PROXY STATEMENT
We are providing these proxy materials in connection with Oracle Corporation’s 2024 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the Annual Meeting). The Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials (the Notice), this proxy statement and the accompanying proxy card or voting instruction card, including an Internet link to our most recently filed Annual Report on Form 10-K, were first made available to stockholders on or about September 25, 2024. This proxy statement contains important information for you to consider when deciding how to vote on the matters brought before the Annual Meeting. Please read it carefully.
HOW DO I VOTE?
Your vote is important. You may vote on the Internet, by telephone, by mail or during the Annual Meeting, all as described below. The Internet and telephone voting procedures are designed to authenticate stockholders by use of a control number and to allow you to confirm that your instructions have been properly recorded. If you vote by telephone or on the Internet, you do not need to return your proxy card or voting instruction card.
Telephone and Internet voting facilities are available now and will be available 24 hours a day until 11:59 p.m., Eastern Time, on November 13, 2024.
If you are a stockholder of record, you may submit your proxy by going to www.proxyvote.com and following the instructions provided in the Notice. If you requested printed proxy materials, you may follow the instructions provided with your proxy materials and on your proxy card. If your shares are held with a broker, you will need to go to the website provided on your Notice or voting instruction card. Have your Notice, proxy card or voting instruction card in hand when you access the voting website. On the Internet voting site, you can confirm that your instructions have been properly recorded. If you vote on the Internet, you can also request electronic delivery of future proxy materials.
If you are a stockholder of record, you can also vote by telephone by dialing 1-800-690-6903. If your shares are held with a broker, you can vote by telephone by dialing the number specified on your voting instruction card. Easy-to-follow voice prompts will allow you to vote your shares and confirm that your instructions have been properly recorded. Have your proxy card or voting instruction card in hand when you call.
If you have requested printed proxy materials, you may choose to vote by mail, by marking your proxy card or voting instruction card, dating and signing it, and returning it in the postage-paid envelope provided. If the envelope is missing and you are a stockholder of record, please mail your completed proxy card to Vote Processing, c/o Broadridge, 51 Mercedes Way, Edgewood, NY 11717. If the envelope is missing and your shares are held with a broker, please mail your completed voting instruction card to the address specified therein. Please allow sufficient time for mailing if you decide to vote by mail.
Please note that if you received a Notice, you cannot vote by marking the Notice and returning it. The Notice provides instructions on how to vote by Internet and how to request paper copies of the proxy materials.
Ø |
Voting at the Annual Meeting |
The method or timing of your vote will not limit your right to vote at the Annual Meeting if you attend the Annual Meeting and vote on the virtual meeting platform. The shares voted electronically, telephonically, or represented by the proxy cards received, properly marked, dated, signed and not revoked, will be voted at the Annual Meeting.
|
|
|
|
|
2024 Annual Meeting of Stockholders
7 |
Our company-owned aircraft are considered a business tool to be used for essential business purposes only. Our policy regarding the use of company-owned aircraft prohibits the use of the aircraft for non-business travel by all employees other than our CTO and CEO. In fiscal 2024, Ms. Catz used company-owned aircraft for personal travel. The aggregate incremental cost to Oracle for use of the company-owned aircraft for non-business travel in fiscal 2024 was $200,086 for Ms. Catz. The aggregate incremental cost of non-business use of our company-owned aircraft includes the variable costs incurred by Oracle to operate the aircraft for such use, including fuel costs, crew expenses (including travel, lodging and meals), in-flight catering, landing fees, communication expenses and other trip-related variable costs, and does not include fixed costs that would be incurred regardless of whether there was any non-business use of the aircraft, such as aircraft purchase costs, pilot and crew salaries, insurance costs and maintenance. For trips that involve mixed non-business and business usage, we include the incremental cost of any non-business usage (i.e., the excess of the cost of the actual trip over the cost of a hypothetical trip without the non-business usage). We include the aggregate incremental costs to Oracle of this personal travel in the total value of perquisites and personal benefits paid to Ms. Catz.
We also permit our NEOs to be accompanied by guests during business travel on private aircraft that are provided by Oracle. This may be deemed to be a “personal benefit” for our NEOs and we include any aggregate incremental costs incurred by Oracle in the total value of perquisites and personal benefits paid to our NEOs. We believe there was no aggregate incremental cost to Oracle during fiscal 2024 as a result of our NEOs being accompanied by guests when traveling on Oracle business.
To the extent required by tax regulations, amounts associated with non-business use of our company-owned aircraft are imputed as income and no tax gross-ups are provided to our NEOs for this imputed income. Additionally, in certain instances, a portion of the aircraft costs for either non-business travel or which is attributable to non-business passengers, cannot be deducted by Oracle for corporate income tax purposes. When applicable, we disclose the amount of these incremental forgone tax deductions in the footnotes accompanying the SCT. In fiscal 2024, use of our company-owned aircraft by our NEOs did not result in a loss of a corporate income tax deduction.
We hire legal counsel to assist our executives with complying with reporting obligations under applicable laws in connection with their personal political campaign contributions. We view this as a necessary and appropriate business expense because the personal political contributions of our executives can trigger disclosure obligations by Oracle. However, because this may be viewed as conveying a personal benefit to these individuals, we include the costs incurred by Oracle in connection with such legal counsel in the total value of perquisites and personal benefits paid to our NEOs.
Insurance Premiums
All Oracle employees are eligible to receive flexible credits to be used toward covering the premiums for cafeteria-style benefit plans, including life insurance and long-term disability benefits. The amounts of flexible credits received by our NEOs are reported in the “All Other Compensation” column of the SCT.
401(k) Plan
Our employees, including our NEOs, are eligible to participate in our 401(k) Plan and we match 50% of an eligible salary deferral up to the first 6% of such deferrals, not to exceed $5,100 in a calendar year and subject to a multi-year vesting schedule. The amounts of the matching contributions are reported in the “All Other Compensation” column of the SCT.
Pension Benefits or Supplemental Retirement Benefits
During fiscal 2024, other than the 401(k) Plan and our deferred compensation programs (described below), we did not provide any pension or retirement benefits to our NEOs and do not believe that these types of benefits are necessary to further the objectives of our executive compensation program.
We offer the 1993 Deferred Compensation Plan (the Cash Deferred Compensation Plan) to certain employees, including eligible NEOs, under which participants may elect to defer all or a portion of their base salary and annual cash bonus. We also offer certain employees, including eligible NEOs, the ability to defer the settlement of their earned and vested RSUs under the terms of the Oracle Corporation Stock Unit Award Deferred Compensation Plan
|
|
|
50
2024 Annual Meeting of Stockholders |
|
|
LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
Derivative Litigation Concerning Oracle’s NetSuite Acquisition
On May 3 and July 18, 2017, two alleged stockholders filed separate derivative lawsuits in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, purportedly on Oracle’s behalf. Thereafter, the court consolidated the two derivative cases and designated the July 18, 2017 complaint as the operative complaint. The consolidated lawsuit was brought against all the then-current members and one former member of our Board, and Oracle as a nominal defendant. Plaintiff alleged that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties by causing Oracle to agree to purchase NetSuite Inc. at an excessive price. The complaint sought (and the operative complaint continues to seek) declaratory relief, unspecified monetary damages (including interest) and attorneys’ fees and costs. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss, which the court denied on March 19, 2018.
On May 4, 2018, our Board established a Special Litigation Committee (SLC) to investigate the allegations in this derivative action. Three non-employee directors served on the SLC. On August 15, 2019, the SLC filed a letter with the court, stating that the SLC believed that plaintiff should be allowed to proceed with the derivative litigation on behalf of Oracle. After the SLC advised the Board that it had fulfilled its duties and obligations, the Board withdrew the SLC’s authority, except that the SLC maintained certain authority to respond to discovery requests in the litigation.
After plaintiff filed the July 18, 2017 complaint, an additional plaintiff joined the case. Plaintiffs filed several amended complaints and filed their final amended complaint on December 11, 2020. The final amended complaint asserts claims for breach of fiduciary duty against our Chief Executive Officer, our Chief Technology Officer, the estate of Mark Hurd (our former Chief Executive Officer who passed away on October 18, 2019) and two other members of our Board. Oracle is named as a nominal defendant. On December 11, 2020, the estate of Mark Hurd and the two other members of our Board moved to dismiss this complaint. On June 21, 2021, the court granted this motion as to the estate of Mark Hurd and one Board member and denied the motion as to the other Board member, who filed an answer to the complaint on August 9, 2021. On December 28, 2020, our Chief Executive Officer, our Chief Technology Officer and Oracle as a nominal defendant filed answers to the operative complaint.
Trial commenced on July 18, 2022, and on November 18, 2022, the court held a final hearing on the parties’ post-trial briefing. On December 27, 2022, the court “so ordered” a stipulation, dismissing the Board member from this action. On May 12, 2023, the court issued its trial ruling, finding for defendants and rejecting plaintiffs’ claims. The court entered judgment for defendants on March 5, 2024. On April 2, 2024, plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal, appealing the court’s judgment and certain discovery decisions relating to the SLC. On May 2, 2024, plaintiffs filed their opening appellate brief. On June 3, 2024, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Technology Officer filed their opposition brief, and the SLC filed an opposition brief on the discovery issues. On July 10, 2024, plaintiffs filed their reply brief. The Supreme Court of Delaware, sitting en banc, will hear oral argument on October 23, 2024.
While Oracle continues to evaluate these claims, we do not believe these matters will have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.
Derivative Litigation Concerning Oracle’s Cloud Business
On February 12 and May 6, 2019, two stockholder derivative lawsuits were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The cases were consolidated, and on July 8, 2019, a single plaintiff filed a consolidated complaint. The consolidated complaint brought various claims relating to a Rule 10b-5 class action that was filed in the same court on August 10, 2018, and which was settled for a payment by Oracle of $17,500,000. That matter is now concluded. In the Rule 10b-5 class action, plaintiff alleged Oracle and certain Oracle officers made or were responsible for false and misleading statements regarding Oracle’s cloud business.
Plaintiff in the derivative action filed an amended complaint on June 4, 2021. The derivative suit is brought by an alleged stockholder of Oracle, purportedly on Oracle’s behalf, against our Chief Technology Officer, our Chief Executive Officer and the estate of Mark Hurd. Plaintiff claims that the alleged actions described in the 10b-5 class action caused harm to Oracle, including harming Oracle because Oracle allegedly repurchased its own stock at an inflated price. Plaintiff also claims that defendants violated their fiduciary duties of candor, good faith, loyalty, and due care by failing to prevent this alleged harm. Plaintiff also brings derivative claims for violations of federal securities laws. Plaintiff seeks a ruling that this case may proceed as a derivative action, a finding that defendants are liable for breaching their fiduciary duties, an award of damages to Oracle, an order directing defendants to enact corporate reforms, attorneys’ fees and costs, and unspecified relief. The parties have reached an agreement in
|
|
|
|
|
2024 Annual Meeting of Stockholders
69 |
PROPOSAL NO. 3: RATIFICATION OF THE SELECTION OF OUR INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
Our F&A Committee is responsible for overseeing the engagement, independence, compensation, retention and services of our independent registered public accounting firm retained to audit our consolidated financial statements. The F&A Committee has selected Ernst & Young LLP (EY) as our independent registered public accounting firm to perform the audit of our consolidated financial statements for fiscal 2025. Representatives of EY will be present at the Annual Meeting, will be given an opportunity to make a statement at the meeting if they desire to do so and will be available to respond to appropriate questions from stockholders.
EY has served as our independent registered public accounting firm since 2002. In conjunction with the mandated rotation of EY’s lead engagement partner, the F&A Committee is involved in the selection of EY’s lead engagement partner. The F&A Committee also periodically considers whether there should be a rotation of independent registered public accounting firms because the F&A Committee believes that it is important for the registered public accounting firm to maintain independence and objectivity. In deciding to engage EY, our F&A Committee reviewed, among other factors, registered public accounting firm independence issues raised by commercial relationships we have with the other major accounting firms. We have no commercial relationship with EY that would impair its independence. Consequently, at this time, the F&A Committee does not believe that a rotation of registered public accounting firms is merited and believes that the continued retention of EY to serve as our independent registered public accounting firm is in the best interests of Oracle and its stockholders.
The F&A Committee reviews audit and non-audit services performed by EY, as well as the fees charged by EY for such services. In its review of non-audit service fees, the F&A Committee considers, among other things, the possible effect of the performance of such services on the registered public accounting firm’s independence. Additional information concerning the F&A Committee and its activities with EY can be found in the following sections of this proxy statement: “Board of Directors—Committees, Membership and Meetings” and “Report of the Finance and Audit Committee of the Board of Directors.”
Pre-approval Policy and Procedures
We have a policy that outlines procedures intended to ensure that our F&A Committee pre-approves all audit and non-audit services provided to us by EY. The current policy provides for (1) general pre-approval of audit and audit-related services which do not exceed certain aggregate dollar thresholds approved by the F&A Committee, and (2) specific pre-approval of all other permitted services and any proposed services which exceed these same dollar thresholds. Throughout the year, the F&A Committee reviews updates regarding the nature and extent of services provided by EY.
The term of any general pre-approval is twelve months from the date of pre-approval unless the F&A Committee considers a different period and states otherwise. The F&A Committee will annually review and pre-approve a dollar amount for each category of services that may be provided by EY without requiring further approval from the F&A Committee. The policy describes the audit, audit-related, tax and all other services that have this general pre-approval, and the F&A Committee may add to, or subtract from, the list of general pre-approved services from time to time.
In connection with this pre-approval policy, the F&A Committee will consider whether the categories of pre-approved services are consistent with the SEC’s rules on auditor independence. The F&A Committee will also consider whether the independent registered public accounting firm may be best positioned to provide the most effective and efficient service, for reasons such as its familiarity with our business, people, culture, accounting systems, risk profile and other factors, and whether the service might enhance our ability to manage or control risk or improve audit quality. All such factors will be considered as a whole, and no one factor is necessarily determinative.
The F&A Committee is also mindful of the relationship between fees for audit and non-audit services in deciding whether to pre-approve any such services. It may determine, for each fiscal year, the appropriate ratio between the total amount of fees for audit, audit related and tax services and the total amount of fees for certain permissible non-audit services classified as “all other fees.”
The F&A Committee pre-approved all audit and non-audit fees of EY during fiscal 2024.
|
|
|
|
|
2024 Annual Meeting of Stockholders
75 |
PROPOSAL NO. 4: STOCKHOLDER PROPOSAL REGARDING A REPORT ON CLIMATE RISKS TO RETIREMENT PLAN BENEFICIARIES
As You Sow, on behalf of Remmer Family Foundation Inc, Edwards Mother Earth Foundation, Frances L. Bell T/W fbo Roger de Freitas, Humankind Benefit Corporation and The Pleiades Trust, have notified us that they intend to present the following proposal (the Retirement Plan Climate Risk Report Proposal) at the Annual Meeting. The address and share ownership information of the proponents is available upon oral or written request. The Retirement Plan Climate Risk Report Proposal is presented in the form in which it was received, and Oracle is not responsible for any inaccuracies it may contain.
The Board of Directors opposes the following Retirement Plan Climate Risk Report Proposal for the reasons stated after the proposal.
Proposal No. 4 – Retirement Plan Climate Risk Report
WHEREAS: Greenhouse gas emissions and the resulting warming is causing significant, deleterious consequences for the global economy. Those harms are predicted to grow. Prior studies estimate that unmitigated climate change will cut the world economy by $23 trillion by 2050; a recent study indicates that the long-term costs may be six times higher than previously estimated. 1,2
These effects will have a particularly significant impact on workers saving for retirement. Retirement plan beneficiaries have long investment horizons, and “[t]he longer term the investment horizon, the more likely it is that climate will not only be a material risk, but the most material risk.”3 Climate portfolio risk to retirement plans will be difficult to mitigate. An International Finance Corporation report concludes that “…the traditional way of managing risk through a shift in asset allocation into increased holdings of more conservative, lower risk, lower return asset classes may do little to offset climate risks.”4
While our Company has taken actions to address its operational greenhouse gas emissions,5 it has not acted to meaningfully address the emissions generated by its retirement plan investments. The plan’s most popular option by assets invested is the Vanguard Target Retirement fund series. The funds in this series account for 26% of plan assets.6 These funds invest heavily in high-carbon companies and companies contributing to deforestation.7
High-carbon and deforestation-risk retirement plan investments are especially perverse when made on behalf of younger workers with longer term investment time horizons.8 Such investments help fuel the climate crisis and make worst-case economic scenarios more likely by locking in future temperature increases. The retirement savings of younger workers will therefore suffer relatively higher impact from climate-related declines in global GDP than older workers’ retirement savings.
The Company’s high carbon retirement plan may also contribute to difficulty in worker recruitment and retention, as polling indicates employee demand for responsible retirement options.9
Federal law requires that retirement plan fiduciaries act in beneficiaries’ best interests and ensure prudence of the plan’s investments. Recent regulatory amendments have confirmed that managing material climate risk is an appropriate consideration for retirement plan fiduciaries.10 The Company can best ensure that it is meeting its obligations to employees—especially younger employees—by appropriately mitigating climate risk in its retirement plan investments.
BE IT RESOLVED: Shareholders request Oracle publish a report disclosing if and how the Company is protecting plan beneficiaries—especially those with a longer investment time horizon—from increased future portfolio risk created by present-day investments in high-carbon companies.
1 https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/22/climate/climate-change-economy.html
2 https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2021/sep/economic-cost-climate-change-could-be-six-times-higher-previously-thought
3 https://www.plansponsor.com/in-depth/climate-change-benchmarking-risk-retirement-plans/
4 https://www.calpers.ca.gov/docs/forms-publications/mercer-asset-allocation-report.pdf, p.2
5 https://www.oracle.com/sustainability/
6 https://investyourvalues.org/retirement-plans/oracle
7 https://investyourvalues.org/retirement-plans/oracle
8 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2022-10-20/how-to-purge-fossil-fuel-investments-from-your-401-k-or-ira#xj4y7vzkg
9 https://www.benefitnews.com/news/employees-want-retirement-plans-to-include-esg-investing
10 https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/12/01/2022-25783/prudence-and-loyalty-in-selecting-plan-investments-and-exercising-shareholder-rights
|
|
|
|
|
2024 Annual Meeting of Stockholders
77 |
Statement in Opposition to Proposal No. 4
At Oracle, we believe that our success is driven by the quality of our people, and this belief drives our benefits philosophy. We strive to attract and retain talented employees through our comprehensive employee benefits, including by helping our employees save for retirement through a flexible and thoughtfully designed 401(k) plan. In furtherance of our benefits philosophy, plan participants have the ability to direct their investments to a variety of options, including climate conscious and other environmental, social and governance (ESG)-focused options. However, by focusing too narrowly on climate issues, the proposal risks putting undue pressure on the plan fiduciary to prioritize those issues over plan participants’ financial interests. As a result, our Board believes the report requested by this proposal is an ineffective means of promoting environmental sustainability and would inappropriately interfere with the plan fiduciary’s discharge of its fiduciary duties under U.S. federal law.
Oracle’s 401(k) plan participants are already free to invest in a wide range of investments, including ESG-focused investment options.
Oracle’s 401(k) plan is designed to offer plan participants flexibility to pursue their retirement goals via a wide range of options and strategies, including target date funds, passive and active investments covering specific market sectors, and options to invest outside of the core fund offerings. Plan participants may also use the plan’s self-directed brokerage option, which provides even broader access to individual stocks, exchange-traded funds, mutual funds and bonds, some of which focus on ESG factors. Taken together, the diverse investment options under our 401(k) plan already enable participants to tailor their investment strategies in ways that align with their financial goals, risk tolerances and investment preferences, including ESG principles.
The plan fiduciary of our 401(k) plan is legally required to select investment options solely in the interest of plan participants and is not responsible for selecting the underlying investments that comprise such options.
As is customary for large plans like Oracle’s, investment options under our 401(k) plan are chosen and monitored by an internal plan committee, which reports to our Board and acts as an internal independent fiduciary (in conjunction with an external co-fiduciary investment advisor) to discharge its duties as plan fiduciary with respect to our 401(k) plan. U.S. federal law requires a plan fiduciary, including the fiduciary of our 401(k) plan, to exercise reasonable care, skill and prudence when selecting investment options under a retirement plan to be made available to plan participants, and to select investment options (including the default investment option under the plan) based on factors that it determines are relevant to a risk and return analysis. The plan fiduciary may not “subordinate the interests of the participants and beneficiaries in their retirement income or financial benefits under the plan to other objectives” or “sacrifice investment return or take on additional investment risk to promote benefits or goals unrelated” to such interests.
Consistent with this obligation under U.S. federal law, Oracle’s plan fiduciary selects investment options based on the risk and return factors that it deems relevant and appropriate to the independent discharge of its fiduciary duties. The plan fiduciary reviews these investment options each quarter to evaluate their appropriateness for a long-term investment horizon and thoughtfully analyzes, constructs and monitors investment options across a variety of different asset classes and investment styles, taking into account the potential risks, rewards and goals of each investment option. It also evaluates the third-party managers of our 401(k) plan’s core investment options on their ability to maximize the financial return on their strategies by reacting and responding to market changes over time adjusting to both long-term and short-term changes in the investment environment. These managers, and not Oracle, are ultimately responsible for selecting the investments that comprise their investment portfolios.
While the Board recognizes that climate, carbon and other ESG-related risks can be relevant to selecting investment options, the Board believes that the report requested by this proposal focuses too narrowly on these areas and risks putting undue pressure on the plan fiduciary to give greater weight to such factors than it considers appropriate in its evaluation of risks and returns or to prioritize such factors over plan participants’ financial interests. As a result, the proposal may subvert the ability of the plan fiduciary to exercise independent judgment in the discharge of its fiduciary duties.
The proposal is an ineffective means of promoting environmental sustainability.
While Oracle is committed to environmental sustainability, the Board believes that the report requested by this proposal would not do more to protect plan participants or provide any meaningful additional information to our
|
|
|
78
2024 Annual Meeting of Stockholders |
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure - USD ($)
|
12 Months Ended |
May 31, 2024 |
May 31, 2023 |
May 31, 2022 |
May 31, 2021 |
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure, Table |
The following tables and related disclosures have been prepared in accordance with the SEC’s pay versus performance rules in Item 402(v) of Regulation S-K under the Exchange Act and do not necessarily reflect the economic benefit actually realized by our NEOs or the method by which the Compensation Committee makes compensation determinations. For a discussion of our executive compensation program and the Compensation Committee’s decision-making process in determining and approving our NEOs’ compensation, see “Executive Compensation—Compensation Discussion and Analysis” beginning o n page 36. Pay Versus Performance Table
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compensation Actually Paid (CAP) to PEO ($) (2) |
|
Average SCT Total for Non- PEO NEOs |
|
Average CAP to Non-PEO NEOs |
|
Value of Initial Fixed $100 Investment Based On: |
|
Net Income ($) (millions) |
|
Non-GAAP Operating Income Growth ($) (6) (millions) |
|
Total Shareholder Return (TSR) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024 |
|
|
|
6,464,234 |
|
|
|
|
94,264,234 |
|
|
|
|
13,191,706 |
|
|
|
|
38,148,634 |
|
|
|
|
132.03 |
|
|
|
|
136.76 |
|
|
|
|
10,467 |
|
|
|
|
2,153 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023 |
|
|
|
5,250,680 |
|
|
|
|
304,050,680 |
|
|
|
|
12,487,762 |
|
|
|
|
96,299,855 |
|
|
|
|
106.80 |
|
|
|
|
68.89 |
|
|
|
|
8,503 |
|
|
|
|
1,309 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022 |
|
|
|
138,192,032 |
|
|
|
|
139,242,032 |
|
|
|
|
58,544,998 |
|
|
|
|
56,911,587 |
|
|
|
|
37.95 |
|
|
|
|
42.02 |
|
|
|
|
6,717 |
|
|
|
|
593 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021 |
|
|
|
10,631,223 |
|
|
|
|
40,389,348 |
|
|
|
|
12,161,232 |
|
|
|
|
31,342,646 |
|
|
|
|
48.84 |
|
|
|
|
48.00 |
|
|
|
|
13,746 |
|
|
|
|
1,618 |
|
(1) |
For fiscal years 2024, 2023, 2022 and 2021, Safra A. Catz served as our principal executive officer (PEO). Our non-PEO NEOs for fiscal years 2022 and 2021 were Lawrence J. Ellison, Edward Screven and Dorian E. Daley. Our non-PEO NEOs for fiscal years 2024 and 2023 were Jeffrey O. Henley, Stuart Levey and Edward Screven. In addition, although Mr. Ellison was not an NEO for fiscal year 2024 or 2023 under applicable SEC rules, we have voluntarily included him as a non-PEO NEO for each of such years. |
(2) |
The amounts reported in this column represent the amount of “compensation actually paid” (CAP) to Ms. Catz computed in accordance with Item 402(v) of Regulation S-K and do not reflect the actual amount of compensation earned by or paid to Ms. Catz during the applicable year. In accordance with the requirements of Item 402(v) of Regulation S-K, the following adjustments were made to Ms. Catz’s total compensation for each year to determine the CAP: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deduction of Equity Amounts Reported in SCT |
|
Fair Value for Unvested Awards Granted in the Covered Year |
|
Fair Value for Vested Awards Granted in the Covered Year |
|
Change in Fair Value of Outstanding Unvested Awards from Prior Years |
|
Change in Fair Value of Awards from Prior Years that Vested in the Covered Year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024 |
|
|
|
6,464,234 |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
54,300,000 |
(a) |
|
|
|
33,500,000 |
|
|
|
|
94,264,234 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023 |
|
|
|
5,250,680 |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
298,800,000 |
(b) |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
304,050,680 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022 |
|
|
|
138,192,032 |
|
|
|
|
(129,275,000) |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
123,300,000 |
|
|
|
|
7,025,000 |
|
|
|
|
139,242,032 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021 |
|
|
|
10,631,223 |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
29,325,000 |
|
|
|
|
433,125 |
|
|
|
|
40,389,348 |
|
|
(a) |
This amount includes the change in the fair value of 2,500,000 PSOs (representing the third tranche of PSOs) which were earned in fiscal 2024 and vested in fiscal 2025 on June 27, 2024. |
|
(b) |
This amount includes the change in the fair value of 2,500,000 PSOs (representing the second tranche of PSOs) which were earned in fiscal 2023 and vested in fiscal 2024 on June 30, 2023. |
(3) |
The amounts reported in this column represent the average amount of CAP to the non-PEO NEOs as a group, as computed in accordance with Item 402(v) of Regulation S-K. The dollar amounts do not reflect the actual average amount of compensation earned by or paid to the non-PEO NEOs as a group during the applicable year. In accordance with the requirements of Item 402(v) of Regulation S-K, the following adjustments were made to the average total compensation for the non-PEO NEOs for each year to determine the CAP: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average SCT Total for non-PEO NEOs |
|
Deduction of Average Equity Amounts Reported in SCT |
|
Average Fair Value for Unvested Awards Granted in the Covered Year |
|
Average Fair Value for Vested Awards Granted in the Covered Year |
|
Change in Average Fair Value of Outstanding Unvested Awards from Prior Years |
|
Change in Average Fair Value of Awards from Prior Years that Vested in the Covered Year |
|
Average CAP to non-PEO NEOs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024 |
|
|
|
13,191,706 |
|
|
|
|
(9,438,478 |
) |
|
|
|
9,932,357 |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
15,424,691 |
(a) |
|
|
|
9,038,358 |
|
|
|
|
38,148,634 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023 |
|
|
|
12,487,762 |
|
|
|
|
(9,341,022 |
) |
|
|
|
14,522,834 |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
78,125,625 |
(b) |
|
|
|
504,656 |
|
|
|
|
96,299,855 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022 |
|
|
|
58,544,998 |
|
|
|
|
(53,190,333 |
) |
|
|
|
8,279,833 |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
39,812,596 |
|
|
|
|
3,464,493 |
|
|
|
|
56,911,587 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021 |
|
|
|
12,161,232 |
|
|
|
|
(6,701,250 |
) |
|
|
|
9,715,000 |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
15,523,575 |
|
|
|
|
644,089 |
|
|
|
|
31,342,646 |
|
|
(a) |
This calculation includes the change in the fair value of 2,500,000 PSOs (representing the third tranche of PSOs) held by Mr. Ellison which were earned in fiscal 2024 and vested in fiscal 2025 on June 27, 2024. |
|
(b) |
This calculation includes the change in the fair value of 2,500,000 PSOs (representing the second tranche of PSOs) held by Mr. Ellison which were earned in fiscal 2023 and vested in fiscal 2024 on June 30, 2023. |
(4) |
The amounts reported in this column reflect the cumulative total stockholder return on our common stock for each of the last four fiscal years ended May 31, 2024, assuming an investment of $100 on May 31, 2020, and the reinvestment of any dividends. |
(5) |
The peer group used in this disclosure, the Dow Jones U.S. Technology Total Return Index, is the same peer group used in the Stock Performance Graph in Part II, Item 5 of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2024. The amounts reported in this column reflect the cumulative total return of the Dow Jones U.S. Technology Total Return Index for each of the last four fiscal years ended May 31, 2024, assuming an investment of $100 on May 31, 2020. |
(6) |
Non-GAAP operating income is a non-GAAP financial measure that reflects adjustments based on stock-based compensation expenses, amortization of intangible assets, acquisition related and other expenses and restructuring expenses. As noted in the CD&A, year-over-year growth in our non-GAAP operating income is the financial performance metric that is used to determine performance-based cash bonuses under the Executive Bonus Plan, and which funds our discretionary bonus plan. For more information see “Executive Compensation—Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Elements of Our Executive Compensation Program—Annual Cash Bonuses” beginning on page 46. |
|
|
|
|
Company Selected Measure Name |
Non-GAAP Operating Income Growth
|
|
|
|
Named Executive Officers, Footnote |
Our non-PEO NEOs for fiscal years 2022 and 2021 were Lawrence J. Ellison, Edward Screven and Dorian E. Daley. Our non-PEO NEOs for fiscal years 2024 and 2023 were Jeffrey O. Henley, Stuart Levey and Edward Screven. In addition, although Mr. Ellison was not an NEO for fiscal year 2024 or 2023 under applicable SEC rules, we have voluntarily included him as a non-PEO NEO for each of such years.
|
|
|
|
Peer Group Issuers, Footnote |
The peer group used in this disclosure, the Dow Jones U.S. Technology Total Return Index, is the same peer group used in the Stock Performance Graph in Part II, Item 5 of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2024. The amounts reported in this column reflect the cumulative total return of the Dow Jones U.S. Technology Total Return Index for each of the last four fiscal years ended May 31, 2024, assuming an investment of $100 on May 31, 2020.
|
|
|
|
PEO Total Compensation Amount |
$ 6,464,234
|
$ 5,250,680
|
$ 138,192,032
|
$ 10,631,223
|
PEO Actually Paid Compensation Amount |
$ 94,264,234
|
304,050,680
|
139,242,032
|
40,389,348
|
Adjustment To PEO Compensation, Footnote |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deduction of Equity Amounts Reported in SCT |
|
Fair Value for Unvested Awards Granted in the Covered Year |
|
Fair Value for Vested Awards Granted in the Covered Year |
|
Change in Fair Value of Outstanding Unvested Awards from Prior Years |
|
Change in Fair Value of Awards from Prior Years that Vested in the Covered Year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024 |
|
|
|
6,464,234 |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
54,300,000 |
(a) |
|
|
|
33,500,000 |
|
|
|
|
94,264,234 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023 |
|
|
|
5,250,680 |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
298,800,000 |
(b) |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
304,050,680 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022 |
|
|
|
138,192,032 |
|
|
|
|
(129,275,000) |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
123,300,000 |
|
|
|
|
7,025,000 |
|
|
|
|
139,242,032 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021 |
|
|
|
10,631,223 |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
29,325,000 |
|
|
|
|
433,125 |
|
|
|
|
40,389,348 |
|
|
(a) |
This amount includes the change in the fair value of 2,500,000 PSOs (representing the third tranche of PSOs) which were earned in fiscal 2024 and vested in fiscal 2025 on June 27, 2024. |
|
(b) |
This amount includes the change in the fair value of 2,500,000 PSOs (representing the second tranche of PSOs) which were earned in fiscal 2023 and vested in fiscal 2024 on June 30, 2023. |
|
|
|
|
Non-PEO NEO Average Total Compensation Amount |
$ 13,191,706
|
12,487,762
|
58,544,998
|
12,161,232
|
Non-PEO NEO Average Compensation Actually Paid Amount |
$ 38,148,634
|
96,299,855
|
56,911,587
|
31,342,646
|
Adjustment to Non-PEO NEO Compensation Footnote |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average SCT Total for non-PEO NEOs |
|
Deduction of Average Equity Amounts Reported in SCT |
|
Average Fair Value for Unvested Awards Granted in the Covered Year |
|
Average Fair Value for Vested Awards Granted in the Covered Year |
|
Change in Average Fair Value of Outstanding Unvested Awards from Prior Years |
|
Change in Average Fair Value of Awards from Prior Years that Vested in the Covered Year |
|
Average CAP to non-PEO NEOs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024 |
|
|
|
13,191,706 |
|
|
|
|
(9,438,478 |
) |
|
|
|
9,932,357 |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
15,424,691 |
(a) |
|
|
|
9,038,358 |
|
|
|
|
38,148,634 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2023 |
|
|
|
12,487,762 |
|
|
|
|
(9,341,022 |
) |
|
|
|
14,522,834 |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
78,125,625 |
(b) |
|
|
|
504,656 |
|
|
|
|
96,299,855 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022 |
|
|
|
58,544,998 |
|
|
|
|
(53,190,333 |
) |
|
|
|
8,279,833 |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
39,812,596 |
|
|
|
|
3,464,493 |
|
|
|
|
56,911,587 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021 |
|
|
|
12,161,232 |
|
|
|
|
(6,701,250 |
) |
|
|
|
9,715,000 |
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
15,523,575 |
|
|
|
|
644,089 |
|
|
|
|
31,342,646 |
|
|
(a) |
This calculation includes the change in the fair value of 2,500,000 PSOs (representing the third tranche of PSOs) held by Mr. Ellison which were earned in fiscal 2024 and vested in fiscal 2025 on June 27, 2024. |
|
(b) |
This calculation includes the change in the fair value of 2,500,000 PSOs (representing the second tranche of PSOs) held by Mr. Ellison which were earned in fiscal 2023 and vested in fiscal 2024 on June 30, 2023. |
|
|
|
|
Compensation Actually Paid vs. Total Shareholder Return |
|
Compensation Actually Paid and Total Stockholder Return | The following graph illustrates the relationship between CAP to our PEO and the average amount of CAP to our non-PEO NEOs, our cumulative total stockholder return and our cumu la tive peer group total stockholder return for fiscal years 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024, each as set forth in the pay versus performance table above.
|
|
|
|
Compensation Actually Paid vs. Net Income |
|
Compensation Actually Paid and Net Income | The following graph illustrates the relationship between CAP to our PEO and the average amount of CAP to our non-PEO NEOs and our net income for fiscal years 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024, each as set forth in the pay versus performance table above.
|
|
|
|
Compensation Actually Paid vs. Company Selected Measure |
|
Compensation Actually Paid and Non-GAAP Operating Income Growth | The following graph illustrates the relationship between CAP to our PEO and the average amount of CAP to our non-PEO NEOs and our non-GAAP operating income growth for fiscal years 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024, each as set forth in the pay versus performance table above.
|
|
|
|
Total Shareholder Return Vs Peer Group |
|
Compensation Actually Paid and Total Stockholder Return | The following graph illustrates the relationship between CAP to our PEO and the average amount of CAP to our non-PEO NEOs, our cumulative total stockholder return and our cumu la tive peer group total stockholder return for fiscal years 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024, each as set forth in the pay versus performance table above.
|
|
|
|
Tabular List, Table |
Financial Performance Measures The table below lists the financial performance measures that the Compensation Committee beli eve s represent the most important financial performance measures used to link CAP to our NEOs to Oracle’s performance for fiscal 2024. Non-GAAP operating income growth is the financial performance metric that is used to determine performance-based cash bonuses under the Executive Bonus Plan and which funds Oracle’s discretionary corporate bonus plan. The other metrics noted below are the metrics associated with the operational performance goals of the PSOs which are held by our CEO and CTO. The Compensation Committee also believes that market capitalization goals, which are an element of the PSOs, are important to align the long-term compensation paid to our CEO and CTO with the interests of our stockholders. See “Executive Compensation—Compensation Discussion and Analysis” beginning on page 36 for a further description of our executive compensation program. The performance measures included in this table are not ranked by relative importance.
|
|
Non-GAAP Operating Income Growth |
|
Non-GAAP Total Cloud Revenue |
|
Non-GAAP Total SaaS Revenue |
|
Non-GAAP Total PaaS and IaaS Revenue |
|
Non-GAAP SaaS Gross Margin |
|
Non-GAAP PaaS and IaaS Gross Margin |
|
|
|
|
Total Shareholder Return Amount |
$ 132.03
|
106.8
|
37.95
|
48.84
|
Peer Group Total Shareholder Return Amount |
136.76
|
68.89
|
42.02
|
48
|
Net Income (Loss) |
$ 10,467,000,000
|
$ 8,503,000,000
|
$ 6,717,000,000
|
$ 13,746,000,000
|
Company Selected Measure Amount |
2,153,000,000
|
1,309,000,000
|
593,000,000
|
1,618,000,000
|
PEO Name |
Safra A. Catz
|
|
|
|
Measure:: 1 |
|
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
|
Name |
Non-GAAP Operating Income Growth
|
|
|
|
Non-GAAP Measure Description |
Non-GAAP operating income is a non-GAAP financial measure that reflects adjustments based on stock-based compensation expenses, amortization of intangible assets, acquisition related and other expenses and restructuring expenses. As noted in the CD&A, year-over-year growth in our non-GAAP operating income is the financial performance metric that is used to determine performance-based cash bonuses under the Executive Bonus Plan, and which funds our discretionary bonus plan. For more information see “Executive Compensation—Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Elements of Our Executive Compensation Program—Annual Cash Bonuses” beginning on page 46.
|
|
|
|
Measure:: 2 |
|
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
|
Name |
Non-GAAP Total Cloud Revenue
|
|
|
|
Measure:: 3 |
|
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
|
Name |
Non-GAAP Total SaaS Revenue
|
|
|
|
Measure:: 4 |
|
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
|
Name |
Non-GAAP Total PaaS and IaaS Revenue
|
|
|
|
Measure:: 5 |
|
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
|
Name |
Non-GAAP SaaS Gross Margin
|
|
|
|
Measure:: 6 |
|
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
|
Name |
Non-GAAP PaaS and IaaS Gross Margin
|
|
|
|
PEO | Deduction of Equity Amounts Reported in SCT [Member] |
|
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
|
Adjustment to Compensation, Amount |
|
|
$ (129,275,000)
|
|
PEO | Change in Fair Value of Outstanding Unvested Awards from Prior Years [Member] |
|
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
|
Adjustment to Compensation, Amount |
$ 54,300,000
|
$ 298,800,000
|
123,300,000
|
$ 29,325,000
|
PEO | Change in Fair Value of Awards from Prior Years that Vested in the Covered Year [Member] |
|
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
|
Adjustment to Compensation, Amount |
33,500,000
|
|
7,025,000
|
433,125
|
Non-PEO NEO | Deduction of Equity Amounts Reported in SCT [Member] |
|
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
|
Adjustment to Compensation, Amount |
(9,438,478)
|
(9,341,022)
|
(53,190,333)
|
(6,701,250)
|
Non-PEO NEO | Average Fair Value for Unvested Awards Granted in the Covered Year [Member] |
|
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
|
Adjustment to Compensation, Amount |
9,932,357
|
14,522,834
|
8,279,833
|
9,715,000
|
Non-PEO NEO | Change in Fair Value of Outstanding Unvested Awards from Prior Years [Member] |
|
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
|
Adjustment to Compensation, Amount |
15,424,691
|
78,125,625
|
39,812,596
|
15,523,575
|
Non-PEO NEO | Change in Fair Value of Awards from Prior Years that Vested in the Covered Year [Member] |
|
|
|
|
Pay vs Performance Disclosure |
|
|
|
|
Adjustment to Compensation, Amount |
$ 9,038,358
|
$ 504,656
|
$ 3,464,493
|
$ 644,089
|