current salaries of those reported for comparable positions in CVS Caremark’s Peer Group.
The Committee also assesses internal salary levels within CVS Caremark, both with respect to the other executive officers and to other senior employees generally. Base salaries may be adjusted upward at the Committee’s discretion, which it generally chooses to exercise when competitive data indicate a significant market lag or in recognition of outstanding individual performance or an increase in the executive’s functional responsibilities, as was the case for Mr. Roberts, who assumed the role of EVP and President – CVS Caremark Pharmacy Services in 2012. Changes to the base salaries of the NEOs made in 2012 are shown below. The increases to base salary in 2012 for Messrs. Merlo and Denton reflect each executive’s outstanding contribution to the Company and the critical roles that they continue to play in our future growth and success.
| Executive | 2011 Salary | 2012 Salary | Percentage Increase |
|||||||||
| Larry J. Merlo, President and CEO |
$ | 1,250,000 | $ | 1,300,000 | 4 | % | ||||||
| David M. Denton, EVP and CFO |
$ | 625,000 | $ | 700,000 | 12 | % | ||||||
| Mark S. Cosby, EVP and President – CVS/pharmacy |
$ | 900,000 | $ | 900,000 | — | |||||||
| Per G.H. Lofberg, EVP and former President – CVS Caremark Pharmacy Services (1) |
$ | 900,000 | $ | 900,000 | — | |||||||
|
Jonathan C. Roberts, EVP and President – CVS Caremark Pharmacy Services (1) |
$ | 700,000 | $ | 900,000 | 29 | % | ||||||
| (1) | Mr. Roberts became EVP and President of CVS Caremark Pharmacy Services on September 1, 2012. He was formerly EVP and Chief Operating Officer of CVS Caremark Pharmacy Services. Mr. Lofberg remains an Executive Vice President of the Company. |
Annual Incentive Awards
CVS Caremark maintains an annual Management Incentive Plan (the “MIP”) for its executive officers under the provisions of the stockholder-approved 2010 ICP. The MIP rewards the NEOs based on performance relative to predetermined financial and operational targets established for the year. The Company’s MIP reflects the Company’s pay-for-performance philosophy in which a significant portion of executive compensation is linked to Company performance and is therefore at-risk.
NEO awards are based on CVS Caremark’s actual performance against operating profit, customer service and customer satisfaction targets established at the beginning of the year. The establishment of the targets, measurement of performance against the targets and subsequent determination of awards to participants are generally implemented in a manner consistent with the requirements of Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “IRC”), which limits the deductibility of compensation that is not performance based.
In determining the 2012 targets, the Committee reviewed CVS Caremark’s performance against the prior year annual operating profit and customer service and satisfaction targets, the Company’s strategic and operational goals for 2012, current and projected external business conditions and the progress represented by the 2012 annual goals against CVS Caremark’s long-term financial objectives. For fiscal 2012, the financial performance target for annual incentives was $6,856 million in Operating Profit. The Committee believes that Operating Profit is an appropriate performance metric for the annual incentive plan, as it measures management’s success in delivering short-term stockholder value while maintaining momentum toward the achievement of longer-term financial progress. Corporate performance against this metric carries an 80% weight in the determination of final award funding. Customer service and satisfaction account for the remaining 20% of award funding; 10% is based on the Retail Customer Service score, which measures customer service in the retail segment and 10% is based on an aggregation of customer satisfaction metrics
28
Table of Contents
from the PBM segment, covering mail order, specialty pharmacy and account/client services. Typically, the financial impact of certain legal settlements and other one-time events, such as an acquisition, would be excluded from the calculation of actual performance at year-end. However, no such adjustments were made for 2012.
The Committee establishes a target annual incentive opportunity for each executive officer. This opportunity is expressed as a percentage of base salary and is determined using a variety of relevant factors including but not limited to the competitive landscape reflected by CVS Caremark’s Peer Group, the Committee’s assessment of the aggressiveness of the 2012 operating profit target and the desired ratios of cash to non-cash and fixed to variable compensation for each executive officer. While the Committee considered the appropriate target incentive opportunity separately for each officer, the performance targets, plan design and range of opportunity relative to target are consistent for all NEOs.
For all executive officers, the target annual incentive percentage represents the percentage of base salary that may be earned if CVS Caremark’s actual performance equals the operating profit and customer service and satisfaction targets established at the beginning of the year. Actual performance relative to the financial and operational targets determines the percentage of the target incentive. Once the Committee establishes the award potentially payable based on actual performance at year-end, it may then apply only negative discretion to the NEOs to adjust that potential award downward. Its consideration includes its assessment of the executive officer’s actual performance and contribution to the achievement of strategic, operational and financial goals, competitive considerations and any other factor it deems appropriate.
Annual Incentive Plan Funding
| Operating Profit (80% weighting) |
Customer Service
and Client (20% weighting) |
|||||||||||||||
| Level of Performance Achieved |
Level of Payout of Target |
Retail Customer Service (10%) |
Client Satisfaction – PBM (10%) |
|||||||||||||
| Below Minimum |
<96.9% of Target | 0 | % | 0 | % | 0 | % | |||||||||
| Threshold |
96.9% of Target | 30 | % | 25 | % | 25 | % | |||||||||
| Target |
$6,856.0 million | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | |||||||||
| Maximum |
³3% over Target | 200 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | |||||||||
| Actual |
$7,228.0 million | 200 | % | 98 | % | 94 | % | |||||||||
The annual incentive opportunity established for fiscal 2012 for performance at target and the actual award levels are expressed as a percentage of base salary for each NEO and set forth in the following table:
Annual Incentive Plan Opportunities and Awards
| Annual Incentive Opportunity as a Percentage of Base Salary |
Actual Annual Incentive Payout for 2012 |
|||||||||||||
| Executive Name | At Threshold Performance Levels |
At Target Performance Levels |
At Maximum Performance Levels |
Payout as a Percentage of Salary |
Payout Amount in Dollars |
|||||||||
| Larry J. Merlo |
60% | 200% | 400% | 384% | $ | 4,992,000 | ||||||||
| David M. Denton |
38% | 125% | 250% | 240% | $ | 1,680,000 | ||||||||
| Mark S. Cosby |
45% | 150% | 300% | 288% | $ | 2,592,000 | ||||||||
| Per G.H. Lofberg |
45% | 150% | 300% | 259% | $ | 2,332,800 | ||||||||
| Jonathan C. Roberts |
45% | 150% | 300% | 259% | $ | 2,332,800 | ||||||||
29
Table of Contents
In keeping with prior year practices when assessing performance in 2012, to determine if negative discretion should be applied, the Committee reviewed and took into account specific events such as progress in the entry into new markets, closings of strategic acquisitions to complement CVS Caremark’s existing businesses, new MinuteClinic openings, as well as retail operating margins, inventory management and streamlining efforts in the PBM, the strengthening of the Company’s cash flow position, positioning for future growth and each executive officers individual contributions during the year.
The Operating Profit, Customer Service and Client Satisfaction performance resulted in a funding level of 192% of target. The maximum annual incentive award that each named executive officer is eligible to receive is not an expectation of the actual incentive amount that will be awarded to an executive, but is instead the highest amount that the Committee may award as performance-based compensation while preserving deductibility under IRC Section 162(m). In no event will the actual award exceed the designated salary percentage determined by the actual level of performance.
After reviewing all of the relevant factors, the Committee applied negative discretion to the calculated awards for two of the NEOs. The remaining NEOs received 2012 MIP payouts at 192% of their annual incentive target.
| n | Mr. Merlo’s award reflects the significant level of achievement of the performance metrics described above and his overall contribution to the enterprise performance as President and CEO. |
| n | Mr. Denton continues to strengthen CVS Caremark’s balance sheet. Under Mr. Denton’s direction, the Company generated substantial free cash flow, continues to improve its working capital position and expects the trend to continue. His 2012 annual cash incentive award reflects these successes and level of achievement of the performance metrics described above as well as his contributions towards the strategic initiatives of the Company. |
| n | Mr. Cosby’s annual cash incentive award reflects the revenue and profitability growth of the Retail segment of the business as well as his contributions to the enterprise strategic initiatives. |
| n | Mr. Lofberg’s annual incentive award reflects the level of achievement for the performance metrics described above and the strategic, operational and improved financial results of the Pharmacy Services business line in 2012 under his leadership. Mr. Lofberg also made significant progress toward the goals of the PBM streamlining initiative that began in 2010 and is expected to generate more than one billion dollars in savings over the next four years. However, his incentive was reduced as a result of regulatory issues in the Pharmacy Services segment. |
| n | Mr. Roberts’ annual cash incentive award acknowledges the significant level of achievement and improvement of the results in the Pharmacy Services business line as both the Chief Operating Officer and as the President of the unit. His incentive was reduced in recognition of regulatory issues in the Pharmacy Services segment. |
30
Table of Contents
Long-Term Incentive Compensation
General Components of Long-Term Compensation. The Committee believes strongly in the use of long-term incentive compensation for executives to reinforce four strategic objectives:
| n | Focus on the importance of returns to stockholders; |
| n | Promote the achievement of long-term performance goals; |
| n | Encourage executive retention; and |
| n | Promote meaningful levels of Company stock ownership by executives. |
The Committee has developed a multi-faceted integrated long-term incentive approach to achieve these strategic objectives. The key elements of this approach are an annual stock option and RSU grant, which only vest upon continued employment with the Company, and long-term target performance incentive awards generally paid equally in cash and Company common stock, which reward financial success over periods greater than one year (the “LTI plans”). The Committee believes that this structure properly balances the incentive required to drive achievement of the four strategic objectives noted above with the amount and timing of the rewards dependent on the successful achievement of Company objectives. The structure also reinforces the alignment between executive and stockholder interests. All three of these long-term compensation elements are delivered under the provisions of our 2010 ICP. To determine the overall opportunity and appropriate mix of vehicles, the Committee considers a variety of factors, including competitive market positioning against comparable executives in the Peer Group, potential economic value realized, timing of vesting and taxation. Along with a review of Peer Group long-term incentive award practices, the Committee considers the retentive value of the unvested equity awards held by each executive officer to determine whether additional awards to secure continued employment with the Company were warranted. The Committee also considers, except in the case of the award to the CEO, the recommendations of the CEO for each of the executive officers. Any permitted financial adjustments to actual results for purposes of calculating long-term incentive plan results generally mirror those established for the annual incentive plan, but will also include any specific adjustments pertinent to the applicable performance metric and period, as necessary. Should an event that qualifies as a permitted financial adjustment occur, the results are adjusted, either up or down, to reflect the impact of that event and documented accordingly at the conclusion of the performance cycle.
The long-term awards encourage executives to focus on long term financial progress with the ultimate objective of enhancing stockholder value, while simultaneously promoting retention by requiring an executive to forfeit his entire award if employment terminates under certain circumstances before the end of the period.
31
Table of Contents
2012 Long-Term Incentive Awards
In March 2012, the Committee reviewed all aspects of our LTI plans, RSU and option grant programs, including the competitiveness of the executive’s target award opportunities, the impact on shares outstanding and the timing and potential economic impact offered by the future vesting of RSU grants and the vesting and exercise of stock option grants. As part of this review, the Committee considered all elements and performance metrics of the existing short—and long-term incentive plans. Based on this review, the Committee adopted the following mixes for the long-term incentives granted to the NEOs in 2012:
As in the past, each of our performance and equity based long-term incentives will continue to be earned independently, meaning that successful achievement of any of the financial goals established for any of the LTI plans will not trigger or accelerate vesting of the RSU or stock option grants; similarly, any awards payable under the LTI plans will be based solely on results as measured against the relevant performance metric and will not be affected by any value realized by the RSU or stock option grants.
2012 Option and RSU Grants. Since 2004, the contractual term of all CVS Caremark options has been fixed at seven years. Starting in 2011, options granted to executives typically vest in four equal installments on each of the first, second, third and fourth anniversaries of the grant date. The annual RSU grants made to the NEOs vest in two equal installments: the first fifty percent (50%) vests on the third anniversary of the grant date; the second fifty percent (50%) of the award vests on the fifth anniversary of the grant date.
The Committee has consistently approved annual equity grants, including stock options and RSUs, in the first quarter of each year and has made such awards without regard to the timing of the release of the Company’s financial results for the year or the timing of the release of any other material non-public information. For fiscal 2012, the grant date was set as the first business day of the Company’s second quarter, which was April 2, 2012.
The full grant date fair value of the stock options and RSUs granted to each NEO during fiscal 2012 is shown in the Summary Compensation Table on page 41. Additional information about the 2012 awards, including stock option exercise price and the number of shares subject to each award, is shown in the Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table on page 43.
32
Table of Contents
2012-2014 LTI Plan Awards to NEOs other than Mr. Lofberg. For the NEOs other than Mr. Lofberg, the LTI plan for the three-year performance period from 2012-2014 is based on performance against our three-year return on net assets goal modified by our total shareholder return. Actual return on net assets performance vs. the goal will determine the initial award and relative total shareholder return vs. the S&P 500 over the three-year period will modify the award. If total shareholder return is in the top third for the performance period, the calculated awards will be adjusted upwards by 25%; if in the middle third, no change to the calculated awards; and if in the bottom third, the calculated awards will be adjusted downwards by 25%. The plan focuses on sustainable financial progress and optimal use of the Company’s assets which we expect will contribute to our strategic initiatives to improve CVS Caremark’s working capital and free cash flow, modified by the market’s view of the company’s achievements through total shareholder return.
Generally, fifty percent (50%) of the awards earned under the LTI plans will continue to be paid in cash due to, among other reasons, the executives’ need for current cash to meet tax obligations occasioned on the settlement of the vesting of RSU awards. However, the target cash portion of the long-term incentive compensation component generally will not exceed 25% of the total target long-term compensation. The executive is prohibited from selling or trading awarded shares for two years following the payment date, which encourages stock ownership and further reinforces an alignment of executive’s interests with that of stockholders.
Mr. Lofberg participated in the PBM LTI plan for the period of January 1, 2011 through December 31, 2012. The performance measure and associated payout will be discussed in the following section.
2010-2012 LTI Plan Awards
Of the executive officers specified in the Summary Compensation Table, only Messrs. Merlo, Denton and Roberts received performance awards in 2012 for the 2010-2012 LTI plan performance. The target performance goal was an EPS CAGR of 8.7%. The following table sets forth minimum, threshold and maximum goals, and the range of potential payouts as a percent of target:
|
% of EPS CAGR Target |
Payout Level as a % of Target | |||
| Minimum |
< 81.5% | 0% | ||
| Threshold |
81.5% | 25% | ||
| Target |
100% | 100% | ||
|
Maximum |
124.1% | 200% |
33
Table of Contents
Potential payouts at minimum, threshold, target and maximum award levels are shown in the chart below. After the application of permitted financial adjustments to the calculation of performance results (the exclusion of Universal American’s results, the impacts of the HealthNet acquisition and the debt restructuring), the actual result for the performance period was 96.0% of target resulting in awards of 83.7% of the target amounts.
2010 – 2012 LTIP Opportunities and Awards
| Executive Name |
Minimum Award (% of target) |
Threshold (% of |
Target (% of |
Maximum (% of |
Actual Cash Award ($) |
Actual Award (# of Shares) |
||||||||||||||||||
| Larry J. Merlo |
0 | % | 25 | % | 100 | % | 200 | % | $ | 1,381,092 | 26,225 | |||||||||||||
| David M. Denton |
0 | % | 25 | % | 100 | % | 200 | % | $ | 418,511 | 7,947 | |||||||||||||
| Jonathan C. Roberts |
0 | % | 25 | % | 100 | % | 200 | % | $ | 502,234 | 9,536 | |||||||||||||
2011-2012 PBM LTIP Earned by Mr. Lofberg
The PBM LTIP granted to Mr. Lofberg in 2011 for the performance period from January 1, 2011 through December 31, 2012 required the achievement of a compound annual growth rate for earnings before interest and taxes (“EBIT CAGR”) for the PBM business segment against a pre-established target. The award opportunity, payable equally in cash and shares of CVS Caremark common stock, was $1.5 million. The shares are subject to restrictions against sale or transfer once earned, until the end of Mr. Lofberg’s employment term. The award was subject to adjustment based upon the actual performance, as shown in the chart below:
| % of EBIT CAGR Target |
Payout as a % of Target |
|||||||
| Minimum |
<81.5 | % | 0 | % | ||||
| Threshold |
81.5 | % | 25 | % | ||||
| Target |
100 | % | 100 | % | ||||
|
Maximum |
124.1 | % | 200 | % | ||||
The EBIT CAGR target for the 2011 – 2012 performance cycle was 0.73% and the final result was 2.36%. The performance resulted in a payout of 200% to Mr. Lofberg.
| Executive Name |
Minimum Award (% of target) |
Threshold (% of |
Target (% of |
Maximum (% of |
Actual Cash Award ($) |
Actual Stock Award (# of Shares) |
||||||||||||||||||
|
Per G.H. Lofberg |
0 | % | 25 | % | 100 | % | 200 | % | $ | 1,500,033 | 28,484 | |||||||||||||
Partnership Equity Program (“PEP”). In addition to the core long-term incentive compensation plans described above, since 1997 the Company has maintained the Partnership Equity Program (“PEP”). PEP is designed to ensure that those executives with significant impact on the future success of CVS Caremark have a substantial “at-risk” personal equity investment in CVS Caremark common stock and is generally provided to selected newly-hired or newly-promoted senior executives in critical positions that can drive the strategic objectives of the Company. The Committee believes that PEP strongly links the economic interests of senior executives with CVS Caremark stockholders, provides future long-term compensation
34
Table of Contents
opportunities that are competitive in the external marketplace and that reflect internal responsibility levels, and assures key management stability, retention, motivation and long-term focus on corporate strategy. To invest in PEP, an executive chooses to purchase a number of “Employee-Purchased RSUs,” which are matched by CVS Caremark on a one-for-one basis (“Company-Matching RSUs”) and vest on the fifth anniversary of the purchase date. In addition, the executive receives an option to purchase shares of CVS Caremark common stock equal to ten times the number of Company-Matching RSUs. The stock option grant vests ratably on each of the third, fourth and fifth anniversaries of the grant date. The vesting for each of the stock option grant and the Company-Matching RSU award is contingent upon the executive retaining the Employee-Purchased RSUs until all of the stock options and Company-Matching RSUs are vested and upon the continued employment of the executive through the vesting period.
Mr. Merlo was appointed President and CEO on March 1, 2011. Under Mr. Merlo’s leadership, the Company has achieved significant growth in 2012 and is well positioned for continued success in 2013 and beyond. CVS Caremark performed favorably against the Peer Group on several performance measures including revenue growth, operating income growth, diluted EPS growth and total shareholder return. During 2012, CVS Caremark’s revenues grew 15.0% and operating profit grew 14.2% vs. 2011.
Mr. Merlo’s 2012 compensation reflects his overall performance, taking into account our current strategic positioning for long-term growth as well as the intention to pay him at a level reflective of the peer group size-adjusted median. Based on these results, Mr. Merlo earned the following amounts with respect to 2012 compensation.
CEO Pay – Mr. Merlo
| Type | Target | Actual | ||||||
| Base Salary |
$ | 1,300,000 | $ | 1,287,500 | ||||
| Annual Cash Incentive |
$ | 2,600,000 | $ | 4,992,000 | ||||
| LTIP Cycle IX (2010 – 2012) |
$ | 3,300,000 | $ | 2,762,100 | ||||
| Stock Option Grant |
$ | 2,750,000 | $ | 3,750,001 | ||||
| RSU Grant |
$ | 2,750,000 | $ | 3,750,004 | ||||
| Total Direct Compensation |
$ | 12,700,000 | $ | 16,541,605 | ||||
Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan
CVS Caremark maintains the unfunded Supplemental Retirement Plan I for Select Senior Management of the Company (“SERP”), which is currently closed to new participants, designed to supplement the retirement benefits of selected executive officers. Mr. Merlo is the only participant in the SERP. The Committee adopted a policy restricting participation in the SERP under the current benefit formulae to those executives participating in the SERP at the time the policy was adopted. The SERP does not allow new members and Messrs. Denton, Cosby, Lofberg and Roberts do not participate. An overview of the SERP design and the actuarial present value of the accumulated pension benefits of Mr. Merlo as of December 31, 2012 are shown in the Pension Benefits Table on page 48.
The Company maintains medical and dental insurance, life insurance and short- and long-term disability insurance programs for all of its employees, as well as customary vacation, leave of absence and other similar policies. Executive officers are eligible to participate in these programs on the same basis and with the same level of financial subsidy by CVS Caremark as the rest of the Company’s salaried employees.
35
Table of Contents
Executive officers may participate in the CVS Future Fund, which is the Company’s qualified defined contribution, or 401(k), plan. An eligible CVS Caremark employee may defer up to 85% of his or her total eligible compensation, defined as salary plus annual incentive, to a maximum defined by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”); in 2012, that maximum was $17,000 plus an additional $5,500 for those age 50 and above. After the first full year of employment, CVS Caremark will match the employee’s deferral dollar-for-dollar up to a maximum equaling 5% of total eligible compensation. CVS Caremark’s matching cash contributions into the CVS Caremark Future Fund for the NEOs who participated are a component of the All Other Compensation Table on page 42.
The Company offers other benefits which are available to eligible employees, including executive officers, as follows:
Deferred Compensation Plans and Deferred Stock Plan
Eligible executive officers may choose to defer compensation once earned and vested into the CVS Caremark Deferred Compensation Plan (the “DCP”) and the CVS Caremark Deferred Stock Compensation Plan (the “DSP”), which are available to all U.S. employees who meet the IRC definition of a “highly compensated employee.” The plans are intended to provide retirement savings in a tax-efficient manner and enhance focus on stock ownership. The DCP offers a variety of investment crediting choices, none of which represents an above-market return. The individual contributions of Messrs. Merlo, Denton, Lofberg and Roberts during fiscal 2012 to the DCP and the DSP, including earnings on those contributions, any distributions during 2012 and total account balances as of the end of 2012, are shown in the Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Table on page 49.
Perquisites and Other Personal Benefits
CVS Caremark generally does not provide perquisites or other personal benefits for its executive officers other than the few items discussed in this section. The Committee believes this policy is consistent with the Company’s philosophy to maximize the amount of “at-risk” pay of its executive officers. CVS Caremark also does not provide any additional cash compensation to any of the executive officers to reimburse them for any income tax liability as a result of the receipt of any cash or equity compensation, benefit or perquisite (with the exception of certain gross-up payments payable pursuant to plans or policies applicable to a large number of employees, such as our relocation policy). In 2012, all of the executive officers who were contractually entitled to receive excise tax gross-ups in the event of a change in control voluntarily amended their agreements to eliminate this provision. Therefore, no executive officer has any entitlement to an excise tax gross-up. The contracts were amended with language that provides the greater net amount of a) an amount of reduced severance benefits as necessary to avoid exceeding the IRC Section 280G cap on the total change in control payments, typically 2.99 times the average annual compensation of the preceding five years, so that no excise tax applies to the payment or b) the full amount of the severance benefits, even though excise taxes may apply. No additional compensation was provided to the executives in exchange for amending their contracts.
CVS Caremark provides an allowance to each of the executive officers to cover the cost of a Company-provided financial planner to assist with personal financial and estate planning. The Company believes it is important to provide to our executives the professional expertise required to ensure they maximize the efficiencies of the Company’s compensation and benefit programs and are able to devote their full attention to the management of the Company. The Company maintains corporate aircraft that may be used by Company employees to conduct Company business. Pursuant to an executive security program established by the Board upon the Committee’s recommendation, the CEO is required to use the Company’s aircraft for all travel needs, including personal travel, in order to minimize and more efficiently use his travel time, protect the confidentiality of his travel and the Company’s business, and enhance his personal security. Certain other NEOs were also permitted to use the Company’s corporate aircraft for personal travel on a very limited basis during fiscal 2012. In addition, CVS Caremark provides an allowance to the NEOs to cover the costs of the installation and maintenance of home security monitoring systems. While the
36
Table of Contents
Committee believes these security costs are business expenses, disclosure of these costs as personal benefits is required. The value of all of these items is treated as income taxable to the executives. The Company provides no reimbursement for these costs nor does it pay the taxes or any other expenses associated with these costs on behalf of the executives.
The aggregate incremental cost to the Company of providing these personal benefits to each of the NEOs during fiscal 2012 is shown in the Summary Compensation Table on page 41.
Stock Ownership Guidelines
The Committee has long been mindful of the importance of equity ownership by directors and executive management as an effective link to stockholders and, as such, the Board maintains stock ownership guidelines for all directors and BPC members and requires that directors and BPC members achieve compliance with the ownership requirements within five years of becoming a director or BPC member. NEOs must maintain ownership levels as set forth in the table below. Shares included in the calculation to assess compliance with the guidelines include shares owned outright, unvested RSUs, shares held in the DSP and shares purchased through the Employee Stock Purchase Plan. Unexercised stock options do not count toward satisfying the guidelines. The Committee believes that these requirements emphasize the importance of equity ownership for the Board and executive management, which in turn reinforces alignment with stockholder interests. To further reinforce this commitment, the Committee annually reviews the policy and compliance by directors and executives
| Name | Multiple of Salary Required |
In Compliance | ||
| Larry J. Merlo |
5x | Yes | ||
| David M. Denton |
3x | Yes | ||
| Mark S. Cosby |
3x | Yes | ||
| Per G.H. Lofberg |
3x | Yes | ||
| Jonathan C. Roberts |
3x | Yes |
Securities Trades by Company Personnel
The Committee and the executive management of the Company take seriously their responsibilities and obligations to exhibit the highest standards of behavior relative to selling and trading Company stock. All transactions in Company stock contemplated by any officer must be pre-cleared by either the GC or the Corporate Secretary. Executive officers are prohibited from trading in any securities of the Company during a period around the release of the Company’s financial results for each quarter and may be required to refrain from trading during other designated periods when significant developments or announcements are anticipated. Even during periods when trading is otherwise allowed, no director or employee is permitted to trade in the securities of the Company if he or she possesses material non-public information. In addition, it is the Company’s policy that directors and executive officers may not engage in any of the following activities with respect to securities of the Company:
| n | Trading in Company securities on a short-term basis (stock purchased in the open market must be held for at least six months); |
| n | Purchasing stock on margin; |
| n | Engaging in short sales; or |
| n | Buying or selling puts, calls or options (other than exercising stock options granted by the Company). |
37
Table of Contents
Executives may transact in Company stock pursuant to a 10b5-1 trading plan. However, there are comprehensive guidelines that govern the use of 10b5-1 trading plans including: (i) a plan may not be entered into, altered, or terminated during a blackout period or when an executive is in possession of material non-public information; (ii) it must be pre-approved; (iii) the plan must provide that transactions will only be executed pursuant to the plan if the sale price is at market price or above a specified minimum price per share that must be at least 50% of the closing price of CVS Caremark common stock on the last trading day preceding the date on which the plan in entered into or amended; (iv) the plan must provide that no transactions will be executed pursuant to the plan for at least 30 days, and if the plan is amended, no transactions will be effected under the amended plan for at least 60 days; (v) and if the plan is terminated prior to its scheduled expiration, any new plan that is entered into must provide that no transactions will be executed pursuant to the new plan prior to the 60th day following the termination of the prior plan.
Recoupment
The Committee recognizes that incentive compensation provisions should be consistent with the Company’s goals of ensuring financial statement accuracy and encouraging ethical behavior. Accordingly, in 2009, the Committee approved recoupment provisions for all annual and long-term incentive awards granted to executive officers, effective with performance cycles beginning in 2009 and thereafter. These provisions apply in cases where financial or operational results used to determine an award amount are meaningfully altered based on fraud or material financial misconduct (collectively, “Misconduct”), as determined by the Board, and apply to any employee determined to have been involved in the Misconduct.
The recoupment policy applies to Misconduct committed during the performance period and allows for the discovery of Misconduct during the performance period or the three-year period following the performance period. The policy allows for the recoupment of the entire award, not only excess amounts generated by the Misconduct, subject to the determination of the Board, and the recoupment provisions may apply even where there is no financial restatement. The Committee believes that the penalties imposed for Misconduct under this policy are consistent with the goals of ensuring financial statement accuracy and encouraging ethical behavior. Each of these provisions has been incorporated into the Company’s incentive programs and award agreements and each is designed to provide the Company with the legal right and means to recover amounts paid or gains realized from incentive and equity awards in cases of Misconduct.
The Committee oversaw a risk assessment of the Company’s executive compensation programs to ascertain any potential material risks that may be created by the compensation program. Because performance-based incentives play a large role in our executive compensation program, it is important to ensure that these incentives do not result in our employees taking actions that may conflict with the Company’s long-term interests. The Committee considered the findings of the assessment conducted internally and concluded that the Company’s compensation programs are designed and administered with the appropriate balance of risk and reward in relation to its overall business strategy and do not encourage executives to take unnecessary or excessive risks. The Committee considered the following attributes of the program:
| n | the balance between short- and long-term incentives; |
| n | consideration of qualitative as well as quantitative performance factors in determining compensation payouts, including minimum and maximum performance thresholds, funding that is based on actual results measured against pre-approved financial and operational goals and metrics that are clearly defined in all plans; |
| n | incentive compensation with a large stock component through which value is best realized through long-term appreciation of stockholder value; |
| n | incentive compensation components that are paid or vest over an extended period; |
38
Table of Contents
| n | stock ownership guidelines that are reasonable and align executives’ interests with those of stockholders; and |
| n | a recoupment policy that allows the Company to recover compensation paid in situations of fraud or material financial misconduct. |
Agreements with Executive Officers
CVS Caremark has entered into employment agreements (the “Employment Agreements”) with Messrs. Merlo and Lofberg, and change in control agreements (the “CIC Agreements”) with Messrs. Denton, Cosby, Lofberg and Roberts. All of the agreements have been previously disclosed.
Our executive officers generally have long tenure with the Company and have provided the vision and leadership that have built CVS Caremark into the successful enterprise that it is today. The Committee believes that the interests of stockholders will be best served if the interests of our senior management are aligned with our stockholders. Providing change-in-control benefits should eliminate, or at least reduce, the reluctance of senior management to pursue potential change-in-control transactions that may be in stockholders’ best interests. The security of competitive change-in-control arrangements serves to eliminate distraction caused by uncertainty about personal financial circumstances during a period in which the Company requires focused and thoughtful leadership to ensure a successful outcome. Accordingly, the Employment Agreements and the CIC Agreements provide certain specified “double trigger” severance benefits to the covered executives in the event of their termination under certain circumstances following a change in control. The Committee believes a “double trigger” severance benefit provision is more appropriate, as it provides an incentive for greater continuity in management following a change in control. “Double trigger” benefits require that two events occur in order for severance to be paid, typically a change in control followed by the executive’s termination of employment. The 2010 ICP allowed for a “single trigger”, however, this was recently amended to a “double trigger”.
The Committee reviews the severance benefits annually with the assistance of its compensation consultant to evaluate both their effectiveness and competitiveness. The review in fiscal 2012 found the current level of benefits to be within competitive norms for design. Details of payments made to the executives upon a change in control and various termination scenarios; provisions for the treatment of equity awards, SERP and other benefits; and estimated payments that would be made to the executives whose employment terminates following a change in control may be found in Payments/(Forfeitures) Under Termination Scenarios beginning on page 50.
Compliance with IRC Section 162(m)
IRC Section 162(m) generally disallows a tax deduction to public companies for compensation over $1 million paid to a company’s chief executive officer and the three other most highly compensated executive officers at year end, other than the chief financial officer. Qualifying performance-based compensation will not be subject to the deduction limit if certain requirements are met.
The Committee’s policy is to generally preserve corporate tax deductions by qualifying as performance-based compensation that is over $1 million which is paid to the NEOs. The Board adopted and stockholders approved the 2010 ICP, which permits annual incentive awards, stock options and certain other LTI plan awards to qualify as performance-based compensation not subject to the limitation on deductibility provided that applicable conditions under Section 162(m) are met. However, maintaining tax deductibility is only one consideration in the design of the compensation program for senior executives. The Committee considers the anticipated tax treatment both to the Company and the executive in its review and approval of compensation grants and awards. The deductibility of some types of compensation payments will be contingent upon the timing of an executive’s vesting or exercise of previously granted rights, and is also subject to amendment or modification based on changes to applicable tax law. The Committee may, from time to time, conclude that certain compensation arrangements are in the best interest of CVS Caremark and its stockholders and consistent with its compensation philosophy and strategy despite the fact that the
39
Table of Contents
arrangements might not qualify for tax deductibility. Elements of the executive compensation program that do not comply with the deduction rules of IRC Section 162(m) include base salaries above $1 million and time-vested RSU awards.
Management Planning and Development Committee Report
The Management Planning and Development Committee has reviewed and discussed the Compensation Discussion and Analysis above with management and based on that review and discussion the Committee recommended to the Board of Directors that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in our annual report on Form 10-K and this proxy statement.
C. David Brown II (Chair)
David W. Dorman
Marian L. Heard
Tony L. White
40
Table of Contents
The following Summary Compensation Table shows information about the compensation received by the Company’s CEO, CFO and each of our three other most highly compensated executive officers for services rendered in all capacities to the Company during the 2012 fiscal year.
Summary Compensation Table
| Name & Principal 2012 Positions (1) |
Year |
Salary ($) |
Bonus ($) |
Stock Awards ($)(2) (3) |
Option Awards ($) (3) |
Non-Equity ($) (4) |
Change
in ($) (5) |
All Other Compen- sation ($) (6) |
Total ($) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Larry J. Merlo |
|
2012 2011 2010 |
|
|
1,287,500 1,208,333 938,889 |
|
|
— — — |
|
|
6,500,004 4,500,026 |
|
|
3,750,001 2,250,002 1,500,001 |
|
|
6,373,092 3,834,020 1,280,000 |
|
|
2,210,254 2,071,265 1,905,802 |
|
|
209,246 211,144 131,890 |
|
|
20,330,097 14,074,790 10,906,613 |
| |||||||||
| David M. Denton |
|
2012 2011 2010 |
|
|
681,250 606,250 550,000 |
|
|
— — — |
|
|
2,000,016 1,750,031 1,312,520 |
|
|
1,250,000 1,000,003 937,506 |
|
|
2,098,511 1,168,500 525,000 |
|
|
— — — |
|
|
32,302 35,942 41,661 |
|
|
6,062,079 4,560,726 3,366,687 |
| |||||||||
| Mark S. Cosby |
|
2012 2011 |
|
|
900,000 300,000 |
|
|
— 1,350,000 |
|
|
1,500,010 5,500,015 |
|
|
750,009 1,500,000 |
|
|
2,592,000 937,000 |
|
|
— — |
|
|
145,448 7,908 |
|
|
5,887,467 9,594,923 |
| |||||||||
| Per G.H. Lofberg |
|
2012 2011 2010 |
|
|
900,000 900,000 900,000 |
|
|
— — 1,500,000 |
|
|
— — 7,000,050 |
|
|
3,000,001 2,000,000 5,166,562 |
|
|
3,832,833 4,020,630 1,050,000 |
|
|
— — — |
|
|
157,376 142,296 25,021 |
|
|
7,890,210 7,062,926 15,641,633 |
| |||||||||
| Jonathan C. Roberts Executive Vice President and President – CVS Caremark Pharmacy Services |
2012 | 766,667 | — | 2,025,074 | 2,141,742 | 2,835,034 | — | 94,906 | 7,863,423 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (1) | Mr. Merlo became President and CEO on March 1, 2011. He was previously President and Chief Operating Officer as well as President – CVS/pharmacy. Mr. Denton was promoted to Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer on January 1, 2010. Mr. Cosby joined the Company effective September 1, 2011. Mr. Lofberg joined the Company effective January 1, 2010. Mr. Roberts became President – CVS Caremark Pharmacy Services effective September 1, 2012, replacing Mr. Lofberg in that role. Mr. Roberts was previously Chief Operating Officer – CVS Caremark Pharmacy Services. Mr. Lofberg remains an Executive Vice President of the Company. |
| (2) | Included in the stock award column is the full fair grant value of all restricted stock unit awards (“RSUs”) made in 2012. Also included is the portion of the LTIP Cycle XI award for performance years 2012 – 2014 (except for Mr. Lofberg, who did not participate) that would be made in non-transferable shares at the target level of performance at the completion of the performance cycles. The amount of the LTIP Cycle XI award that is payable in cash at the completion of the performance cycles will be reported in the 2015 proxy statement. For 2012, the amounts reported with respect to 2012 RSUs and the LTIP Cycle XI award (other than for Mr. Lofberg), respectively, for each of the named executive officers are as follows: for Mr. Merlo, $3,750,004 and $2,750,000; for Mr. Denton, $1,250,016 and $750,000; for Mr. Cosby, $750,010 and $750,000; and for Mr. Roberts, $875,034 and $650,000. For Mr. Roberts, the figure also includes $500,040 for his RSU award granted under the Partnership Equity Program. |
41
Table of Contents
| (3) | The figures shown are the full fair value on the date of grant. For a discussion of the assumptions and methodologies used to value the stock and option awards, please see the discussion of stock awards and option awards contained in our Annual Report to Stockholders, Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements at Note 11, “Stock Incentive Plans”. |
| (4) | The figures shown include amounts earned as annual cash incentive awards and the cash portion of the LTIP Cycle IX 2010-2012. |
| (5) | The amounts reported in this column represent only changes in pension value, as the Company does not pay above-market earnings on deferred compensation. For additional information on the SERP, see “Pension Benefits” beginning on page 47. |
| (6) | Set forth below is additional information regarding the amounts disclosed in the All Other Compensation column. |
All Other Compensation – 2012
| Name & Principal 2012 Positions | Perquisites & Other Personal Benefits (a) ($) |
Company Contributions to Defined Contribution Plans (b) ($) |
||||||
| Larry J. Merlo |
46,871 | 162,375 | ||||||
| David M. Denton |
15,402 | 16,900 | ||||||
| Mark S. Cosby |
132,948 | 12,500 | ||||||
| Per G.H. Lofberg |
51,896 | 105,480 | ||||||
| Jonathan C. Roberts |
17,373 | 77,533 | ||||||
| (a) | The amounts above reflect the following: for Mr. Merlo, $15,000 for financial planning services, $575 for home security, and $31,296 associated with personal use of company aircraft; for Mr. Denton, $14,177 for financial planning services, $346 for home security, and $879 associated with personal use of company aircraft; for Mr. Cosby, $103,948 associated with relocation expenses and related gross-ups for certain taxable expenses, $15,000 for financial planning services and $14,000 for home security; for Mr. Lofberg, $15,000 for financial planning services, $7,668 for home security and $29,228 associated with personal use of company aircraft; for Mr. Roberts, $15,000 for financial planning services, $1,230 for home security and $1,143 associated with personal use of company aircraft. The Company determines the amount associated with personal use of Company aircraft by calculating the incremental cost to the Company based on the cost of fuel, trip-related maintenance, deadhead flights, crew travel expenses, landing fees, trip-related hangar costs and smaller variable expenses. |
| (b) | For 2012, this amount includes Company matching contributions to the CVS Caremark Future Fund of $12,500 for each of Messrs. Merlo, Denton, Cosby, Lofberg and Roberts. It also includes Company matching contributions credited to notional accounts in the unfunded Deferred Compensation Plan equal to: for Mr. Merlo $149,875; Mr. Denton, $4,400; Mr. Lofberg, $92,980; and Mr. Roberts, $65,033. |
42
Table of Contents
This table reflects awards granted under the Company’s annual cash incentive plan for 2012, the LTIP Cycle XI (for the NEOs other than Mr. Lofberg), a Partnership Equity Plan award for Mr. Roberts and the annual equity awards for 2012, which include stock options and RSUs.
Grants of Plan-Based Awards – 2012
| Name & Principal 2012 Positions | Award Type | Date of Committee Action |
Grant Date |
Est. Future Payouts Under Non- Equity Incentive Plan Awards |
Est. Future Payouts Under Equity Incentive Plan Awards(1) |
All Other Stock Awards: Number of Shares of Stock or Units (#) |
All Other Option Awards: Number of Securities Underlying Options (#) |
Exercise or Base Price of Option Awards ($ / Sh) |
Grant Date Fair Value of Stock and Option Awards ($) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Threshold ($) |
Target ($) |
Maximum ($) |
Threshold (#) |
Target (#) |
Maximum (#) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Larry J. Merlo |
Stock Options | 2/7/2012 | 4/2/2012 | 332,736 | 45.07 | 3,750,001 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| President and Chief Executive Officer |
Annual RSUs | 2/7/2012 | 4/2/2012 | 83,204 | 3,750,004 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Annual Cash | 780,000 | 2,600,000 | 5,200,000 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| LTIP (12-14) | 3/7/2012 | 3/7/2012 | 1,375,000 | 2,750,000 | 5,500,000 | 30,754 | 61,507 | 123,014 | 2,750,000 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| David M. Denton |
Stock Options | 2/7/2012 | 4/2/2012 | 110,912 | 45.07 | 1,250,000 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
Annual RSUs | 2/7/2012 | 4/2/2012 | 27,735 | 1,250,016 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Annual Cash | 262,500 | 875,000 | 1,750,000 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| LTIP (12-14) | 3/7/2012 | 3/7/2012 | 375,000 | 750,000 | 1,500,000 | 8,387 | 16,774 | 33,548 | 750,000 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Mark S. Cosby |
Stock Options | 2/7/2012 | 4/2/2012 | 66,548 | 45.07 | 750,009 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Executive Vice President and President – CVS/pharmacy |
Annual RSUs | 2/7/2012 | 4/2/2012 | 16,641 | 750,010 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Annual Cash | 405,000 | 1,350,000 | 2,700,000 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| LTIP (12-14) | 3/7/2012 | 3/7/2012 | 375,000 | 750,000 | 1,500,000 | 8,387 | 16,774 | 33,548 | 750,000 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Per G.H Lofberg |
Stock Options | 2/7/2012 | 4/2/2012 | 347,343 | 45.07 | 3,000,001 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Executive Vice President and former President—CVS Caremark Pharmacy Services |
Annual Cash | 405,000 | 1,350,000 | 2,700,000 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Jonathan C. Roberts |
Stock Options | 2/7/2012 | 4/2/2012 | 77,639 | 45.07 | 875,007 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Executive Vice President and President – CVS Caremark Pharmacy Services |
Stock Options—PEP |
9/4/2012 | 9/4/2012 | 108,870 | 45.93 | 1,266,735 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Annual RSUs | 2/7/2012 | 4/2/2012 | 19,415 | 875,034 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| RSUs—PEP | 9/4/2012 | 9/4/2012 | 10,887 | 500,040 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Annual Cash | 405,000 | 1,350,000 | 2,700,000 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| LTIP (12-14) | 3/7/2012 | 3/7/2012 | 325,000 | 650,000 | 1,300,000 | 7,269 | 14,538 | 29,076 | 650,000 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (1) | Share numbers determined based on the closing price of our stock on the applicable grant date. |
43
Table of Contents
The stock option awards shown above vest in equal installments on the first, second, third and fourth anniversaries of the date of grant and expire in seven years from the date of grant, except for Mr. Lofberg’s options, which vest on December 31, 2013 and Mr. Roberts’ PEP options which vest one-third on each third, fourth and fifth anniversary of the grant date. As described above, the Company’s policy is to establish the exercise price for stock options as the closing price of the Company’s common stock on the grant date. Annual RSU grants typically vest in increments of 50% on the third anniversary of the grant and 50% on the fifth anniversary of the grant. Mr. Roberts’ PEP RSUs will cliff vest on the fifth anniversary of the grant date.
If earned, a portion of the LTIP Cycle XI awards will be reported in the Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation column of the Summary Compensation Table for the relevant year.
44
Table of Contents
Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End
This table reflects stock option and RSU awards granted to the executive officers specified in the table under the Company’s 2010 and 1997 ICPs that were outstanding as of December 31, 2012.
Outstanding Equity Awards at 2012 Year-End
| Stock Option Awards | Stock Awards | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Name & Principal 2012 Positions |
Grant Date |
Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#) Exercisable |
Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#) Unexercisable |
Option Exercise Price ($) |
Option Expiration Date |
Grant Date |
Number of Shares or Units of Stock that Have Not Vested (#) |
Market Value of Shares or Units of Stock that Have Not Vested ($) (1) |
Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Number of Shares or Units of Stock that Have Not Vested (#) |
Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Market Value of Shares or Units of Stock that Have Not Vested ($) (1) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Larry J. Merlo |
4/2/2007 | 136,089 | — | (2) | 34.42 | 4/2/2014 | 4/1/2008 | 75,905 | (15) | 3,670,007 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4/1/2008 | 144,144 | — | (2) | 41.17 | 4/1/2015 | 4/1/2009 | 23,132 | (12) | 1,118,432 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4/1/2009 | 185,572 | — | (2) | 28.10 | 4/1/2016 | 4/1/2010 | 41,403 | (8) | 2,001,835 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4/1/2010 | 101,992 | 50,996 | (2) | 36.23 | 4/1/2017 | 4/1/2011 | 64,360 | (10) | 3,111,806 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4/1/2011 | 60,287 | 180,863 | (4) | 34.96 | 4/1/2018 | 4/2/2012 | 83,204 | (10) | 4,022,913 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4/2/2012 | — | 332,736 | (4) | 45.07 | 4/2/2019 | 3/9/2011 | 66,040 | (11) | 3,193,034 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 3/7/2012 | 61,507 | (11) | 2,973,863 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| David M. Denton |
4/2/2007 | 14,113 | — | (2) | 34.42 | 4/2/2014 | 3/5/2008 | 1,311 | (12) | 63,400 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 3/5/2008 | 8,280 | 4,140 | (3) | 40.28 | 3/5/2018 | 4/1/2009 | 4,004 | (13) | 193,593 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4/1/2008 | 26,811 | — | (2) | 41.17 | 4/1/2015 | 2/17/2010 | 1,030 | (14) | 49,801 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4/1/2009 | 48,178 | — | (2) | 28.10 | 4/1/2016 | 4/1/2010 | 8,626 | (8) | 417,067 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4/1/2010 | 63,745 | 31,873 | (2) | 36.23 | 4/1/2017 | 4/1/2011 | 28,605 | (10) | 1,383,052 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4/1/2011 | 26,794 | 80,384 | (4) | 34.96 | 4/1/2018 | 4/2/2012 | 27,735 | (10) | 1,340,987 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4/2/2012 | — | 110,912 | (4) | 45.07 | 4/2/2019 | 3/9/2011 | 22,013 | (11) | 1,064,329 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 3/7/2012 | 16,774 | (11) | 811,023 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Mark S. Cosby |
9/1/2011 | 57,503 | 115,006 | (2) | 35.78 | 9/1/2018 | 9/1/2011 | 41,923 | (9) | 2,026,977 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4/2/2012 | — | 66,548 | (4) | 45.07 | 4/2/2019 | 4/2/2012 | 16,641 | (10) | 804,592 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 9/1/2011 | 27,948 | (11) | 1,351,286 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 3/7/2012 | 16,774 | (11) | 811,023 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Per G.H.
Lofberg |
1/4/2010 | 454,830 | — | (5) | 32.98 | 1/4/2020 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4/1/2010 | 101,992 | — | (6) | 36.23 | 4/1/2017 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4/1/2011 | 234,066 | — | (5) | 34.96 | 4/1/2018 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4/2/2012 | — | 347,343 | (7) | 45.07 | 4/2/2019 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
45
Table of Contents
| Stock Option Awards |
|
Stock Awards | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Name & Principal 2012 Positions | Grant Date |
Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#) Exercisable |
Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#) Unexercisable |
Option Exercise Price ($) |
Option Expiration Date |
Grant Date |
Number of Shares or Units of Stock that Have Not Vested (#) |
Market Value of Shares or Units of Stock that Have Not Vested ($) (1) |
Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Number of Shares or Units of Stock that Have Not Vested (#) |
Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Market Value of Shares or Units of Stock that Have Not Vested ($) (1) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Jonathan C.
Roberts |
4/2/2007 | 60,484 | — | (2) | 34.42 | 4/2/2014 | 4/1/2008 | 15,182 | (16) | 734,050 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4/1/2008 | 86,487 | — | (2) | 41.17 | 4/1/2015 | 4/1/2009 | 4,226 | (12) | 204,327 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4/1/2009 | 101,708 | — | (2) | 28.10 | 4/1/2016 | 4/1/2010 | 5,521 | (8) | 266,940 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4/1/2010 | 40,797 | 20,399 | (2) | 36.23 | 4/1/2017 | 4/1/2011 | 22,884 | (10) | 1,106,441 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4/1/2011 | 21,435 | 64,308 | (4) | 34.96 | 4/1/2018 | 4/2/2012 | 19,415 | (10) | 938,715 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4/2/2012 | — | 77,639 | (4) | 45.07 | 4/2/2019 | 9/4/2012 | 10,925 | (12) | 528,224 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 9/4/2012 | — | 108,870 | (3) | 45.93 | 9/4/2022 | 3/9/2011 | 19,078 | (11) | 922,421 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 3/7/2012 | 14,538 | (11) | 702,912 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (1) | The value of the restricted stock units is based on $48.35, which was the closing price of the Company’s stock on December 31, 2012, the last trading day of our fiscal year. |
| (2) | The stock options vest in one-third increments on each of the first, second and third anniversaries of the date of grant. |
| (3) | The stock options vest in one-third increments on each of the third, fourth and fifth anniversaries of the date of grant and expire ten years from the date of grant. |
| (4) | The stock options vest in one-quarter increments on each of the first, second, third and fourth anniversaries of the date of grant. |
| (5) | The stock options vest on December 31, 2012. |
| (6) | The stock options vest in one-third increments on each of the first and second anniversaries of the date of grant and on December 31, 2012. |
| (7) | The stock options vest on December 31, 2013. |
| (8) | RSUs vest in increments of 50% on the third anniversary of the grant date and on the later of the fifth anniversary of the grant date or the executive’s 55th birthday. |
| (9) | RSUs vest in one-third increments on each of the grant date and first and second anniversaries of the date of grant. |
| (10) | RSUs vest in increments of 50% on the third anniversary of the grant date and on the fifth anniversary of the grant date. |
| (11) | Represents non-transferable shares to be delivered to each of the executives for outstanding LTIP performance cycles in effect for Cycle X (2011-2013) and Cycle XI (2012-2014), assuming in each case that the target level of performance will be achieved. |
| (12) | RSUs vest on the fifth anniversary of the date of grant. |
| (13) | RSUs vest on the fourth anniversary of the date of grant. |
| (14) | RSUs vest one-third on the first, second and third anniversaries of the date of grant. |
| (15) | For Mr. Merlo the award includes 15,181 restricted stock units granted as part of his annual equity award and 60,724 restricted stock units granted as a retention award, both of which will vest on the fifth anniversary of the grant date. |
| (16) | For Mr. Roberts the award includes 3,037 restricted stock units granted as part of his annual equity award and 12,145 restricted stock units granted as a retention award, both of which will vest on the fifth anniversary of the grant date. |
46
Table of Contents
Option Exercises and Stock Vested
The table below reflects information for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012 concerning options exercised and vesting of previously granted RSUs and non-transferable shares for each of the executive officers specified in the table. The value of the shares acquired upon exercise of the options and the shares represented by the vesting of RSUs is based on the closing price of our stock on the date of exercise and the date of vesting, respectively.
Option Exercises and Stock Vested – 2012
| Option Awards | Stock Awards | |||||||||||||||
| Name & Principal 2012 Positions |
Number of (#) |
Value Realized on Exercise ($) |
Number of (#) |
Value Realized ($) |
||||||||||||
| Larry J. Merlo |
161,359 | 2,731,229 | 55,894 | 2,718,190 | ||||||||||||
| David M. Denton |
11,526 | 195,539 | 11,779 | 589,130 | ||||||||||||
| Mark S. Cosby |
— | — | 41,923 | 1,909,593 | ||||||||||||
| Per G.H. Lofberg |
— | — | 101,569 | 4,952,225 | ||||||||||||
| Jonathan C. Roberts |
64,546 | 1,001,433 | 16,667 | 822,419 | ||||||||||||
The Company has established and maintains the unfunded Supplemental Retirement Plan I for Select Senior Management of the Company (the “SERP”). The SERP is designed to supplement the retirement benefits of selected executives in lieu of a qualified defined benefit plan. Under the SERP’s benefit formula, executives selected for participation (including Mr. Merlo and certain retired executives) will receive an annual benefit commencing on the later of age 55 or retirement, equal to 1.6% of a three-year average of final compensation (as defined in the SERP) for each year of service up to 30 years, with no offset for any amounts provided by the Company’s qualified plans, Social Security or other retirement benefits.
Final compensation for purposes of the SERP benefit formula is the average of the executive’s three highest years of annual salary and annual cash bonus during the last ten years of service. The estimated credited years of benefit service for Mr. Merlo as of the measurement date of December 31, 2012 was 30 years (Mr. Merlo’s years of service are capped at 30, in accordance with the terms of the SERP.) Messrs. Denton, Cosby, Lofberg and Roberts do not participate in the SERP. Benefits under the SERP formula are payable in annual installments for the life of the executive, unless the executive has made an advance election in accordance with plan and IRS rules to have the benefit paid in the form of a lump sum or joint and survivor annuity of equivalent actuarial value. Mr. Merlo has made an election to receive his entire benefit payable on account of termination of employment in the form of a lump sum.
47
Table of Contents
No benefits are payable to an eligible executive until he terminates employment. After termination of employment, SERP benefits are payable (i) immediately, if the executive is age 55 or older at the time of termination, regardless of years of service, or (ii) upon reaching age 55, if the executive is younger than 55 at the time of termination and five or more years of Company service were completed prior to termination. As of the measurement date, only Mr. Merlo was eligible for an immediate benefit.
The accumulated values for the Pension Benefits Table and Summary Compensation Table are based on the benefit accrued as of the measurement date payable as a lump sum commencing on the earliest unreduced retirement age (55) using assumptions which include a 4.00% discount rate and a 3.50% lump sum rate as of December 31, 2012. Mr. Merlo is fully vested in his accrued benefit. For further information regarding pension assumptions, please see the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements in our Annual Report to Stockholders for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012.
The SERP does not allow new members, and the Management Planning and Development Committee has adopted a policy restricting participation in the SERP under the current benefit formula to those executives participating in that plan at the time the policy was adopted. As noted above, only Mr. Merlo currently participates in the SERP.
Pension Benefits – 2012
| Name & Principal 2012 Positions |
Plan Name | Number of Years of Credited Service (#) |
Present Value ($) |
Payments ($) | ||||
| Larry J. Merlo |
SERP | 30 | 21,792,523 | — | ||||
| David M. Denton |
N/A | — | — | — | ||||
| Mark S. Cosby |
N/A | — | — | — | ||||
| Per G.H. Lofberg |
N/A | — | — | — | ||||
| Jonathan C. Roberts |
N/A | — | — | — | ||||
Nonqualified Deferred Compensation
Executive officers and selected members of senior management may participate in the CVS Caremark Deferred Compensation Plan (the “DCP”) and the CVS Caremark Deferred Stock Plan (the “DSP”). The DCP allows participants to defer payment of a portion of their salary and all or a portion of their annual cash incentive (and in the case of executive officers, all or a portion of any LTI plan cash award) to facilitate their personal retirement or financial planning. For participants in the DCP, the Company provides a maximum match of up to 5% of the salary and annual cash incentive deferred, plus an additional match for matching contributions only on amounts that cannot be deferred into qualified 401(k) plans due to IRS plan limits.
48
Table of Contents
The investment crediting options for the DCP mirror those offered for the CVS Caremark Future Fund. Each year, the amount of a participant’s deferred compensation account increases or decreases based on the appreciation and/or depreciation in the value of the investment crediting alternatives selected by the participant. There are no vesting requirements on deferred amounts or earnings on deferred amounts.
Executive officers and selected members of management are eligible to participate in the DSP, in which they may elect to defer settlement of RSUs beyond the scheduled vesting date. Dividend equivalents are reinvested during the deferral period. Messrs. Merlo, Lofberg, and Roberts utilized the DSP to defer portions of their equity-based compensation.
Executive officers are not permitted to defer proceeds of stock option exercises.
The amounts shown in the table below for “Cash” and “Stock” were deferred pursuant to the DCP and the DSP, respectively. Except for Messrs. Cosby and Lofberg, also included in the “Aggregate Balance” column is $3,300,903 due from the Company upon the death of the executive under an unfunded “death benefit only” life insurance arrangement for each executive.
Nonqualified Deferred Compensation – 2012
| Name & Principal 2012 Positions |
Type |
Executive Contributions in Last FY ($)(1) |
Registrant Contributions in Last FY ($)(2) |
Aggregate Earnings in Last FY ($)(3) |
Aggregate Withdrawals/ Distributions ($) (4) |
Aggregate Balance at Last FYE ($) (5) (6) |
||||||||||||||||
| Larry J. Merlo |
Cash | 162,375 | 149,875 | 193,883 | — | 5,249,092 | ||||||||||||||||
| Stock | 3,204,916 | — | 4,584,896 | 55,038 | 29,846,798 | |||||||||||||||||
| David M. Denton |
Cash | — | 4,400 | 21,478 | — | 3,483,251 | ||||||||||||||||
| Stock | — | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||
| Mark S. Cosby |
Cash | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||
| Stock | — | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||
| Per G.H. Lofberg |
Cash | 4,470,630 | 92,980 | 541,294 | — | 7,143,179 | ||||||||||||||||
| Stock | 6,263,228 | — | 2,833,361 | — | 9,096,589 | |||||||||||||||||
| Jonathan C. Roberts
|
Cash | 77,533 | 65,033 | 83,455 | — | 4,199,933 | ||||||||||||||||
| Stock | 130,928 | — | 189,409 | 3,787 | 1,197,393 | |||||||||||||||||
| (1) | The cash contributions are included in amounts shown for 2012 in the Salary column of the Summary Compensation Table as follows: for Mr. Merlo, $64,375; for Mr. Lofberg, $450,000; and for Mr. Roberts, $38,333. All other amounts represent non-equity incentive plan compensation received during 2012. The stock contributions represent deferred settlement of RSUs granted in prior years that vested in 2012. |
| (2) | All amounts shown are also disclosed in the Summary Compensation Table under All Other Compensation and reflect amounts credited and/or earned in 2012. |
| (3) | All earnings shown on the Stock line are attributable to dividend equivalents and an increase in the Company’s common stock price. |
49
Table of Contents
| (4) | All amounts distributed from the DSP include cash dividend payments. |
| (5) | Includes Death Benefit Only maximum benefits to Messrs. Merlo, Denton, and Roberts. |
| (6) | The following amounts included in this column have been previously reported in the Summary Compensation Tables of the Company’s annual proxy statement since 2007: |
| Cash | Stock | |||||||
| Mr. Merlo |
$ | 1,105,820 | $ | 5,161,264 | ||||
| Mr. Denton |
12,875 | — | ||||||
| Mr. Cosby |
— | — | ||||||
| Mr. Lofberg |
2,035,250 | — | ||||||
| Mr. Roberts |
— | — | ||||||
Payments/(Forfeitures) Under Termination Scenarios
The tables below show the amounts that would be received or forfeited by each NEO under various termination scenarios, assuming (i) that the termination occurred on December 31, 2012 and (ii) that amounts that have been paid or are payable in all events, such as the non-equity incentive amounts earned with respect to fiscal year 2012 and disclosed in the Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation column of the Summary Compensation Table on page 41, the amounts payable under the pension plans discussed beginning on page 47, and the amounts in the nonqualified deferred compensation plans discussed beginning on page 48, are not included in the tables below, nor is any amount for stock options that are vested and exercisable as of December 31, 2012.
With respect to the tables below:
| n | Messrs. Denton, Cosby, and Lofberg are not eligible for retirement as of December 31, 2012. |
| n | The amounts paid as base salary upon voluntary termination for Mr. Merlo reflects the Company’s option to continue to pay 50% of the executive’s salary for 18 months in consideration for compliance with a non-competition provision. |
| n | The option value is determined by multiplying the number of unvested options outstanding as of December 31, 2012 by the difference between the exercise price and $48.35, the closing price on December 31, 2012, the last trading day of the Company’s fiscal year. Generally, the grant agreements provide for the following post-termination exercise periods, but in no case will the post-termination exercise period be longer than the original option term: |
| n | In the case of termination due to death, during the one-year period following termination; |
| n | In the case of constructive termination without cause prior to a change in control of the Company (a “CIC”), during the severance period; |
| n | In the case of constructive termination without cause after a CIC, during the remainder of the option term; and |
| n | In the cases of termination for cause or voluntary termination, generally there is no post-termination exercise period. |
| n | The value of the RSUs is determined by multiplying the number of RSUs as of December 31, 2012 by the closing price on that date, $48.35, which was the last trading day of the Company’s fiscal year. |
| n | Upon a CIC and subsequent termination of employment by executive, all outstanding unvested stock options will vest in full and restrictions will lapse on all RSUs. |
| n | The value of LTIP cycles assumes pro-rated payments are made for outstanding LTIP Cycle X (two-thirds; years 2011 – 2013), LTIP Cycle XI (one-third; years 2012 – 2014) in which case all outstanding performance cycles are assumed to be achieved at target and the value of payments are made at target. |
50
Table of Contents
In the event of his covered termination prior to a CIC, Mr. Merlo would receive a cash severance payment equal to two times the sum of his annual base salary and his then-current annual cash incentive at target. In the event of a covered termination following a CIC, Mr. Merlo would receive a cash severance payment equal to three times the sum of his annual base salary and his then-current annual cash incentive at target, but under his amended employment contract such cash severance would be reduced to avoid the excise tax under IRC Section 280G if that would give Mr. Merlo a better after-tax result. Mr. Merlo meets the requirements for retirement as described in the Approved Early Retirement definition of his Employment Agreement, but without Board approval any voluntary termination by him would not be deemed a retirement.
| Larry J. Merlo President and Chief Executive Officer |
Death ($) |
Termination ($) |
Voluntary ($) |
Termination ($) |
Termination ($) |
Approved ($) |
||||||||||||||||||
| Severance Value |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Base Salary |
— | — | 975,000 | 2,600,000 | 3,900,000 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Bonus |
— | — | — | 5,200,000 | 7,800,000 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Immediate Vesting of Equity |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Value of Options |
4,131,201 | (4,131,201 | ) | (4,131,201 | ) | 4,131,201 | 4,131,201 | 4,131,201 | ||||||||||||||||
| Value of RSUs |
13,924,993 | (13,924,993 | ) | (13,924,993 | ) | 13,924,993 | 13,924,993 | 13,924,993 | ||||||||||||||||
| Value of LTIP Cycles |
4,833,333 | (4,833,333 | ) | (4,833,333 | ) | 4,833,333 | 10,000,000 | 4,833,333 | ||||||||||||||||
| Benefits and Other |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Health Insurance |
— | — | — | 25,236 | 37,854 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| SERP |
— | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Excise Tax Gross-Up |
— | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total |
22,889,527 | (22,889,527 | ) | (21,914,527 | ) | 30,714,763 | 39,794,048 | 22,889,527 | ||||||||||||||||
51
Table of Contents
In the event of his termination prior to a CIC, Mr. Denton is eligible for severance payments, provided that he executes a separation agreement with the Company that includes, among other things, standard restrictive covenants regarding non-competition and non-solicitation of customer and employees. In the event Mr. Denton is terminated by the Company without cause prior to a CIC, he is eligible to receive 18 months of base salary as severance, paid in equal monthly installments over 18 months, in consideration for a general release of claims and compliance with various restrictive covenants, including non-competition and non-solicitation provisions. Mr. Denton has entered into a CIC Agreement with the Company that specifies payments that would be made to him in the event of a CIC. In the event of his covered termination, he would receive a cash severance payment equal to one and one-half times the sum of his annual base salary and his then-current annual cash incentive at target, but under his amended CIC Agreement such cash severance would be reduced to avoid the excise tax under IRC Section 280G if that would give Mr. Denton a better after-tax result.
| David M. Denton Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
Death ($) |
Termination ($) |
Voluntary ($) |
Termination ($) |
Termination ($) |
|||||||||||||||
| Severance Value |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Base Salary |
— | — | — | 1,050,000 | 1,050,000 | |||||||||||||||
| Bonus |
— | — | — | — | 1,312,500 | |||||||||||||||
| Immediate Vesting of Equity |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Value of Options |
1,859,844 | (1,859,844 | ) | (1,859,844 | ) | 1,408,863 | 1,859,844 | |||||||||||||
| Value of RSUs |
3,447,900 | (3,447,900 | ) | (3,447,900 | ) | 1,206,853 | 3,447,900 | |||||||||||||
| Value of LTIP Cycles |
1,500,000 | (1,500,000 | ) | (1,500,000 | ) | 1,500,000 | 3,000,000 | |||||||||||||
| Benefits and Other |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Health Insurance |
— | — | — | 18,300 | 18,300 | |||||||||||||||
| SERP |
— | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||
| Excise Tax Gross-Up |
— | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||
| Total |
6,807,744 | (6,807,744 | ) | (6,807,744 | ) | 5,184,016 | 10,688,544 | |||||||||||||
52
Table of Contents
In the event of his covered termination prior to a CIC, Mr. Cosby is eligible for severance payments, provided that he executes a separation agreement with the Company that includes, among other things, standard restrictive covenants regarding non-competition and non-solicitation of customers and employees. In the event Mr. Cosby’s Employment Agreement is terminated by the Company without cause or by Mr. Cosby for good reason, he is eligible to receive 18 months of base salary as severance, paid in equal monthly installments over 18 months, in consideration for a general release of claims and compliance with various restrictive covenants, including non-competition and non-solicitation provisions. Mr. Cosby has entered into a CIC Agreement with the Company that specifies payments that would be made to him in the event of a CIC. In the event of his covered termination, he would receive a cash severance payment equal to one and one-half times the sum of his annual base salary and his then-current annual cash incentive at target, but under his CIC Agreement such cash severance would be reduced to avoid the excise tax under IRC Section 280G if that would give Mr. Cosby a better after-tax result.
| Mark S. Cosby Executive Vice President and President – CVS/pharmacy |
Death ($) |
Termination ($) |
Voluntary ($) |
Termination ($) |
Termination ($) |
|||||||||||||||
| Severance Value |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Base Salary |
— | — | — | 1,350,000 | 1,350,000 | |||||||||||||||
| Bonus |
— | — | — | — | 2,025,000 | |||||||||||||||
| Immediate Vesting of Equity |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Value of Options |
1,663,903 | (1,663,903 | ) | (1,663,903 | ) | 1,072,937 | 1,663,903 | |||||||||||||
| Value of RSUs |
2,831,569 | (2,831,569 | ) | (2,831,569 | ) | 2,026,977 | 2,831,569 | |||||||||||||
| Value of LTIP Cycles |
1,833,333 | (1,833,333 | ) | (1,833,333 | ) | 1,833,333 | 3,500,000 | |||||||||||||
| Benefits and Other |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Health Insurance |
— | — | — | 17,361 | 17,361 | |||||||||||||||
| SERP |
— | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||
| Excise Tax Gross-Up |
— | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||
| Total |
6,328,805 | (6,328,805 | ) | (6,328,805 | ) | 6,300,608 | 11,387,833 | |||||||||||||
53
Table of Contents
In the event of his covered termination prior to a CIC, Mr. Lofberg is eligible for severance payments, provided that he executes a separation agreement with the Company that includes, among other things, standard restrictive covenants regarding non-competition and non-solicitation of customers and employees. In the event Mr. Lofberg’s Employment Agreement is terminated by the Company without cause or by Mr. Lofberg for good reason, he is eligible to receive 12 months of base salary as severance, paid in equal monthly installments over 12 months, in consideration for a general release of claims and compliance with various restrictive covenants, including non-competition and non-solicitation provisions. Mr. Lofberg has entered into a CIC Agreement with the Company that specifies payments that would be made to him in the event of a CIC. In the event of his covered termination, he would receive a cash severance payment equal to one and one-half times the sum of his annual base salary and his then-current annual cash incentive at target, but under his CIC Agreement such cash severance would be reduced to avoid the excise tax under IRC Section 280G if that would give Mr. Lofberg a better after-tax result.
| Per G.H. Lofberg Executive Vice President and former President – CVS Caremark |
Death ($) |
Termination ($) |
Voluntary ($) |
Termination ($) |
Termination ($) |
|||||||||||||||
| Severance Value |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Base Salary |
— | — | — | 900,000 | 1,350,000 | |||||||||||||||
| Bonus |
— | — | — | — | 2,025,000 | |||||||||||||||
| Immediate Vesting of Equity |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Value of Options |
1,139,285 | (1,139,285 | ) | (1,139,285 | ) | 1,139,285 | 1,139,285 | |||||||||||||
| Value of RSUs |
— | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||
| Value of LTIP Cycles |
— | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||
| Benefits and Other |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Health Insurance |
— | — | — | 4,682 | 7,024 | |||||||||||||||
| SERP |
— | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||
| Excise Tax Gross-Up |
— | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||
| Total |
1,139,285 | (1,139,285 | ) | (1,139,285 | ) | 2,043,967 | 4,521,309 | |||||||||||||
54
Table of Contents
In the event of his termination prior to a CIC, Mr. Roberts is eligible for severance payments, provided that he executes a separation agreement with the Company that includes, among other things, standard restrictive covenants regarding non-competition and non-solicitation of customer and employees. In the event Mr. Roberts is terminated by the Company without cause prior to a CIC, he is eligible to receive 18 months of base salary as severance, paid in equal monthly installments over 18 months, in consideration for a general release of claims and compliance with various restrictive covenants, including non-competition and non-solicitation provisions. Mr. Roberts has entered into a CIC Agreement with the Company that specifies payments that would be made to him in the event of a CIC. In the event of his covered termination, he would receive a cash severance payment equal to one and one-half times the sum of his annual base salary and his then-current annual cash incentive at target, but under his amended CIC Agreement such cash severance would be reduced to avoid the excise tax under IRC Section 280G if that would give Mr. Roberts a better after-tax result.
| Jonathan C. Roberts Executive Vice President and President – CVS Caremark Pharmacy Services |
Death ($) |
Termination ($) |
Voluntary ($) |
Termination ($) |
Termination ($) |
|||||||||||||||
| Severance Value |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Base Salary |
— | — | — | 1,350,000 | 1,350,000 | |||||||||||||||
| Bonus |
— | — | — | — | 2,025,000 | |||||||||||||||
| Immediate Vesting of Equity |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Value of Options |
1,626,441 | (1,626,441 | ) | (1,626,441 | ) | 1,020,377 | 1,626,441 | |||||||||||||
| Value of RSUs |
3,778,697 | (3,778,697 | ) | (3,778,697 | ) | 1,625,068 | 3,778,697 | |||||||||||||
| Value of LTIP Cycles |
1,300,000 | (1,300,000 | ) | (1,300,000 | ) | 1,300,000 | 2,600,000 | |||||||||||||
| Benefits and Other |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Health Insurance |
— | — | — | 18,734 | 18,734 | |||||||||||||||
| SERP |
— | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||
| Excise Tax Gross-Up |
— | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||
| Total |
6,705,138 | (6,705,138 | ) | (6,705,138 | ) | 5,314,179 | 11,398,872 | |||||||||||||
55
Table of Contents
Our Board of Directors has nominated 9 directors for election at the Annual Meeting. Each nominee is currently serving as one of our directors. If you re-elect them, they will hold office until the next annual meeting or until their successors have been elected and qualified.
Each director is elected by a majority of the votes cast with respect to that director’s election (at a meeting for the election of directors at which a quorum is present) by the holders of shares of common stock present in person or by proxy at the meeting and entitled to vote. Abstentions and broker non-votes are not counted as votes cast with respect to the election of directors.
In accordance with the Company’s by-laws, each nominee who is a current director has submitted an irrevocable resignation, which resignation becomes effective upon (i) that person not receiving a majority of the votes cast in an uncontested election, and (ii) acceptance by the Board of that resignation in accordance with the policies and procedures adopted by the Board for that purpose. The Board, acting on the recommendation of its Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee (the “Committee”), will no later than at its first regularly scheduled meeting following certification of the stockholder vote, determine whether to accept the resignation of the unsuccessful incumbent. Absent a determination by the Board that a compelling reason exists for concluding that it is in the best interests of the Company for an unsuccessful incumbent to remain as a director, the Board will accept that person’s resignation.
In recognition of the fact that the selection of qualified directors is complex and crucial to the long-term success of the Company, the Committee has established guidelines for the identification and evaluation of candidates for membership on the Company’s Board of Directors. Those guidelines are included in this proxy statement as Exhibit A. When considering current directors for re-nomination to the Board, the Committee takes into account the performance of each director. The Committee also reviews the composition of the Board in light of the current challenges and needs of the Board and the Company, and determines whether it may be appropriate to add or remove individuals after considering, among other things, the need for audit committee expertise and issues of independence, diversity, judgment, character, reputation, age, skills, background and experience. The Committee believes that the Board, as currently constituted, is well-balanced and that it fully and effectively addresses the Company’s needs. All of our nominees are seasoned leaders, the majority of whom are or were chief executive officers or other senior executives, who bring to the Board skills and qualifications gained during their tenure at a vast array of public companies, private companies, non-profits and other organizations. We have indicated below for each nominee certain of the experience, qualifications, attributes or skills that led the Committee and the Board to conclude that the nominee should continue to serve as a director.
Biographies of our Board Nominees
| C. David Brown II | Director since March 2007 | Age 61 |
Mr. Brown has been Chairman of Broad and Cassel, a Florida law firm, since March 2000. From 1989 until March 2000, he was Managing Partner of the Orlando office of the firm. He is also a director of Rayonier, Inc., a real estate development, timberland management and cellulose production company. Mr. Brown previously served on the board of Caremark Rx, Inc. from March 2001 until the closing of the CVS/Caremark merger, when he became a director of CVS Caremark. Mr. Brown’s legal expertise and experience are valued by the Board, as is his ability to analyze and interpret complex issues and facilitating Board engagement. The Board believes that Mr. Brown’s experience adds knowledge and leadership depth to the Board.
| David W. Dorman | Director since March 2006 | Age 59 |
Mr. Dorman has been the Chairman of the Board of CVS Caremark Corporation since May 2011. He has also served as Lead Director of Motorola Solutions, Inc. (formerly Motorola, Inc.), a communications products company, since May 2011, and was Non-Executive Chairman of the Board of Motorola from May 2008 through May 2011. From October 2006 through April 2008, he was a Managing Director and Senior Advisor with
56
Table of Contents
Warburg Pincus LLC, a global private equity firm. From November 2005 until January 2006, Mr. Dorman served as President and a director of AT&T Inc., a telecommunications company (formerly known as SBC Communications). Mr. Dorman is also a director of Yum! Brands, Inc., a quick service restaurant company. Mr. Dorman’s experience in leading large companies, beginning with Sprint and later Pacific Bell and AT&T, lends a perspective and skill set that is greatly valued by the Board. His business background of growing companies is in line with and useful to our business strategy. The Board believes that Mr. Dorman’s experience leading the boards of AT&T and Motorola make him well-suited to be the Company’s Chairman.
| Anne M. Finucane | Director since January 2011 | Age 60 |
Ms. Finucane has been the Global Strategy and Marketing Officer for Bank of America Corporation (“BOA”), an international financial services company, since 2006 and has been Northeast Market President for BOA since 2004. During her fifteen-plus years as a senior leader at BOA and its legacy firms, Ms. Finucane has served as senior advisor to four chief executive officers and the Board of Directors, with a focus on corporate strategy and public policy creation and implementation. Ms. Finucane oversees marketing, public policy, government affairs, consumer policy and corporate social responsibility, leading BOA’s engagement and positioning on global and domestic policies and issues, current and proposed legislation and other public affairs issues affecting BOA and the financial services industry. Ms. Finucane’s experience in the financial services industry and government affairs provides the Board with valuable insight in those key areas.
| Kristen Gibney Williams | Director since March 2007 | Age 64 |
Ms. Gibney Williams is a former executive of the Prescription Benefits Management Division of Caremark International Inc. and its predecessors, including service as General Manager and as President from 1986 until June 1993 and as Corporate Vice President from June 1993 until her retirement in January 1997. Ms. Gibney Williams previously served on the board of Caremark Rx, Inc. from February 1999 until the closing of the CVS/Caremark merger, when she became a director of CVS Caremark. Ms. Gibney Williams helped to found the Caremark PBM and was head of its operations for over ten years, so her experience and expertise in the pharmacy benefit services area is an extremely valuable resource to the Board. She also has over ten years of experience on the Board and the Audit Committees of Caremark and CVS Caremark.
| Larry J. Merlo | Director since May 2010 | Age 57 |
Mr. Merlo has been the Chief Executive Officer of CVS Caremark Corporation since March 2011 and President of CVS Caremark Corporation since May 2010. Mr. Merlo formerly served as Chief Operating Officer of CVS Caremark Corporation from May 2010 through March 2011 and was President of CVS/pharmacy from January 2007 through January 2010; and Executive Vice President of CVS Caremark Corporation from January 2007 to May 2010. Mr. Merlo has been with CVS and its subsidiaries for more than 30 years, and provides the Board with invaluable experience and insight into the retail drugstore and health care industries.
| Jean-Pierre Millon | Director since March 2007 | Age 62 |
Mr. Millon is the retired former President and Chief Executive Officer of PCS Health Systems, Inc. (“PCS”). Mr. Millon joined PCS in 1995, where he served as President and Chief Executive Officer from June 1996 until his retirement in September 2000. He has also served as a director of InfuSystems Holdings, Inc., a provider of pumps, supplies and support to oncology practices and clinics, until his resignation from that board in April 2012, and served as a director of Cypress Bioscience, Inc., a biotechnology company, until his resignation from that board in August 2010. Mr. Millon previously served on the board of Caremark Rx, Inc. from March 2004, upon Caremark’s acquisition of AdvancePCS, and as a director of AdvancePCS (which resulted from the merger of PCS and Advance Paradigm, Inc.) beginning in October 2000. He became a director of CVS Caremark upon the closing of the CVS/Caremark merger. Mr. Millon has ten years of financial management experience and 15 years of general functional management experience, including strategic planning experience specific to pharmacy benefit management companies as the former head of PCS. He also has extensive venture capital and public company board experience.
57
Table of Contents
| Richard J. Swift | Director since September 2006 | Age 68 |
Mr. Swift is the former Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of Foster Wheeler Ltd., an international engineering and construction firm, having served in those positions from April 1994 until his retirement in October 2001. Mr. Swift also served as a member and as Chairman of the Financial Accounting Standards Advisory Council (“FASAC”) from 2002 until his retirement from FASAC in December 2006. Mr. Swift is also a director of Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated, an energy company, Ingersoll-Rand plc, a diversified industrial company, Kaman Corporation, a diversified manufacturer and distributor, and Hubbell Incorporated, an electrical and electronic products company. The Board greatly values Mr. Swift’s financial expertise, including his experience at FASAC and with various public company boards and audit committees for over 30 years of combined service. Mr. Swift is an audit committee financial expert and his accounting and financial skills are important to the oversight of our financial reporting, enterprise and operational risk management.
| William C. Weldon | Director since March 2013 | Age 64 |
Mr. Weldon is the former Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Johnson & Johnson, a global developer and manufacturer of health care products, having served in those positions from 2002 until his retirement as Chief Executive Officer in April 2012 and his retirement from the board in December 2012. Mr. Weldon previously served in a variety of senior executive positions during his 41-year career with Johnson & Johnson. Mr. Weldon is also a director of JPMorgan Chase & Co., a global financial services company. Mr. Weldon’s experience in managing a complex global health care company and his deep knowledge of the worldwide health care market across multiple sectors makes him extremely well suited to serve on our Board. His background in international business management and operating in the highly-regulated health care industry is also greatly valued by the Board.
| Tony L. White | Director since March 2011 | Age 66 |
Mr. White is the former Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of Applied Biosystems, Inc. (formerly Applera Corporation), a developer, manufacturer and marketer of life science systems and genomic information products, having served in those positions from September 1995 until his retirement in November 2008. Mr. White is also a director of Ingersoll-Rand plc, a diversified industrial company, and C.R. Bard, Inc., a company that designs, manufacturers, packages, distributes and sells medical, surgical, diagnostic and patient care devices. Mr. White’s wealth of management experience in the life sciences and health care industries, including over 13 years as Chairman and CEO of an advanced-technology life sciences company and 26 years in various management positions at Baxter International, Inc., a provider of medical products and services, makes him well qualified to serve as a director of CVS Caremark.
The Board of Directors unanimously recommends a vote FOR the election of all nominees.
58
Table of Contents
ITEM 2: RATIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Audit Committee of the Company’s Board of Directors (the “Committee”) has appointed Ernst & Young LLP (“Ernst & Young”), an independent registered public accounting firm, to audit the financial statements of the Company for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2013, and recommended to our full Board of Directors that it approve that appointment. We are submitting the appointment by the Committee to you for your ratification.
Fees of Principal Accounting Firm
The following table summarizes the fees paid to Ernst & Young for services rendered during fiscal 2012 and 2011.
| Fiscal Year Ended 12/31/12 |
Fiscal Year Ended 12/31/11 |
|||||||
| Audit Fees (1) |
$ | 6,473,543 | $ | |||||