UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

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 Registrantx

Filed by a Party other than the Registrant¨o

Check the appropriate box:

¨o

    PreliminaryProxy Statement

¨o

    Confidential, for Use of the  Commission Only(as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2))

x

    Definitive Proxy Statement

¨o    Definitive Additional Materials
¨o    Soliciting Material Pursuant to §240.14a-12
GENERAL MOTORS COMPANY
(Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

GENERAL MOTORS COMPANY

(Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if Other Than the Registrant)

(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if Other Than the Registrant)
Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):

xNo fee required.

¨
oFee 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:

¨
oFee paid previously with preliminary materials:

¨
oCheck box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration statement number, or the Form or Schedule and the date of its filing.

(1)Amount previously paid:

(2)Form, Schedule or Registration Statement No.:

(3)Filing Party:

(4)Date Filed:



Table of Contents



GENERAL MOTORS COMPANY

300 Renaissance Center, P.O. Box 300, Detroit, MI 48265-3000

LOGO

April 25, 2013

2014

Dear Stockholder:

You are cordially invited to attend the Annual Meeting of Stockholders of General Motors Company (“GM” or “General Motors” or the “Company” or “we,” or “our”). It will be held at 9:30 a.m. Eastern Time on Thursday,Tuesday, June 6, 2013,10, 2014, at General Motors Global Headquarters, 300 Renaissance Center, Detroit, Michigan 48243.

At

The matters to be acted upon at the meeting stockholders will be asked to vote onare described in the electionNotice of directors,Annual Meeting of Stockholders of General Motors Company and the ratification of the selection of the independent registered public accounting firm for 2013, an advisory proposal to approve executive compensation, and two stockholder proposals, and to transact any other business that is properly brought before the meeting or any adjournment.Proxy Statement. Additionally, there will be a report on the state of the Company’s business operations, and we will provide time for business-related questions and comments. If you plan to attend the meeting, you must request an admission ticket in advance. Please refer to page 57 for further instructions concerning admission tickets. A map and directions are on the back cover of this proxy statement.

This year

As in previous years, we will again furnish proxy materials to our stockholders primarily through the Internet. We will mail a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials (“Notice”) to most of our stockholders, which will contain instructions on how to access proxy materials on the Internet and vote your shares. The Notice will also describe how to request a paper copy of proxy materials or electronic delivery of materials via e-mail, free of charge. Stockholders who have previously elected delivery of our proxy materials electronically will receive an e-mail with instructions on how to access these materials electronically. Stockholders who have previously elected to receive a paper copy of our proxy materials will receive a full paper set of these materials by mail.

Your vote is very important. Whether or not you plan to attend the annual meeting, please submit your vote as soon as possible so that your shares will be represented and voted at the meeting. You may submit your vote by Internet or telephone or by completing and mailing the enclosed proxy card or voting instruction form. Please note that voting in advance by any of these methods will not affect your right to attend the meeting and vote in person. For specific instructions on how to vote your shares, please see“How do I vote without attending the annual meeting?” on page 3.

Thank you for your support and continued interest in General Motors Company.

Sincerely,

LOGO

Daniel F. Akerson

Chairman & Chief Executive Officer


Table of Contents

Notice of Annual Meeting of Stockholders of General Motors Company

 1

Questions and Answers

Mary T. Barra
 2Theodore M. Solso

Item No. 1 – Nomination and Election of Directors

Chief Executive Officer
 8

Information about Nominees for Director

8

Corporate Governance

15

Corporate Governance Guidelines

15

Board Leadership Structure

15

Board’s Role in Risk Oversight

16

Selection of Nominees for Election to the Board

17

Board Meetings and Attendance

18

Size of the Board

18

Voting Standards for the Election of Directors

19

Director Independence

19

Executive Sessions

21

Stockholder Communication with the Board

21

Code of Ethics

21

Confidentiality

21

Director Orientation and Continuing Education

21

Access to Outside Advisors

22

CommitteesChairman of the Board of Directors

22

Non-Employee Director Compensation

24

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

27

Director Stock Ownership and Holding Requirements

27

Security Ownership of Directors, Named Executive Officers, and Certain Others

28

Stockholders Agreement

30

Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions

30

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

32

Executive Compensation

33

Compensation Discussion and Analysis Executive Summary

33

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

36

Compensation Risk Assessment and Management Process

43

2012 Summary Compensation Table

45

Compensation Committee Report

53

Audit Committee Report

58

Fees Paid to Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

59

Item No. 2— Ratification of the Selection of Deloitte & Touche LLP for 2013

60

Item No. 3 — Advisory Vote to Approve Executive Compensation

60

Item No. 4 — Stockholder Proposal Regarding Independent Board Chairman

61

Item No. 5— Stockholder Proposal Regarding Executive Stock Retention

63


LOGO

Notice of Annual Meeting of Stockholders of General Motors Company

Time and Date:
9:30 a.m. Eastern Time, Thursday, June 6, 2013
Place:General Motors Company
General Motors Global Headquarters
300 Renaissance Center
Detroit, Michigan 48243
Agenda Items:

1. Election of directors;

2. Ratification of the selection of the independent registered public accounting firm for 2013;

3. Advisory vote to approve executive compensation;

4. Stockholder proposal regarding independent board chairman;

5. Stockholder proposal regarding executive stock retention; and

6. Transacting any other business that is properly brought before the meeting, or any adjournment.

Board of Directors

Recommendations:

The Board of Directors recommends a vote“FOR” Items 1, 2, and 3 and“AGAINST” Items 4 and 5.
Record Date:You are entitled to vote at the meeting if you were a holder of record of GM Common Stock, $0.01 par value (“Common Stock”), at the close of business on April 8, 2013.
Proxy Voting:Your vote is very important. Whether or not you plan to attend the annual meeting, please submit your vote as soon as possible so that your shares will be represented and voted at the meeting.You may submit your vote by Internet or telephone or by completing and mailing the enclosed proxy card or voting instruction form. Please note that voting in advance by any of these methods will not affect your right to attend the meeting and vote in person. For specific instructions on how to vote your shares, please see “How do I vote without attending the annual meeting?” on page 5.





Table of Contents



Notice of Annual Meeting of Stockholders of General Motors Company
Time and Date:9:30 a.m. Eastern Time, Tuesday, June 10, 2014
Place:General Motors Company
General Motors Global Headquarters
300 Renaissance Center
Detroit, Michigan 48243
Agenda Items:1. Election of directors;
2. Ratification of the selection of Deloitte & Touche LLP as the Company's independent registered
 public accounting firm for 2014;
3. Advisory vote to approve executive compensation;
4. Advisory vote to approve the frequency of a stockholder advisory vote on executive compensation;
5. Approval of the General Motors Company 2014 Short-Term Incentive Plan;
6. Approval of the General Motors Company 2014 Long-Term Incentive Plan;
7. Stockholder proposal regarding cumulative voting;
8. Stockholder proposal regarding independent board chairman; and
9. Transacting any other business that is properly brought before the meeting, or any adjournment.
Board of Directors
Recommendations:
The Board of Directors recommends a vote “FOR” Items 1, 2, and 3, for “ONE YEAR” on Item 4, "FOR" Items 5 and 6, and “AGAINST” Items 7 and 8.
Record Date:You are entitled to vote at the meeting if you were a holder of record of GM Common Stock, $0.01 par value (“Common Stock”), at the close of business on April 11, 2014.
Proxy Voting:
Your vote is very important. Whether or not you plan to attend the annual meeting, please submit your vote as soon as possible so that your shares will be represented and voted at the meeting. You may submit your vote by Internet or telephone or by completing and mailing the enclosed proxy card or voting instruction form. Please note that voting in advance by any of these methods will not affect your right to attend the meeting and vote in person. For specific instructions on how to vote your shares, please see “How do I vote without attending the annual meeting?”on page 3.5.
Admission:If you plan to attend the annual meeting, you must request an admission ticket in advance by following the instructions on page 57 of this proxy statement, and we must receive your request no later than Wednesday, May 29, 2013.June 3, 2014. Each stockholder may bring one guest to the meeting, and you must also request an admission ticket for your guest. Stockholders and their accompanying guest must each present an admission ticket and government-issued photo identification and an admission ticket to enter the meeting.

By order of the Board of Directors,

LOGO

Anne T. Larin

Corporate Secretary

By order of the Board of Directors,
Anne T. Larin
Corporate Secretary
Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the

GM Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be Held on Thursday,Tuesday, June 6, 2013

10, 2014

The Proxy Statement and Annual Report to stockholdersStockholders are available at
www.gm.com/proxymaterials.

  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




Table of Contents

LOGO

Questions and Answers4
Information about Nominees for Director10
Corporate Governance Guidelines15
Board Leadership Structure16
Board’s Role in Risk Oversight17
Selection of Nominees for Election to the Board17
Board Meetings and Attendance19
Size of the Board19
Voting Standards for the Election of Directors19
Director Independence20
Executive Sessions21
Stockholder Communication with the Board21
Code of Ethics21
Confidentiality21
Director Orientation and Continuing Education22
Access to Outside Advisors22
Committees of the Board of Directors22
Non-Employee Director Compensation24
Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation26
Director Stock Ownership and Holding Requirements26
Security Ownership of Directors, Named Executive Officers, and Certain Others27
Stockholders Agreement28
Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions28
Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance30
Compensation Discussion and Analysis31
     Executive Summary31
     Total Compensation Framework and Overview33
     Assessing Compensation Competitiveness34
     Objectives of Our Compensation Program35
     2013 Compensation Decisions and RSU Performance Metric35
     Stock Ownership Requirements38
     Policy on Recoupment of Incentive Compensation38
     Compensation Committee and Consultant Independence38
     Compensation Risk Assessment Process39
          2014 Compensation for Named Executive Officers40
2013 Summary Compensation Table and Related Compensation Tables41
Compensation Committee Report51
Fees Paid to Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm53

  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




PROXY STATEMENT SUMMARY
This summary highlights information contained elsewhere in this Proxy Statement. It does not contain all of the information that you should consider, so you should read the entire proxy statement carefully before voting.

ANNUAL MEETING INFORMATION

Tuesday, June 10, 2014

General Motors Company Global Headquarters
9:30 a.m. Eastern Time300 Renaissance Center
Detroit, Michigan 48243

Voting:
You are entitled to vote at the meeting if you were a holder of record of Common Stock at the close of business on April 11, 2014.
VOTING MATTERS AND BOARD VOTING RECOMMENDATIONS
ProposalBoard Voting RecommendationPage Reference for More Detail
Management Proposals:
1. Election of directorsFOR10
2. Ratification of the selection of Deloitte & Touche LLP as the Company's independent public accounting firm for 2014FOR54
3. Advisory vote to approve executive compensationFOR54
4. Advisory vote to approve the frequency of a stockholder advisory vote on executive compensationONE YEAR55
5. Approval of the General Motors Company 2014 Short-Term Incentive PlanFOR55
6. Approval of the General Motors Company 2014 Long-Term Incentive PlanFOR58
Stockholder Proposals:
7. Stockholder proposal regarding cumulative votingAGAINST65
8. Stockholder proposal regarding independent board chairmanAGAINST66
Your vote is very important. Whether or not you plan to attend the annual meeting, please submit your vote as soon as possible so that your shares will be represented and voted at the meeting. You may submit your vote by Internet or telephone or by completing and mailing the enclosed proxy card or voting instruction form. Please note that voting in advance by any of these methods will not affect your right to attend the meeting and vote in person. For specific instructions on how to vote your shares, please see “How do I vote without attending the annual meeting?” on page 5.
ATTENDING THE ANNUAL MEETING
GM stockholders as of the record date are entitled to attend the annual meeting. In accordance with our security procedures, all attendees must present an admission ticket and government-issued photo identification. You must request an admission ticket in advance by following the instructions on page 7.

1
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




WEBCAST
Our annual meeting will be audio webcast on Tuesday, June 10, 2014 and may be accessed at www.gm.com/gmannualmeeting. Additional information regarding the webcast may be found on page 8.
NOMINEES FOR DIRECTOR (SEE PAGES 10–15)
NameAgeDirector SincePrincipal OccupationIndependentCommittee Membership(1)
Joseph J. Ashton65Vice President, United Auto Workers  
Mary T. Barra522014Chief Executive Officer, General Motors Company  
Erroll B. Davis, Jr.692009Superintendent, Atlanta Public SchoolsXAC, PPC (Chair)
Stephen J. Girsky512009Senior Advisor, General Motors Company FC, PPC
E. Neville Isdell702009Retired Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, The Coca-Cola CompanyXDCGC, ECC (Chair)
Kathryn V. Marinello572009Senior Advisor, Ares Management, LLCXAC, PPC
Admiral Michael G. Mullen USN (ret.)672013Retired Chairman, Joint Chiefs of StaffXAC, PPC
James J. Mulva672012Retired Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, ConocoPhillipsXECC, FC, PPC
Patricia F. Russo612009Retired Chief Executive Officer, Alcatel-LucentXDCGC (Chair), ECC, FC
Thomas M. Schoewe612011Retired Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.XAC (Chair), FC
Theodore M. Solso672012Retired Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Cummins, Inc. and Chairman, General Motors CompanyXAC, DCGC, ECC
Carol M. Stephenson632009Retired Dean, Ivey Business School, The University of Western OntarioXDCGC, ECC
(1)Board Committee Names: AC - Audit Committee, DCGC - Directors and Corporate Governance Committee, ECC - Executive Compensation Committee, FC - Finance Committee, PPC - Public Policy Committee
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION HIGHLIGHTS (SEE PAGES 31–51)
Performance-Based Compensation Structure
Following the U.S. Department of the Treasury's (the "UST") sale of its remaining shares of Common Stock, we have implemented a more appropriate performance-based compensation structure for our Named Executive Officers ("NEOs") comprised of both short- and long-term incentives based on financial and operational metrics for fiscal year 2014 and beyond. In addition to base salary, this structure, shown below, will include: 1) an annual short-term incentive that may be earned upon achievement of annual financial and operating performance goals and individual contribution, and 2) long-term incentives comprised of both restricted stock units ("RSUs") and performance share units ("PSUs").

2
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




General Motors Company 2014 Short-Term Incentive Goals
Performance Measures● Earnings Before Interest and Taxes ("EBIT") - Adjusted
● Adjusted Automotive Free Cash Flow ("Adjusted AFCF")
● Global Market Share
● Quality
Payout Range0%–200% of target
General Motors Company 2014 Long-Term Incentive ("LTI") Goals
Performance Share Units (75% of 2014 LTI)Performance Measures: ● Return on Invested Capital ("ROIC")
● Global Market Share
Payout Range: 0%–200% of target
Performance Period: 2014–2016
RSUs (25% of 2014 LTI)Ratable vesting over a 3-year period
2013 Compensation Program
2013 Fiscal Year Named Executive Officers (1)
Daniel F. AkersonChairman & Chief Executive Officer
Daniel AmmannExecutive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer
Stephen J. GirskyVice Chairman, Corporate Strategy, Business Development, and Global Product Planning
Mary T. BarraExecutive Vice President, Global Product Development, Purchasing & Supply Chain
Karl-Thomas NeumannExecutive Vice President & President, Europe
(1)On January 15, 2014, Daniel F. Akerson stepped down as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer ("CEO") and is serving as Senior Advisor until he leaves the Company in July 2014. Mary T. Barra, who was Executive Vice President, Global Product Development, Purchasing & Supply Chain, was elected by the Board of Directors to replace Mr. Akerson as CEO. Daniel Ammann was named President of the Company with responsibility for managing regional operations around the world, global Cadillac and Chevrolet brand organizations, and GM Financial. Charles K. Stevens, III was named Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer on January 15, 2014, replacing Mr. Ammann. In addition, on January 15, 2014, Stephen J. Girsky stepped down as Vice Chairman and is serving as Senior Advisor until he leaves the Company in July 2014. Mr. Girsky remains on our Board of Directors.
During 2013, the compensation structure for our NEOs included the following core elements:
Base salary;
Salary stock units ("SSUs"); and
Long-Term RSUs
No adjustments were made to base salaries for NEOs in 2013. Mr. Akerson’s SSU awards remained at the 2012 level. The other NEOs, with the exception of Dr. Neumann, received increases in SSU awards to maintain their total compensation at competitive levels.
Mr. Akerson did not receive an RSU grant in 2013 in acknowledgment of the possibility of his retirement before the completion of the three-year vesting period for RSUs. The other NEOs, with the exception of Dr. Neumann, received RSU grants based on achievement of target 2012 Adjusted AFCF performance.
Dr. Neumann was hired in March 2013, and his base salary, SSU awards, and RSU grant were set pursuant to his employment agreement.

3
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




PROXY STATEMENT
This proxy statement is provided in connection with the solicitation of proxies, by order of the Board of Directors of General Motors Company (the “Board” or the “Board of Directors”) of General Motors Company,, to be used at the 20132014 annual meeting of stockholders of the Company. The enclosed proxy card or voting instruction form represents your holdings of our Common Stock in the account name shown. We expect that on or after Thursday,Friday, April 25, 2013,2014, this proxy statement and the enclosed proxy card or voting instruction form will be mailed, and proxy materials will be available by Internet for those stockholders who received a mailed Notice or have previously elected delivery of proxy materials electronically.

In addition to this proxy statement and the proxy card or voting instruction form, the GM 20122013 Annual Report to stockholders (“Annual Report”) is provided in this package and is available through the Internet.

Questions and Answers

How does the Board of Directors recommend that I vote on matters to be considered at the annual meeting?

The Board of Directors recommends a vote on the following items, which are described in more detail beginning on page 8:

10: 
Item    DescriptionDescription

Board Voting

Recommendation

1Election of directorsFOR
2Ratification of the selection of Deloitte & Touche LLP as the Company's independent registered public accounting firm for 20132014FOR
3Advisory vote to approve executive compensationFOR
4Advisory vote to approve the frequency of a stockholder advisory vote on executive compensationONE YEAR
5Approval of the General Motors Company 2014 Short-Term Incentive PlanFOR
6Approval of the General Motors Company 2014 Long-Term Incentive PlanFOR
7Stockholder proposal regarding cumulative votingAGAINST
8Stockholder proposal regarding independent board chairmanAGAINST
5Stockholder proposal regarding executive stock retentionAGAINST

Are there any other matters to be voted upon at the annual meeting?

We do not know of any matters to be voted on by stockholders at the annual meeting other than those included in this proxy statement. If any other matter is properly presented at the meeting, your executed proxy gives the Proxy Committee discretionary authority to vote your shares in accordance with its best judgment with respect to the matter. The Proxy Committee is composed of the following executive officers of the Company: Daniel F. Akerson, Stephen J. Girsky, andMary T. Barra, Daniel Ammann, and Charles K. Stevens, III, each of whom is authorized to act on behalf of the Proxy Committee.

Who is entitled to vote?

Holders of our Common Stock as of the close of business on April 8, 201311, 2014 are entitled to vote at the annual meeting. On that date, the Company had 1,374,615,9791,603,608,139 shares of Common Stock outstanding and entitled to vote. Each share of our Common Stock entitles the holder to one vote.




4
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




How do I vote without attending the annual meeting?

When you timely submit your proxy or voting instructions in the proper form, your shares will be voted according to your instructions. You may give instructions to vote for or against, or abstain from voting for the election of all the Board of Directors’ nominees or any individual nominee and to vote for or against, or abstain from voting upon, each of the other matters submitted for voting, except Item No. 4 (advisory vote to approve the frequency of a stockholder advisory vote on executive compensation), in which case, you may vote for one year, two years, or three years, or abstain from voting. If you sign, date, and return the proxy card or voting instruction form without specifying how you wish to cast your vote, your shares will be voted according to the recommendations of the Board of Directors, as indicated in this proxy statement. Internet and telephone voting is available 24 hours a day, through 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday,Monday, June 5, 2013.

9, 2014.

Stockholders may vote their proxy in any one of the following ways:

If you received a paper copy of proxy materials:To vote by Internet or telephone, you should follow the instructions provided on the proxy card or voting instruction form enclosed with the proxy materials. To vote by mail, mark, sign, and date the proxy card or voting instruction form included with the materials and return it in the enclosed envelope in time to be received before the date of the annual meeting. If you receive more than one proxy card or voting instruction form (which means you have shares in more than one account), you must mark, sign, and date each proxy card or voting instruction form you received. If you vote by Internet or telephone, you do not need to mail your proxy card or voting instruction form.

If you received a mailed Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials: You may access and review the proxy statement and Annual Report on the Internet and submit your vote by Internet or telephone by following the instructions provided in the Notice or on the website indicated in the Notice. If you prefer to vote by mail, you must request a paper copy of the proxy materials and follow the instructions on the proxy card or voting instruction form enclosed with the proxy materials.

If you received the proxy materials electronicallyvia e-mail: You may access and review the proxy statement and Annual Report on the Internet and submit your vote by Internet or telephone by following the instructions on the website provided in the e-mail notification.

If you received a paper copy of proxy materials:To vote by Internet or telephone, you should follow the instructions provided on the proxy card or voting instruction form enclosed with the proxy materials. To vote by mail, mark, sign, and date the proxy card or voting instruction form included with the materials and return it in the enclosed envelope in time to be received before the date of the annual meeting. If you receive more than one proxy card or voting instruction form (which means you have shares in more than one account), you must mark, sign, and date each proxy card or voting instruction form you received. If you vote by Internet or telephone, you do not need to mail your proxy card or voting instruction form.
If you received a mailed Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials:You may access and review the proxy statement and Annual Report on the Internet and submit your vote by Internet or telephone by following the instructions provided in the Notice or on the website indicated in the Notice. If you prefer to vote by mail, you must request a paper copy of the proxy materials and follow the instructions on the proxy card or voting instruction form enclosed with the proxy materials.
If you received the proxy materials electronicallyvia e-mail: You may access and review the proxy statement and Annual Report on the Internet and submit your vote by Internet or telephone by following the instructions on the website provided in the e-mail notification.
By submitting your vote by Internet, telephone, or mail, you will authorize the Proxy Committee to vote your shares of our Common Stock as you direct and as they determine on any matters that we do not know about now but that may be presented properly at the meeting.

How can I change or revoke my vote after I have voted?

After you have voted by Internet, telephone, or mail, you may revoke your proxy at any time until it is voted at the annual meeting. If you are a stockholder of record, you may do this by voting subsequently by Internet or telephone, submitting a new proxy card with a later date, sending a written notice of revocation to the Corporate Secretary at the address provided in“How can I obtain the Company’s corporate governance information?”on page 7,9, or by voting in person at the annual meeting.

If you are a beneficial stockholder, you may subsequently vote by Internet or telephone, or you may revoke your vote through your broker, bank, or other nominee in accordance with their instructions.

How can I vote in person at the annual meeting?

If you are a stockholder of record, you may vote your shares at the annual meeting by completing a ballot at the meeting. If you are a beneficial stockholder and want to vote your shares in person at the annual meeting, you must bring a signed legal proxy from your broker, bank, or other nominee giving you the right to vote the shares, which must be submitted with your ballot at the meeting. You will not be able to vote your shares at the meeting without a legal proxy. Accordingly, we encourage you to vote your shares in advance, even if you plan to attend the meeting. Your vote at the annual meeting will supersede any prior vote by you.




5
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT

Table of Contents



Will my votes be confidential? Who will count the vote?

As a matter of policy, GM believes your vote should be private except in contested elections. Therefore, we use an independent third party to receive, inspect, count, and tabulate proxies. Representatives of the independent third party also act as judges at the annual meeting.

What is the difference between a stockholder of record and a beneficial stockholder of shares held in street name?

If your shares are owned directly in your name in an account with GM’s stock transfer agent, Computershare Trust Company, N.A. (“Computershare”), you are considered the stockholder of record of those shares in your account.

If your shares are held in an account with a broker, bank, or other nominee as custodian on your behalf, you are considered a “beneficial” stockholder of those shares, which are held in “street name.” The broker, bank, or other nominee is considered the stockholder of record for those shares. As the beneficial owner, you have the right to instruct the broker, bank, or other nominee on how to vote the shares in your account.

I am a beneficial stockholder. What happens if I do not provide voting instructions to my broker?

As a beneficial stockholder, youmust provide voting instructions to your broker, bank, or other nominee by the deadline provided in the proxy materials you receive from your broker, bank, or other nominee to ensure your shares are voted in the way you would like. If you do not provide voting instructions to your broker, bank, or other nominee, whether your shares can be voted on your behalf depends on the type of item being considered for vote. Under New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) rules, brokers are permitted to exercise discretionary voting authority on “routine” matters. Therefore, your broker may vote on Item No. 2 (ratification of Deloitte & Touche LLP as the selection of theCompany's independent registered public accounting firm for 2013)2014) even if you do not provide voting instructions, because it is considered a routine matter.Your broker may not vote on the other Agenda Items if you do not provide voting instructions, because those items involve matters that are considered non-routine.

What is a broker non-vote?

If your broker does not receive instructions from you on how to vote your shares and does not have discretion to vote on a proposal because it is a non-routine item, the broker may return the proxy without voting on that proposal. This is known as a “broker non-vote.” A broker non-vote is deemed as not entitled to vote at the meeting with regard to a proposal so that it does not have any effect on the outcome of a vote.

What are the voting requirements to elect the directors and to approve each of the proposals?

Under GM’s Bylaws, directors are elected by a majority in uncontested elections and by plurality in contested elections. A contested election is one in which the number of nominees exceeds the number of directors to be elected, and other conditions are met. In anuncontested election, nominees will be elected directors if they receive a majority of the votes cast (i.e., the number of shares voted “for” a director must exceed the number of votes cast “against” that director, without counting abstentions). In acontested election, the

nominees who receive a plurality of the votes cast (i.e., more votes in favor of their election than other nominees) will be elected directors.


6
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT

Table of Contents



ItemDescriptionDescriptionVote Required for Approval

Effect of

Abstentions and

Broker Non-Votes

1

Election of directorsThe affirmative vote of a majority of votes cast in anuncontested election;election; Plurality of votes cast in acontested election.election. This year’syear's election will be considered uncontested so that majority voting will apply. See Item“Item No. 1 – Nomination and Election of Directors”on page 8.10.Not considered as votes cast and have no effect on the outcome of the vote.

2

Ratification of Deloitte & Touche LLP as the selection of theCompany's independent registered public accounting firm for 20132014The affirmative vote of a majority of shares present in person or by proxy and entitled to vote.Abstentions have the same effect as a vote against. NYSE rules permit brokers to vote uninstructed shares at their discretion on this proposal, so broker non-votes are not expected.

3

4

5




Advisory vote to approve executive compensation

Stockholder proposal regarding independent board chairman

Stockholder proposal regarding executive stock retention

The affirmative vote of a majority of shares present in person or by proxy and entitled to vote.Abstentions have the same effect as a vote against. Broker non-votes have no effect on the outcome of the vote.
4Advisory vote to approve the frequency of a stockholder advisory vote on executive compensationThe option of "one year," "two years," or "three years" that receives the affirmative vote of a majority of shares present in person or by proxy and entitled to vote will be deemed to win this non-binding advisory vote.Abstentions and broker non-votes have no effect on the outcome of the vote.
5



6



7


8


Approval of the General Motors Company 2014 Short-Term Incentive Plan

Approval of the General Motors Company 2014 Long-Term Incentive Plan

Stockholder proposal regarding cumulative voting

Stockholder proposal regarding independent board chairman
The affirmative vote of a majority of shares present in person or by proxy and entitled to vote.Abstentions have the same effect as a vote against. Broker non-votes have no effect on the outcome of the vote.

What constitutes a quorum at the annual meeting?

The presence of the holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of our Common Stock, in person or by proxy, will constitute a quorum for transacting business at the annual meeting. Abstentions and broker non-votes are counted as present and entitled to vote for purposes of establishing a quorum at the meeting.

How can I attend the annual meeting?

We welcome you to attend the annual meeting. To attend the meeting, you must be a holder of our Common Stock as of the record date of April 8, 201311, 2014 and request an admission ticket in advance by following the directionsinstructions below. Because our space is limited, you may only bring one guest to the meeting.

If your shares are owned directly in your name in an account with Computershare, GM’s stock transfer agent, you must provide your name and address as shown on your account or voting materials with your admission ticket request. If you hold your shares in an account with a broker, bank, or other nominee, you must include proof of your stock ownership such as a copy of the portion of your Notice or voting instruction form

7
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT

Table of Contents



that shows your name and address, or a letter from your broker, bank, or other nominee confirming your stock

ownership as of April 8, 2013.11, 2014. The e-mail notification received with electronic delivery of proxy materials is not sufficient proof of stock ownership.

Please send your annual meeting admission ticket request and proof of stock ownership as described above to GM Stockholder Services by one of the following methods:

E-mail: stockholder.services@gm.com;

Fax: 313-667-1426; or

Mail: GM Stockholder Services, Mail Code 482-C25-A36, P.O. Box 300, Detroit, Michigan 48265-3000.

Because our space is limited, you may only bring one guest to the meeting. If you plan to bring a guest, you will need to provide the name of your guest when making your ticket request. Ticket requests will be processed in the order in which they are received and must be received no later than Wednesday, May 29, 2013.June 3, 2014. Please include your e-mail address or telephone number in your fax or mail communication in case we need to contact you regarding your ticket request. You will receive your admission ticket(s) by mail. On the day of the meeting, each stockholder must accompany their guest at the meeting entrance. Stockholders and accompanying guests must each have an admission ticket both of whichto enter the meeting. Both admission tickets will be issued in the stockholder’s name, to enter the meeting.stockholder's name. Along with the admission ticket, each stockholder and accompanying guest will be required to present a form of government-issued photo identification, such as a driver’s license or passport. The admission ticket is not transferable.

Large bags, backpacks and packages, suitcases, briefcases, personal communication devices (e.g., cell phones, tablets,smartphones, and smartphones)tablets), cameras, recording equipment, and other electronic devices will not be permitted in the meeting, and attendees will be subject to security inspections.

Will there be a webcast of the annual meeting?

Yes. Our annual meeting will be audio webcast on Thursday,Tuesday, June 6, 201310, 2014 and may be accessed atwww.gm.com/gmannualmeeting. Listening to our annual meeting webcast will not constitute attendance at the meeting, and you will not be able to cast a vote as a listener to the live webcast. For specific instructions on how to vote your shares, please see, “How do I vote without attending the annual meeting?” on page 3.5.

Can I access proxy materials on the Internet instead of receiving paper copies?

Yes. You may consent to receive your proxy materials and Annual Report by Internet, which will reduce the amount of paper you receive, our future postage and printing expenses, and the impact on the environment. At your request, you will be notified by e-mail when these documents are available electronically through the Internet. If you are a stockholder of record, you may sign up for this service atwww.computershare.com/gm. If you are a beneficial stockholder, you should refer to the instructions provided by your broker, bank, or other nominee on how to receive electronic delivery of proxy materials. You may also enroll for electronic delivery when you vote by Internet.

Why did I receive a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials in the mail?

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) has adopted a rule that permits companies to furnish proxy materials to stockholders through the Internet. Under this rule, we are mailing a Notice instead of a paper copy of the proxy materials to most of our stockholders. The Notice tells you how to access and review our proxy statement and Annual Report on the Internet and how to vote your shares after you have reviewed the proxy materials. If you would like to receive a paper copy of proxy materials or electronic delivery of materials via e-mail, free of charge, you should follow the instructions for requesting such materials included in the Notice.You will not receive a Notice if you have previously requested to receive proxy materials by electronic means or mailed paper copy.

What is “householding” and how does it affect me?

The SEC permits companies to send a single envelope containing all of the Notices or a single copy of their annual report and proxy statement to any household at which two or more stockholders reside if it appears they are members of the same family. Each stockholder will continue to receive a separate proxy card, voting instruction form, or Notice. The Notice for each stockholder will include the unique control number, which is

8
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT

Table of Contents



needed to vote those shares. This procedure, referred to as householding, is intended to reduce the volume of duplicate information stockholders receive and also to reduce expenses for companies. General Motors has instituted this procedure for its stockholders.

If one set of these documents was sent to your household for the use of all GM stockholders in your household and one or more of you would prefer to receive additional sets, or if multiple copies of these documents were sent to your household and you want to receive one set, please contact Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc., by calling toll-free at 800-542-1061, or by writing to Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc., Householding Department, 51 Mercedes Way, Edgewood, New York 11717.

If a broker, bank, or other nominee holds your shares, please contact your broker, bank, or other nominee directly if you have questions about delivery of materials, require additional copies of the proxy statement or Annual Report, or wish to receive multiple copies of proxy materials by stating that you do not consent to householding.

How can nominees obtain proxy materials for beneficial owners?

Brokers, banks, and other nominees who want a supply of the Company’s proxy materials to send to beneficial owners should write to Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc., 51 Mercedes Way, Edgewood, New York 11717.

What proposals will be submitted at the 20142015 annual meeting?

At

Each year at the annual meeting, each year, the Board of Directors asks stockholders to vote on its nominees for election as directors. In addition, at each annual meeting, the stockholders ratify or reject the independent registered public accounting firm selected by the Board's Audit Committee. The Board of Directors also may submit other matters for stockholder approval at the annual meeting.

The deadline for stockholders to submit a proposal under Rule 14a-8 of the SEC’s proxy rules for inclusion in the Company’s proxy statement for the 20142015 annual meeting is December 26, 2013.2014. Any proposals intended to be included in the proxy statement for the 20142015 annual meeting must be received by the Company on or before that date. Please send proposals to the Corporate Secretary at the mailing address, fax number, or e-mail address given below.

How can I obtain the Company’s corporate governance information?

You may download a copy of GM’s corporate governance documents by visiting our website atwww.gm.com/investor, under “Corporate Governance.” To request a printed copy of any of these documents, write to the Corporate Secretary at General Motors Company, Mail Code 482-C25-A36, 300 Renaissance Center, P.O. Box 300, Detroit, Michigan 48265-3000, or at fax number 313-667-1426, or at stockholder.services@gm.com.

How can I obtain a copy of the Company’s 20122013 Annual Report on Form 10-K?

You may download a copy of our 20122013 Annual Report on Form 10-K by visiting our website atwww.gm.com/investor, under “Contacts.” Alternatively, you may request a printed copy by writing to GM Stockholder Services at General Motors Company, Mail Code 482-C25-A36, 300 Renaissance Center, P.O. Box 300, Detroit, Michigan 48265-3000.

How can I review a list of stockholders entitled to vote at the annual meeting?

A list of stockholders of record entitled to vote at the annual meeting will be available for examination for a purpose that is germane to the meeting at General Motors Global Headquarters, 300 Renaissance Center, Detroit, Michigan, 48243, for ten business days before the annual meeting between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time, and also during the annual meeting.

When will the annual meeting voting results be announced?

We will announce the preliminary voting results at the annual meeting. We will provide final voting results on our website and in a Form 8-K filed with the SEC.


9
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT

Table of Contents



Who pays for this proxy solicitation and how much did it cost?

We will pay our cost for soliciting proxies for the 20132014 annual meeting. General Motors will distribute proxy materials and follow-up reminders, if any, by mail and electronic means. We have engaged Morrow & Co., LLC (“Morrow”) at 470 West Avenue, Stamford, Connecticut 06902 to assist with the solicitation of proxies. We will pay Morrow an aggregate fee, including reasonable out-of-pocket expenses, of up to $30,000, depending on the level of services actually provided. Certain GM employees, officers, and directors may also solicit proxies by mail, telephone, or personal visits. They will not receive any additional compensation for their services.

As usual, we will reimburse brokers, banks, and other nominees for their expenses in forwarding proxy materials to beneficial owners.

Item No. 1

Nomination and

Election of Directors

If you sign and return the proxy card or voting instruction form or vote by Internet or telephone, the Proxy Committee will vote your shares for all 1412 nominees described in the following section, unless you vote against, or abstain from voting for, one or more such nominees. Each director will serve until the next annual meeting of stockholders and until a successor is elected and qualified, or until his or her earlier resignation, removal, or death. If any of the Board’s nominees for director becomes unavailable to serve before the annual meeting (which we do not anticipate), the Board may decrease the number of directors to be elected or designate a substitute nominee for that vacancy.

Pursuant

On January 29, 2014, David Bonderman gave notice to the Company that he does not intend to stand for re-election. On March 7, 2014, Cynthia A. Telles gave notice to the Company that she does not intend to stand for re-election. In addition, pursuant to the Board’s retirement age policy, Philip A. Laskawy,Robert D. Krebs, who is 72 years old, is not standing for reelection.re-election. Mr. Laskawy hasBonderman and Mr. Krebs have been a membermembers of our Board since July 2009. He was alsoDr. Telles has been a member of the Board of General Motors Corporation from 2003 to 2009.

since April 2010.

GM has received notice pursuant to Section 1.11 of our Bylaws that a stockholder, who owns two shares of our Common Stock, intends to nominate candidates for election to the Board at the 20132014 annual meeting. Under Section 2.2(d) of our Bylaws, the Board has determined in its reasonable judgment that this is not considered a contested election. The Board recommends that you vote your shares for the candidates nominated by the Board.

Other than Admiral Michael G. Mullen,Mary T. Barra and Joseph J. Ashton, all of the directors in the following section were elected to the Board at the 20122013 annual meeting. Admiral MullenMs. Barra was elected a director of the Company effective February 1, 2013.

January 15, 2014. While Mr. Ashton is standing for election at the annual meeting, if he is elected his term will begin on August 11, 2014 at which time the size of the Board will increase from 11 to 12 members.

Information about Nominees for Director

Set forth below is information about the nominees, including their names and ages, recent employment or principal occupation, their period of service as a GM director, the names of other public companies for which they currently serve as a director or have served as a director within the past five years, and a summary of their

specific experience, qualifications, attributes, or skills that led to the conclusion that they are qualified to serve as a director:


The Board of Directors recommends that you vote FORThe Board recommends that you voteFOR the election of each of the following nominees.
Joseph J. Ashton (65), Vice President, United Auto Workers
Mr. Ashton has been a Vice President of the following nominees.

International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Workers of America (the “UAW”) since June 2010. Prior to that time Mr. Ashton served as director of the UAW’s Region 9 (Central New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania) from June 2006 and as assistant director of Region 9 from January 2003. He has been a member of the UAW International staff since 1986 and plans to retire after the UAW Constitutional Convention in June 2014. He is active in labor and civic affairs,

Names and (Ages)10
  Positions and Offices2014 PROXY STATEMENT

Daniel F. Akerson (64)

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, General Motors Company

David Bonderman (70)

Co-Founding Partner and Managing General Partner, TPG

Erroll B. Davis, Jr. (68)

Superintendent, Atlanta Public Schools

Stephen J. Girsky (50)

Vice Chairman, Corporate Strategy, Business Development, Global Product Planning and Global Purchasing and Supply Chain, General Motors Company

E. Neville Isdell (69)

Retired Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, The Coca-Cola Company

Robert D. Krebs (70)

Retired Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corporation

Kathryn V. Marinello (56)

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Stream Global Services, Inc.

Admiral Michael G. Mullen,

USN (ret.) (66)

Former Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff

James J. Mulva (66)

Retired Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, ConocoPhillips

Patricia F. Russo (60)

Former Chief Executive Officer, Alcatel-Lucent

Thomas M. Schoewe (60)

Former Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Wal-Mart

Stores, Inc.

Theodore M. Solso (66)

Former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Cummins, Inc.

Carol M. Stephenson (62)

Dean, Richard Ivey School of Business, The University of Western Ontario

Cynthia A. Telles (60)

Director, UCLA Neuropsychiatric Institute Spanish-Speaking Psychosocial Clinic

Daniel F. Akerson

Daniel F. Akerson


Table of Contents



including serving as the executive vice president of the Pennsylvania AFL-CIO Executive Council and executive vice president of the New Jersey AFL-CIO. Under the terms of a 2009 stockholders agreement among some of GM’s largest stockholders, Mr. Ashton was designated for nomination to the GM Board by the UAW Retiree Medical Benefits Trust (the "VEBA Trust").
During his career with the UAW Mr. Ashton has played a key role in organizing campaigns and contract negotiations with major manufacturing and technology companies in a variety of industries including vehicle components, defense, aerospace, steel, and marine products. Based on these experiences, he has developed a deep understanding of how labor strategy can affect a company’s financial success, including expertise in areas such as manufacturing processes, pension and health care costs, government relations, employee engagement and training, and plant safety.
Mary T. Barra (52), Chief Executive Officer, General Motors Company
Ms. Barra has been Chief Executive Officer of the Company since January 15, 2014, when she also became a member of our Board of Directors since July 2009. He has held the office of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer since January 2011 and Chief Executive Officer since September 2010.Directors. Prior to joining GM, Mr. Akerson was a Managing Director of The Carlyle Group (“Carlyle”), a private equity firm, servingbecoming CEO, Ms. Barra had been Executive Vice President, Global Product Development, Purchasing & Supply Chain since August 2013. She served as the Head ofSenior Vice President, Global BuyoutProduct Development from July2011 to 2013; Vice President, Global Human Resources from 2009 until August 2010to 2011; and as Co-Head of U.S. BuyoutVice President, Manufacturing Engineering from 20032008 to 2009. Prior to joining Carlyle, he served as a chairman, chief executive officer, or president of several major companies including XO Communications, Inc. (1999 to 2003), Nextel Communications (1996 to 1999), General Instrument Corporation (1993 to 1995), and MCI Communications Corporation (1983 to 1993). Mr. Akerson served as a director of American Express Company (1995 to 2012) and AOL Time Warner Inc. (now doing business as Time Warner, Inc.) (1997 to 2003).

As Chief Executive Officer of the Company, Mr. Akerson has led the reestablishment of GM as one of the world’s largest automakers. Under his leadership, GM has taken critical steps to transform the Company by launching a $23 billion initial public offering, establishing consistent profitability, gaining market share, improving product quality, accelerating efforts to improve the fuel economy of our vehicles, investing in manufacturing and job creation, and generating global growth. As part of Mr. Akerson’s extensive operating and senior management experience as a chief executive officer in a succession of major companies in challenging, highly competitive industries, he formulated and executed global strategies, guided business development and deployment efforts, and led successful business restructurings. Mr. AkersonMs. Barra also brings to our Board his experience in overseeing private equity investments and servingserves on other public company boards.

David Bonderman

David Bonderman has been a member of our Board of Directors since July 2009. He is Co-Founding Partner and Managing General Partner of TPG, a private investment firm he founded in 1992. Mr. Bonderman serves as Chairman of the Board of Directors of Ryanair Holdings PLC, a European-based low fares airline, and as a director of CoStar Group, Inc., a marketing and information services company in the commercial real estate industry; Caesars Entertainment Corporation, a gaming operations company; and Energy Future Holdings Corporation, a privately held energy company based in Dallas with a portfolio of competitive and regulated energy companies. He also served as a director of Armstrong Worldwide Industries, Inc. (2009 to 2012), Gemalto N.V. (2006 to 2010), Washington Mutual, Inc. (April 2008 to December 2008), and Burger King Holdings, Inc. (2002 to 2008).

Mr. Bonderman’s qualifications to serve on our Board of Directors include his operating and leadership experience as a co-founding partner in a private equity firm. Through his involvement with TPG he has provided leadership to companies that have been in distressed and turn-around situations and are undergoing dramatic changes. HeGeneral Dynamics Corporation.

Ms. Barra brings to our Board an in-depth knowledge of Directors extensivethe Company and the global automotive industry. With more than 33 years at GM and having served in a variety of leadership positions, Ms. Barra has gained substantial strategic planning, operating and business experience and a deep understanding of the Company’s strengths and weaknesses and the challenges that it faces. As CEO of the Company, she shares management’s perspective on the business with the Board and engages with the Board in developing her strategic vision for GM. In her most recent role as the senior leader of global product development, she had responsibility for the design, engineering, program management and quality of GM vehicles around the world, which enables her to provide unique insight to the Board on one of the most critical and complex parts of GM’s business. Ms. Barra’s previous leadership in other key areas of the Company, including global human resources and manufacturing engineering, will allow her to make a significant contribution to our Board. Further, Ms. Barra brings to our Board her experience in finance, business development, mergers and acquisitions, business restructuring and integration, and international business, particularly in China where GM has significant operations.

serving on the board of directors of another public company.

Erroll B. Davis, Jr.

Erroll B. (69), Superintendent, Atlanta Public Schools

Mr. Davis Jr. has been a member of our Board of Directors since July 2009. He was also a member of the Board of Directors of General Motors Corporation from 2007 to 2009. Mr. Davis has served as the Superintendent, of Atlanta Public Schools since July 2011. From 2006 until his retirement in June 2011, heHe served as Chancellor of the University System of Georgia, the governing and management authority of public higher education in Georgia.Georgia, from 2006 until his retirement in 2011. From 2000 to 2006, Mr. Davis served as Chairman of Alliant Energy Corporation, and he held the offices of President and Chief Executive Officer from 1998 to 2005. He is a director of Union Pacific Corporation.Corporation and in the past five years, Mr. Davis also served as a director of BP p.l.c. (1998 to 2010).

In nominating Mr. Davis to serve on our Board of Directors, the Board considered his operatingmanagement and managementstrategic leadership experience as a chief executive officer of one of the largest public school systems in the state of Georgia, and a large, diverse public university system and, before that, a complex, highly regulated public utility. Mr. Davis brings to our Board of Directors extensive knowledge in the areas of financial reporting and accounting, compliance and controls, technology, and public policy issuesconcerns such as education and environmental issues. In addition, his knowledge and experience in the utility and energy industries brings to the Board valuable insight regarding the infrastructure needed to advance the use and acceptance of electric power and natural gas to fuelalternative fuels for our low-emission vehicles. Further, Mr. Davis’ experience on the boards of directors of severalother public companies provides exposure to diverse industries with unique challenges enabling him to make significant contributions to our Board, particularly in the areas of audit and public policy.

Stephen J. Girsky

Stephen J. (51), Senior Advisor, General Motors Company

Mr. Girsky has been a member of our Board of Directors since July 2009. Under the terms of a stockholders agreement among GM’s largest stockholders, Mr. Girsky was designated for nomination to the GM Board by the UAW Retiree Medical Benefits Trust (the “VEBA Trust”). At GM, Mr. Girsky has been Senior Advisor to the Company since January 15, 2014. Prior to that, he served as GM Vice Chairman from March 2010 to January 2014, during which time he held overall responsibility for global corporate strategy, new business development, global product planning and program management, global purchasing and supply chain,

11
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT

Table of Corporate Strategy, Business Development, Global Product Planning,Contents



global connected customer/OnStar, GM Ventures LLC, and Global Purchasingglobal research and Supply Chain since February 2011.development. He had been Vice Chairman of Corporate Strategy and Business Development since March 2010. He served aswas also Interim President of GM Europe from July 2012 to February 2013. Mr. Girsky has served as Chairman of the Adam Opel AG Supervisory Board, a GM subsidiary, since November 2011, and a member of that board since January 2010. He has been a member of the GM Ventures LLC board of directors, a GM subsidiary, since May 2010, and in October 2010, he joined the board of directors of GM Financial Company, Inc., a GM subsidiary. Mr. Girsky served as Senior Advisor to the Office of the Chairman at GM from December 2009 to February 2010. He was President of S. J. Girsky & Company, an advisory firm, from January 2009 to March 2010. He served as President of Centerbridge Industrial Partners, LLC

(“Centerbridge”), an affiliate of Centerbridge Partners, L.P., a private investment firm from 2006 to 2009. From November 2008 to June 2009, Mr. Girsky provided advisory services to the International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (the “UAW”).UAW. Prior to joining Centerbridge, Mr. Girsky was a special advisor to the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of General Motors Corporation from 2005 to 2006. From 1995 to 2005, he served as Managing Director at Morgan Stanley and a Senior Analyst of the Morgan Stanley Global Automotive and Auto Parts Research Team. In the past five years, Mr. Girsky also served as lead director of Dana Holding Corporation (2008 to 2009).

Mr. Girsky’s current role

Having served as GM Vice Chairman Corporate Strategy, Business Development, Global Product Planning and Global Purchasing and Supply Chain and hiswith responsibility for several key areas of the business, including Interim President of GM’s European operations, Mr. Girsky has an in-depth knowledge of the Company. In total, he brings more than 25 years of experience in the automotive industry, both as a participant and knowledgeable observer, which provides our Board of Directors with unique insight into the Company’s challenges, operations, and strategic opportunities as well as in-deptha deep understanding of the automotive business and its key participants. In addition, Mr. Girsky’s experience as an auto analyst and president of a private equity firm brings to our Board of Directors significant expertise in finance, market and risk analysis, and
business restructuring and development.

E. Neville Isdell

E. Neville (70), Retired Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, The Coca-Cola Company

Mr. Isdell has been a member of our Board of Directors since July 2009. He was also a member of the Board of Directors of General Motors Corporation from 2008 to 2009. Mr. Isdell served as Chairman of The Coca-Cola Company (“Coca-Cola”) from 2004 to 2009 and Chief Executive Officer from 2004 to 2008. From 2002 to 2004,Previously, he was an International Consultant to The Coca-Cola Company and headed his investment company, Collines Investments. Mr. Isdell served asInvestments from 2002 to 2004; Chief Executive Officer of Coca-Cola Hellenic Bottling Company (“HBC”) from 2000 to May 2001 and2001; Vice Chairman of HBC from May 2001 to December 2001. He was2001; and Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Coca-Cola Beverages plc from 1998 to September 2000. Mr. Isdell also served as a directoris Chairman of SunTrust Banks, Inc. (2004 to 2008).

the World Wildlife Fund and Co-Chairman and Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Investment Climate Facility for Africa.

When considering Mr. Isdell as a nominee to serve on our Board of Directors, the Board recognized his success as a chief executive officer of an iconic American corporation that promotes one of the most widely recognized consumer brands in the world in a continually growing global market. In addition,Through his broad range of roles with Coca-Cola, Mr. Isdell hasgained significant expertise in global brand management, corporate strategy, and business development. Hisdevelopment, which allows him to add significant value to our Board in areas that are key to the Company’s success. In addition, his previous and current board positions in non-profit organizations involved with among other areas, community development, environmental issues, and human rights such as the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the Leadership Council of Initiative for Global Development, and the World Wildlife Fund, have developed his broad perspective on social and public policy issues relatedof interest to environmental sustainability and corporate social responsibility.

Robert D. Krebs

Robert D. Krebs has been a member of our Board of Directors since July 2009. He served as Chairman of Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corporation (“BNSF”) from 2000 until his retirement in 2002. Prior to that, he served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of BNSF from 1999 until 2000. He held the offices of Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer from 1997 to 1999. Mr. Krebs also served as a director of UAL Corporation (2006 to 2010).

Mr. Krebs’ career at BNSF has provided him with wide-ranging operating and management experience as a chief executive officer of a large company focused on meeting the transportation needs of industry in the U.S. and Canada. He brings to our Board of Directors extensive experience in corporate strategy, business development, and finance. In addition, his past service on several public company boards of directors provides exposure to diverse industries with unique challenges enabling him to make significant contributions to other areas of Board responsibility including audit and risk assessment.

Board.

Kathryn V. Marinello

Kathryn V. (57), Senior Advisor, Ares Management LLC

Ms. Marinello has been a member of our Board of Directors since July 2009. She was also a member of the Board of Directors of General Motors Corporation from 2007 to 2009. In March 2014, Ms. Marinello hasrejoined Ares Management LLC ("Ares"), a global asset manager, as Senior Advisor. She had been Chairman and

Chief Executive Officer of Stream Global Services, Inc., a premiumglobal business process outsource service provider specializing in customer relationship management for Fortune 1,000 companies, since August 2010. Ms. Marinello served as senior advisor and consultant at Providence Equity Partners LLC, a private equity firm, and Ares Capital Corporation, a specialty finance company, from June to August 2010. She served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Ceridian Corporation, a human resources outsourcing company, from December 2007 to January 20102010; and President and Chief Executive Officer from 2006 to 2007. Prior to joining Ceridian, Ms. Marinello spent 10 years at General Electric Company (“GE”), and served in a variety of senior roles, including President and Chief Executive Officer of GE Fleet Services, a division of GE, from 2002 to 2006.

Ms. Marinello is a director of AB Volvo.

Ms. Marinello’s experience at large, complex service companies in various industries enables her to bring a varied perspective to our Board. As Chairman and CEO of Stream Global Services, Inc., she is was

12
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT

Table of Contents



focused on using information technology to enhance customer service, areas that are key to our success. At Ceridian, she led a business service company providing integrated human resource systems, involving a wide range of issues including audit and financial reporting, compliance and controls, and mergers and acquisitions. As the former President and CEO of GE Fleet Services, Ms. Marinello has significant experience with vehicle fleet sales and financing and dealer relations, and ensures that our Board of Directors considers the customer perspective in its decision making. Moreover, at GE Capital, and in her prior roles at Chemical Bank,
Citibank, and First Bank Systems, Inc., Ms. Marinello operated large consumer financial services divisions, which included auto lending, auto warranty, telematics, and auto insurance companies, further broadening her contribution to our Board.

Admiral Michael G. Mullen USN (ret.)

(67), Retired Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff

Admiral Michael G. Mullen has been a member of our Board of Directors since February 1, 2013. Admiral Mullen served as the 17th17th Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from October 2007 until his retirement in September 2011. Previously, Admiral Mullen served as the 28th28th Chief of Naval Operations (“CNO”) from July 2005 to 2007. CNO was one of four different four-star assignments Admiral Mullen held, which also included Commander, U.S. Naval Forces Europe and Commander, Allied Joint Force Command, and the 32nd32nd Vice Chief of Naval Operations. Since 2012, Admiral Mullen has served as President of MGM Consulting LLC and is the Charles and Marie Robertson Visiting Professor at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University.

Admiral Mullen also serves on the board of directors of Sprint Corporation.

Admiral Mullen brings to our Board extensive senior leadership experience gained over his 43-year career in the U.S. military. As Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the highest ranking officer in the U.S. military, Admiral Mullen led the armed forces during a critical period of transition, overseeing two active war zones. Admiral Mullen’s involvement in key aspects of U.S. diplomacy, including forging vital relationships with diverse countries around the world, brings valuable insight to our Board as we work to restructure GM’s operations in Europe and expand our operations in Brazil, Russia, India, and China. In addition to strong global relationships, Admiral Mullen has deep experience in leading change in complex organizations, executive development and succession planning, diversity implementation, crisis management, strategic planning, budget policy, risk management, and technical innovation, which are important to the oversight of GM’s business and
will allow him to make a significant contribution to our Board.

James J. Mulva

James J. (67), Retired Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, ConocoPhillips

Mr. Mulva has been a member of our Board of Directors since June 2012. Mr. Mulva served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of ConocoPhillips, an international integrated oil and gas company, from 2004 until his retirement in May 2012. He served as2012; Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of ConocoPhillips from 2004 to 2008. He served as2008; and President and Chief Executive Officer from 2002 to 2004. Mr. Mulva is also a director of General Electric Company.

Company and Statoil ASA, a Norwegian oil and gas company.

Mr. Mulva brings to our Board of Directors 39 years of experience in the energy industry, first at Phillips Petroleum Company (“Phillips”) and, since 2002, as Chief Executive Officer of ConocoPhillips. Prior to overseeing the merger of Conoco and Phillips, Mr. Mulva served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Phillips, where he held various domestic and international senior management positions in finance, including

Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. As Chief Executive Officer of Phillips and later ConocoPhillips, Mr. Mulva oversaw mergers and acquisitions, business restructurings, and negotiated joint ventures, positioning the company to compete in an increasingly challenging and highly competitive

industry. Prior to his retirement from ConocoPhillips, in May 2012, Mr. Mulva oversaw the strategic repositioning of the company to split its fuel production and refining businesses. Mr. Mulva’s expertise in the energy industry will provideprovides valuable insight to our Board in developing GM’s long-term energy diversity strategy, as willdoes his in-depth background in finance. Mr. Mulva also brings to our Board his experience in serving as a director of other large, complex companies.

Patricia F. Russo

Patricia F. (61), Retired Chief Executive Officer, Alcatel-Lucent

Ms. Russo has been a member of our Board of Directors since July 2009 and has beenserved as Lead Director of our Board of Directors sincefrom March 2010.2010 to January 2014. She served as Chief Executive Officer of Alcatel-Lucent from 2006 to 2008. Prior to the merger of Alcatel and Lucent in 2006, she served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Lucent Technologies, Inc. (“Lucent”) from February 2003 to 20062006; and President and Chief

13
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT

Table of Contents



Executive Officer from 2002 to 2003. Ms. Russo is currently a director of Alcoa Inc., Hewlett-Packard Company, KKR Management LLC (the managing partner of KKR & Co. L.P.), and Merck & Co. Inc (“Merck”). Ms. Russo also served as a director of Schering-Plough Corporation from 1995 to its merger with Merck in 2009.

As the chief executive officer of highly technical, complex companies, Ms. Russo demonstrated leadership that strongly supported her nomination to our Board of Directors. In that capacity she dealt with a wide range of issues including mergers and acquisitions and business restructuring as she led Lucent’s recovery through a severe industry downturn and later a merger with Alcatel, a French company. In addition, she brings to the Board extensive global experience in corporate strategy, finance, sales and marketing, technology, and leadership development. Ms. Russo also brings extensive expertise in corporate governance and executive compensation as a member of the board and board committees of other public companies.

Thomas M. Schoewe

Thomas M. (61), Retired Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

Mr. Schoewe has been a member of our Board of Directors since November 2011. Mr. Schoewe served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (“Wal-Mart”) from 2000 to 2011. Prior to joining Wal-Mart, Mr. Schoewe worked for Black & Decker Corporation from 1986 to 1999, most recently serving as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. From 1974 to 1986, Mr. Schoewe worked for Beatrice Companies, Inc., where he was Chief Financial Officer and Controller for Beatrice Consumer Durables, Inc. Mr. Schoewe is a director of KKR Management LLC and Northrop Grumman Corporation. HeIn the past five years, he also served as a director of PulteGroup, Inc. (2009 to 2012) and Centex Corporation from 2001 to its 2009 merger with Pulte Homes, Inc. (now doing business as PulteGroup, Inc.).

With extensive experience gained over more than 35 years in finance, including serving as the chief financial officer of large multi-national, consumer-facing companies, Mr. Schoewe brings financial expertise, corporate leadership, and operational experience to our Board of Directors. His extensive experience as a senior leader in corporate finance has provided him with key skills, including financial reporting, accounting and control, business planning and analysis, and risk management that are valuable to the oversight of our business. Mr. Schoewe also brings to our Board his experience at Wal-Mart and Black & Decker with large-scale, transformational information technology (“IT”) implementations, which provides valuable insight as we continue to restructure our IT operations. Further, Mr. Schoewe’s previous and current board positions at public companies involved with home building, security, and investments provides exposure to diverse industries with unique challenges enabling him to make a significant contributionscontribution to our Board.

Theodore M. Solso

Theodore M. Solso (67), Retired Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Cummins, Inc. and Chairman, General Motors Company
Mr. Solso has been the Non-Executive Chairman of our Board of Directors since January 15, 2014 and a member of our Board of Directors since June 2012. Mr. Solso served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Cummins, Inc. (“Cummins”), a global company that manufacturesmanufacturer of diesel and natural gas engines and engine-related component products, from 2000 until his retirement in December 2011. He is a director of Ball Corporation, a manufacturer of metal packing products and aerospace systems and technologies. In the past five years, Mr. Solso also served as a director of Ashland Inc. (1999 to 2012).

Mr. Solso has gained significant senior management experience during his 40-year career at Cummins. AsCummins, which culminated in his role as Chairman and Chief Executive OfficerOfficer. He brings to our Board of Cummins,Directors his experience and insight into the complexities of managing a major global organization. Mr. Solso led the companyCummins through strong financial performance and stockholder returns, international growth, business restructuring, and leadership in emissions reduction technology and related environmental activities, corporate responsibility, diversity, and human rights issues. Mr. Solso’sHis extensive experience at Cummins in manufacturing and engineering of diesel engines and compliance with challenging emissions laws and regulations will allowallows him to contribute significantly to our Board regarding GM’s global product development strategies. His recent experience in serving as U.S.
Chairman of the U.S. - Brazil CEO Forum provides valuable insight to advance the business priorities of our operations in Brazil, one of the world’s fastest growing economies.Brazil. In addition to his deep understanding of global markets and business operations and corporate responsibility, Mr. Solso brings to our Board his experience gained at Cummins and as a director of other public companies, particularly in the areas of finance, accounting, risk oversight, and corporate governance.



14
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT





Carol M. Stephenson

Carol M. (63), Retired Dean, Ivey Business School, The University of Western Ontario

Ms. Stephenson has been a member of our Board of Directors since July 2009. She has beenserved as Dean of the Richard Ivey Business School of Business at The University of Western Ontario (“Ivey”) since 2003.from 2003 until her retirement in September 2013. Prior to joining Ivey, Ms. Stephenson served as President and Chief Executive Officer, of Lucent Technologies Canada from 1999 to 2003. Ms. Stephenson is a director of Ballard Power Systems, Inc., a manufacturer of fuel cell products, Intact Financial Corporation (formerly ING Canada), an insurance provider in Canada, and Manitoba Telecom Services Inc., a communications provider in Canada. She was a member of the Advisory Board of General Motors of Canada, Limited (“GM Canada”), a GM subsidiary, from 2005 to 2009. Ms. Stephenson was invested as an Officer into the Order of Canada in 2009.

Ms. Stephenson’s experience as Dean of the Richard Ivey School of Business and President and Chief Executive Officer of Lucent Technologies Canada provides our Board of Directors with diverse perspectives and progressive management expertise in marketing, operations, strategic planning, technology development, and financial management. Her experience on the boards of several top Canadian companies provides our Board of Directors with her broad perspective on successful management strategies and insight on matters affecting the business interest of GM and GM of Canada. Ms. Stephenson also brings to our Board her experience in serving on the compensation and governance committees of other public companies.

Cynthia A. Telles

Cynthia A. Telles has been

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
Corporate Governance Guidelines
Our Board is committed to having a membersound governance structure that promotes the best interests of our Board of Directors since April 2010. She has been on the faculty of the University of California, Los Angeles School of Medicine Department of Psychiatry since 1986 and the Director of the UCLA Neuropsychiatric Institute Spanish-Speaking Psychosocial Clinic since 1980. Among many corporate and non-profit board memberships, in 2010 Dr. Telles joined the board of the Pacific Council for International Policy and was appointed to the White House Commission on Presidential Scholars by President Obama. She has held several governmental and public service appointmentsstockholders. To that include serving as a Commissioner for the City of Los Angeles for 13 years. Dr. Telles currently is Chairman ofend, the Board of Directors of the California Community Health Foundation and a member of the board of the Kaiser Foundation Health Plan and Hospitals. She previously served on the boards of Americas United Bank, the largest Hispanic-owned bank in California (2006 to 2010), Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corporation (2009 to 2010), and California United Bank (formerly Sanwa Bank California) (1994 to 2002).

Dr. Telles’ qualifications for serving on our Board of Directors include her extensive experience in public and governmental service, as well as public policy and governmental and community relations. In addition, her in-depth understanding of the Hispanic community, which represents the nation’s largest and fastest growing consumer market segment, provides our Board with valuable insight. Moreover, her previous and current board positions in companies in the health care, transportation, and financial industries and in non-profit organizations involved with, among other areas, community development, environmental issues, health care reform, and education, have developed her broad perspective on issues related to corporate social responsibility and governance.

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Corporate Governance Guidelines

Our Board has adoptedmaintains its Corporate Governance Guidelines and other policies that along withit believes enable it to most effectively discharge its responsibility to provide oversight and direction to the Certificate of Incorporation, Bylaws, and chartersconduct of the Board Committees, provide the framework for the governance of our Company.Company’s business. The Board’s Corporate Governance Guidelines and related policies which are periodically updated by the Board following recommendations from the Directors and Corporate Governance Committee (the “Governance Committee”), cover among other things:

Board membership criteria and the process for the selection of new directors;

Majority voting for directors and the related requirement that each incumbent director, when nominated for re-election, submit a written irrevocable resignation that would become effective if the Board accepts that resignation following an uncontested election in which the director fails to receive a majority of the votes cast, excluding abstentions;

Orientation for new directors and continuing education for all directors;

Requirement that at least two-thirds of the Board be independent;

Limitation on the number of outside board memberships that can be held by any director;

Mandatory retirement for directors at age 72;

Prohibition against personal loans from the Company or its subsidiaries to directors and executive officers that would violate the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002;

Requirement that non-management directors own stock and/or deferred share units, which must be retained until after retirement or otherwise leaving the Board;

Requirements for executive sessions of the Board attended by non-management and independent directors;

Role and responsibilities of the Chairman of the Board and Lead Director;

Director, if the Chairman is not independent;

Access by the Board and each of its Committees to independent advisors at the Company’s expense;

Annual self-evaluations of the Board and each of its Committees by all directors;

Directors’ obligations to comply with the Company’s policies regarding ethics and conflicts of interest;

Confidentiality of Board materials, deliberations, and actions;

Directors’ unrestricted access to management;


15
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT

Table of Contents



Annual evaluation of the Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”)CEO by the Board; and

Board responsibility for overseeing succession planning for management.

The Directors and Corporate Governance Committee (the “Governance Committee”) regularly considers information concerning the Board’s Corporate Governance Guidelines and reviews related policies adopted by other major public corporations as well asperiodically recommends to our Board the viewsadoption of various groups activeamendments in response to changing regulatory requirements, evolving best practices, and the field of corporate governance regarding such guidelines and policies. This benchmark information is provided to assist in the review and updatingperspectives of our guidelines and policies. The Committee also oversees the Company’s ongoing compliance with the governance requirements of corporate regulators and overseers such as the SEC and NYSE.stockholders. To obtain a copy of our Corporate Governance Guidelines, see“How can I obtain the Company’s corporate governance information?” on page 7.9.

Board Leadership Structure

Our governance documentsBylaws and Corporate Governance Guidelines provide the Board with flexibility to select the appropriate leadership structure for the Company. WhileCompany, and the Board has no fixed policy with respect to combining or separatingperiodically considers whether the rolesoffices of Chairman and CEO, our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that if the Chairman is notChief Executive Officer should be combined or separate and whether an executive or independent director should be Chairman. The Board strongly believes that when making these determinations it should not be constrained by a policy that could deprive the independent directors will elect a Lead Director from amongBoard of its ability to select the independent directors serving onmost qualified and appropriate individual to lead the Board.Board as Chairman at any particular point in time. In making leadership structure determinations, the Board considers many factors to determine what is in the best interests of the Company’s stockholders, including the qualifications of individual directors and the specific needs of the business.

Our current At certain points in the Company’s history, the Chairman and CEO roles have been held by the same person, and at other times, the roles have been held by different individuals. Since July 2009, the Company has had a joint Chairman and CEO two times, and a separate Chairman and CEO three times, including two independent, non-executive Chairmen. In each instance, the decision on whether to combine or separate the roles was made in the best interests of the Company’s stockholders, based on the circumstances at the time. While the Board has no fixed policy with respect to combining or separating the roles of Chairman and CEO, our Bylaws provide that if the Chairman is not an independent director, the independent directors will elect a Lead Director from among the independent directors serving on the Board, whose authority is described below.

In planning for Daniel F. Akerson to step down as Chairman and CEO in January 2014, our Board reconsidered its leadership structure, consistswhich consisted of a combined Chairman and CEO and an independent director serving as Lead Director. Currently, Theodore M. Solso serves as our independent, non-executive Chairman, and Mary T. Barra is CEO. Our Board believes thatchose to designate an independent, non-executive Chairman to allow Ms. Barra as the Company and its stockholders are well served by this leadership structure. As the individual with primary responsibility for managingnew CEO to focus on leading the Company’s day-to-day operationsbusiness, while working closely with Mr. Solso, who can draw on his experience as chairman of a major company to deal with outside constituencies such as the financial markets and with in-depth knowledge and understanding of the Company, Mr. Akerson is best positioned to chair regular Board meetings at which the directors discuss key business and strategic issues. Having one person serve as both Chairman and CEO permits a clear, unified, strategic vision for GM that ensures alignment between the Board and management, provides focused leadership for the Company, and helps ensure accountability for the Company’s performance. At the same time, the role of an independent Lead Director with specified responsibilities on behalf of the non-management directors and the activities of key Board Committees comprised entirely of independent directors provide a formal structure for active independent oversight of management, including the Chairman and CEO.institutional stockholders. Given the dynamic and competitive environment in which GM operates, our Board may reconsider its determination to have a single individual act both as Chairman and CEOleadership structure from time to time based on changes in our circumstances.

The Lead Directorcircumstances and in the members of the Board.

When the Board chooses a Chairman who is elected annually bynot independent, a majority of the independent directors annually elect a Lead Director, upon athe recommendation fromof the Governance Committee. During 2013, Patricia F. Russo currently servesserved as our Lead Director. Under the Board’s Corporate Governance Guidelines, the Lead Director has duties assigned by the Board which include:

Presiding at all meetings of the Board at which the Chairman is not present, including executive sessions of non-management directors, and advising the Chairman of any actions taken;

Calling executive sessions of the non-management and independent directors;

Developing agendas for executive sessions of the Board in consultation with the Chairman and other Board members;

Leading the non-management directors in the annual evaluation of the performance of the CEO and communicating that evaluation to him;

him or her;

Approving Board meeting agendas and related materials recommended by the Chairman;

Approving Board meeting schedules to assure that there is sufficient time for discussion of all agenda items;

Serving as liaison between non-management directors and the Chairman, as necessary; and

Being available, if requested by major stockholders, for consultation and communication.


16
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT

Table of Contents



Board’s Role in Risk Oversight

One of the essential functions of our Board is oversight of management, directly and through its various Committees. Identifying and managing the risks we face is an important component of management’s responsibilities. Risks are considered in virtually every business decision and as part of the Company’s business strategy. We recognize that it is neither possible nor prudent to eliminate all risk. Indeed, purposeful and appropriate risk-taking is essential for the Company to be competitive on a global basis and to achieve our strategic objectives.

Our Board has overall responsibility for risk oversight, with a focus on the most significant risks facing the Company. Our Board implements its risk oversight function both as a whole and through delegation to Board Committees. The Board receives regular reports from our management on particular risks within the Company, through review of the Company’s strategic plan, and through regular communication with its Committees. The Board Committees, which meet regularly and report back to the full Board, play a significant role in overseeing the Company’s management of risks within their areas of responsibility. In general, individual Committees oversee the following risks:

The Audit Committee oversees risks associated with financial and accounting matters and the Company’s financial reporting and disclosure process. It also reviews the Company’s policies for risk assessment and risk management, including our major financial and accounting risk exposures and

actions taken to mitigate these risks as well as reviewing management’s assessment of legal and regulatory risks identified in the Company’s compliance programs;

actions taken to mitigate these risks as well as reviewing management’s assessment of legal and regulatory risks identified in the Company’s compliance programs;

The Executive Compensation Committee (the “Compensation Committee”) ensures that GM’s executive compensation programs are designed to provide incentives that are consistent with the interests of GM’s stockholders but do not encourage senior executives to take excessive risks that threaten the value of the Company. It also considers risks related to executive recruitment, development, retention, and succession planning;

The Governance Committee oversees risks that may arise in connection with the Company’s governance structure and processes, including Board structure and composition, director independence, and related party transactions;

The Finance Committee oversees risks associated with general economic conditions, financial instruments, financial policies and strategies, capital structure, and pension funding; and

The Public Policy Committee oversees risks that may arise in connection with global political, social, and public policy issues that may affect the Company’s business operations, profitability, or reputation.

Our General Auditor and Chief Risk Officer is responsible for coordinating the Company’s risk management activities, including reporting to both the Board’s Audit Committee and to senior management on the risk assessment and mitigation strategies for the top risks the Company has identified. Oversight of these top Company risks has been assigned to the functional or regional leaders who are in the best position to develop risk management strategies and to report progress to the Board and senior management. Our General Auditor and Chief Risk Officer also supports the process of identifying emerging risks to the Company and stress testing key risk scenarios.

While the Board is ultimately responsible for risk oversight, our management is responsible for day-to-day risk management processes. We believe that this division of responsibilities is the most effective risk management approach and that our Board leadership structure supports this approach.

Selection of Nominees for Election to the Board

The Board makes nominations for the election of directors pursuant to the recommendations of the Governance Committee. Any stockholder entitled to vote for the election of directors may make a nomination by complying with the requirements of applicable law and section 1.11 of our Bylaws.

The Governance Committee annually reviews with the Board the appropriate skills and characteristics required of Board nominees, considering current Board composition and Company circumstances. The Governance Committee is responsible for identifying potential candidates for Board membership and making its recommendations to the full Board. To assist in the identification and evaluation of qualified director

17
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT

Table of Contents



candidates, the Governance Committee from time to time engages search firms that specialize in providing services for the identification and evaluation of candidates for election to corporate boards.

The selection of qualified directors is complex and crucial to our long-term success. The Governance Committee and the Board establish different priorities for recruiting new Board members from time to time depending on the Company’s needs and the current make-up of the Board. In every case, however, candidates for election to the Board must be able to make a significant contribution to the Board’s discussion and decision making concerning the broad array of complex issues facing the Company. Recently, ourRecent recruiting efforts have been particularly directed towardfocused on identifying candidates who have distinguished themselves as leaders of large, complex,active CEOs with global organizations with expertise in geopolitical and international affairs.organizations. Potential candidates who satisfy our priorities are further evaluated based upon criteria that include:

Their demonstrated global business and social perspective, personal integrity, and sound judgment;

Expertise and experience gained in government and non-profit organizations that would complement or expand that of the current directors;

Their demonstrated commitment to the highest ethical standards and values of the Company;

Their ability to take into account and balance the legitimate interests and concerns of all our stockholders and other stakeholders effectively, consistently, and appropriately in reaching decisions; and

Their ability and willingness to give sufficient time and attention to preparing for and participating fully in Board activities, including enhancing their knowledge of our Company and the global automotive industry.

In assessing potential candidates the Governance Committee seeks to consider individuals with a broad range of business experience and backgrounds. While GM does not have a formal policy governing diversity among members of the Board, we recognizeare striving to add directors with diverse backgrounds in recognition of the value of overall diversity, on the Board, considering members’ opinions, perspectives, personal and professional experiences, and backgrounds, such as gender, race, ethnicity, or country of origin. We believe that the judgment and perspectives offered from deliberations of a diverse board of directors improve the quality of their decision making and enhance the Company’s business performance by enabling it to respond more effectively to the needs of customers, employees, suppliers, stockholders, and other stakeholders worldwide.

The Governance Committee is also responsible for recommending nominees to the Board annually. In determining whether to recommend a director for re-election, the Governance Committee considers a number of factors, including the director’s history of attendance and participation in meetings, other contributions to the activities of the Board, and the results of Board self-evaluations. The Corporate Governance Guidelines state that it is preferable for the CEO and other senior executives not to serve on the Board after retiring. Mr. Girsky has been a member of the Board since July 2009 and was a senior executive of the Company from December 2009 through January 2014. In deciding to recommend him for re-election at the annual meeting, the Governance Committee recognized his service in joining management at a crucial time to provide leadership through several transitions, as well as the value of providing continuity in the membership of the Board in light of the number of directors leaving the Board in the first half of 2014.
The Governance Committee will consider persons recommended by stockholders for election to the Board. To recommend an individual for Board membership, write to the Corporate Secretary of our Company at the mailing address, fax number, or e-mail address provided on page 79 in“How can I obtain the Company’s corporate governance information?” Using the same criteria for candidates proposed by stockholders and by members of the Board, the Governance Committee will review the qualifications and background of each recommended candidate in light of the selection criteria listed above and will then communicate its decision to the candidate or the person who made the recommendation.

If you intend to nominate a candidate for director at the annual meeting or to introduce any other matter (aside from a stockholder proposal under Rule 14a-8 of the SEC’s proxy rules, which is discussed on page 7)9), you must give us written notice as required in Section 1.11 of our Bylaws. The Corporate Secretary must receive such notice at the mailing address, fax number, or e-mail address provided in“How can I obtain the Company’s corporate governance information?”on page 7,9, not more than 180 days and not less than 120 days before the date of the annual meeting. For the 20142015 annual meeting, your notice must be received between December 12, 201311, 2014 and February 10, 2014.9, 2015.


18
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




Board Meetings and Attendance

In 2012,2013, our Board held a total of 11ten meetings, and average attendance at Board and Committee meetings was 9693 percent. Each director standing for re-election attended at leastmore than 75 percent of the total meetings of the Board and Committees on which he or she served during 2012, except Mr. Bonderman who attended 74 percent (91 percent of Board meetings and 63 percent of Committee meetings).2013. Directors are expected to attend our annual meeting of stockholders, which is held in conjunction with a regularly scheduled Board meeting. All of GM’s directors attended the 20122013 annual meeting of stockholders.

Size of the Board

The Board of Directors is currently composed of 15 members, and with the retirement of Mr. Laskawy, will have 14 members following the annual meeting.members. The Board of Directors sets the number of directors from time to time by resolution adopted by a majority of the Board. The Governance Committee reassesses the Board’s size at least annually to determine if a larger or smaller group would be more effective. If any nominee is unable to serve as a director or if any director leaves the Board between annual meetings of stockholders, the Board, by resolution, may reduce the number of directors or elect an individual to fill the resulting vacancy.

Voting Standards for the Election of Directors

Section 2.2 of GM’s Bylaws and our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that in uncontested elections directors are elected by a majority of the votes cast. In contested elections, the plurality voting standard applies so that the Board vacancies are filled by the nominees who receive the most votes, regardless of whether they receive a majority of votes cast. An election is considered “contested” if we receive proper notice pursuant to Section 1.11 of our Bylaws that a stockholder intends to nominate a candidate for the election, so that the number of candidates would be greater than the number of directors to be elected, unless the Board determines in its reasonable judgment that the stockholder’s nominee or nominees are likely to receive less than 0.01 percent of the votes cast.

Our Bylaws and Corporate Governance Guidelines further provide that before any incumbent director may be nominated by the Board for re-election to the Board, he or she must submit a written irrevocable resignation, which would become effective if: (1) the director does not receive more than 50 percent of the votes cast in an uncontested election and (2) the Board accepts that resignation in accordance with policies and procedures adopted by the Board for such purposes.

Within 90 days after receipt of the certified final vote for an uncontested election of directors in which one or more incumbent directors did not receive a majority of the votes cast, the Governance Committee will consider his or her tendered resignation in light of the best interests of GM and its stockholders and make a recommendation to the Board whether to accept or reject the resignation, and whether a different individual should be chosen to serve as a director in place of the unsuccessful incumbent. The Committee in making its recommendation and the Board in determining whether to accept the Committee’s recommendation may consider any factors they determine appropriate and relevant to the best interests of GM and its stockholders. In any event, however, the Board will accept the resignation of an unsuccessful incumbent unless there is a compelling reason to reject the resignation. Using this standard, a resignation might be rejected, for example, if:

The stated or apparent reasons for the votes against the director could be better addressed or resolved in a different way; or

The resignation of the director would: (1) eliminate an Audit Committee financial expert; (2) cause the Board to have less than a majority of independent directors; (3) cause GM to fail to satisfy the listing requirements of the NYSE; (4) result in a default or breach under any loan covenants; or (5) trigger a significant payment under an executive employment contract or other contract.

While the Governance Committee is considering whether to recommend that the Board accept a director’s resignation under the circumstances described above and the Board itself is deliberating and acting upon the Committee’s recommendation, the Board expects an unsuccessful incumbent to recuse himself or herself voluntarily from participation in those discussions and decisions, except in limited circumstances.

Within four business days after the Board accepts or rejects the resignation following the process described above, we will file a report with the SEC on Form 8-K setting forth the decision and explaining the Board’s rationale for its decision.


19
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




If all incumbent directors who are Board nominees fail to receive a vote of at least 50 percent of the votes cast in an uncontested election of directors, the incumbent Board will nominate a new slate of directors and within 180 days after the certification of the stockholder vote will hold a special meeting to elect a Board of Directors. In such circumstances, the incumbent Board will continue to serve until new directors are elected and qualified.

Director Independence

Pursuant to our Bylaws and the terms of the Stockholders Agreement described on page 30,28, at least two-thirds of our directors must be independent within the meaning of Rule 303A.02 of the NYSE Listed Company Manual, as determined by our Board of Directors.

The Governance Committee assesses the independence of each director and makes recommendations to the Board as to each director’s independence both by using the quantitative criteria in the Board’s Corporate Governance Guidelines and by determining whether the director is free from any qualitative relationship that would interfere with the exercise of independent judgment.

Section 2.10 of our Bylaws incorporates, by reference, the independence criteria of the NYSE, and the Board’s Corporate Governance Guidelines set forth our standards for director independence, which are based on all the applicable SEC and NYSE requirements. The Board’s Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that an independent director must satisfy all of the following criteria:

During the past three years, we have not employed the director, and have not employed (except in a non-executive capacity) any of his or her immediate family members;

During any twelve-month period within the last three years, the director has not received more than $120,000 in direct compensation from us other than director fees or other forms of deferred compensation. No immediate family members of the director have received any compensation other than for employment in a non-executive capacity;

Neither the director nor any immediate family member is a current partner of a firm that is our internal or external auditor; the director is not an employee of such a firm; the director does not have an immediate family member who is a current employee of such a firm and personally works on our audit; and neither the director nor any immediate family member was a partner or employee of such a firm and personally worked on our audit within the last three years;

During the past three years, neither the director nor any immediate family member has been part of an “interlocking directorate” in which one of our executive officers serves on the compensation committee (or its equivalent) of another company that employs the director; and

During the past three years, neither the director nor any immediate family member has been employed (except, in the case of family members, in a capacity other than as an executive officer) by one of our significant suppliers or customers or any affiliate of such supplier or customer. For the purposes of this standard, a supplier or customer is considered significant if its sales to, or purchases from, us represent the greater of $1 million or 2two percent of our or the supplier’s or customer’s consolidated gross revenues.

In addition to satisfying all of the foregoing requirements, a director or director nominee would not be considered independent if he or she has, in the judgment of the Board, any other “material” relationship with the Company, other than serving as a director that would interfere with the exercise of his or her independent judgment.

Members of the Audit Committee will not be considered independent if they receive, directly or indirectly, any compensation from the Company other than their compensation for service as directors, or be an “affiliated person” of the Company or subsidiary thereof, as such term is defined under Rule 10A-3 promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. In determining the independence of members of the Compensation Committee, the Board must consider all factors specifically relevant to determining whether they have a relationship to the Company that is material to their ability to be independent from management in connection with the duties of a compensation committee member, including their source of compensation, any consulting, advisory or other compensatory fee paid by the Company to them; and whether they are affiliated with the Company or any subsidiary.

20
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




Consistent with the standards described above, the Board has reviewed all relationships between the Company and each director or director nominee, considering quantitative and qualitative criteria, and affirmatively has determined that all of the directors other than Mr. AkersonMs. Barra and Mr. Girsky, a former executive officer of the Company, are independent according to the definition in the Board’s Corporate Governance Guidelines.

The Board has also determined that if Mr. Ashton is elected to the Board, he will not be considered independent in view of his long-term affiliation with the UAW and the significant relationship between the Company and the UAW.

In recommending to the Board that each non-employee director be found independent, the Governance Committee also considered whether there were any other facts or circumstances that might impair a director’s independence. In particular, the Governance Committee evaluated charitable contributions that GM (including the GM Foundation) has made to non-profit organizations with which our directors are or have been associated. None of these transactions was material. The Governance Committee also considered that GM in the ordinary course of business, during the last three years, has sold fleet vehicles to and purchased products and services from companies at which some of our directors serve as non-employee directors and confirmed the absence of any material relationship. In each case, these transactions were in the ordinary course of business for GM and the other companies involved and were on terms and conditions available to similarly situated customers and suppliers.

Our Bylaws and Corporate Governance Guidelines are available on our website atwww.gm.com/investor, under “Corporate Governance.”

Executive Sessions

Under the Board’s Corporate Governance Guidelines, the non-management directors generally have an opportunity to meet in executive session without management present as part of each regularly scheduled Board meeting. If any non-management directors are not independent, then the independent directors schedule an executive session of independent directors at least once per year. Executive sessions are currently chaired by the non-executive Chairman of the Board, Mr. Solso. In 2013 and January 2014, executive sessions were chaired by the Board’s Lead Director at the time, Ms. Russo. During these sessions, the non-management directors review CEO performance, compensation, and succession planning; future Board agendas and flow of information to directors; the Board’s corporate governance matters; and any other matters of importance to the Company or other issues raised by the non-management directors. The non-management directors of the Board met in executive session five times in 2012,2013, including at leastmore than one time with only independent directors present.

Stockholder Communication with the Board

Stockholders and other interested parties may contact our Board as a whole, or the non-management directors as a group, any Board Committee, or the Chairman of the Board or the Lead Director by using contact information provided on our website atwww.gm.com/investor, under “Corporate Governance.”

Code of Ethics

We have adopted a code of ethics that applies to our directors, officers, and employees, including the Chairman and CEO, the SeniorExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, the Vice President, Controller and Chief Accounting Officer, and any other persons performing similar functions. GM’s code of ethics, “Winning With Integrity: Our Value and Guidelines for Employee Conduct,” is posted on our website atwww.gm.com/investor, under “Corporate Governance.”

Confidentiality

Directors, like all employees, are required to maintain the confidentiality of information entrusted to them by us or any other confidential information about GM that they receive from any source in their capacity as a director, except when disclosure is legally required or specifically authorized by our Board. Directors are expected to take all appropriate steps to minimize the risk of disclosure of confidential communications coming to them from us as well as confidential discussions and decisions by or among directors and by or among the directors and management. All discussions that occur at meetings of the Board or a Board Committee are deemed confidential, except to the extent that disclosure may be legally required. Directors may not use confidential information for their benefit or for the benefit of persons or entities outside the Company or in violation of any law or regulation including insider trading laws and regulations. Directors are subject to these

21
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




obligations with regard to confidential information during and after their service on the Board. For purposes of this policy, “confidential information” is all non-public information relating to GM including, but not limited to, information that could be useful to competitors or otherwise harmful to our interests or objectives, if disclosed.

Director Orientation and Continuing Education

All new directors must participate in the Company’s director orientation program, which is generally conducted promptly after the meeting at which a new director is elected. The Governance Committee oversees an orientation process developed by management to familiarize new directors with the Company’s business and strategic plans, significant financial matters, core values, including ethics, compliance programs, corporate governance practices, and other key policies and practices through a review of background material and meetings with senior management. It is the responsibility of the Governance Committee to advise directors about their continuing education on subjects that would assist them in discharging their duties. For example, Board members are encouraged to visit GM facilities, dealers, and auto shows to enhance their understanding of the Company and its competitors in the auto industry. All directors are encouraged to attend, at our expense, director continuing education programs sponsored by educational and other institutions.

Access to Outside Advisors

The Board as well as each Board Committee can retain the services of outside advisors at our expense.

Committees of the Board of Directors

Our Board of Directors has five standing Committees: Audit, Directors and Corporate Governance, Executive Compensation, Finance, and Public Policy. Our Board has adopted a written charter for each of our standing Committees, which may be found on our website atwww.gm.com/investor, under “Corporate Governance.” See“How can I obtain the Company’s corporate governance information?” on page 79 for information about obtaining a printed copy of each charter. Our Board may also establish from time to time any other committees that it deems necessary or desirable. Each member of the Audit, Corporate Governance, and Compensation Committees has been determined by the Board to be independent for purposes of the NYSE Corporate Governance listing standards. The composition of each Committee also complies with the listing requirements and other rules of the Toronto Stock Exchange. The following table shows for each of our standing Committees the current membership and the number of meetings held in 2012.2013.

Standing Committee Membership

Director Audit Directors and
Corporate
Governance
 Executive
Compensation
 Finance (1) Public Policy
           

David Bonderman

     X X  

Erroll B. Davis, Jr.

 X       Chair

Stephen J. Girsky

       X X

E. Neville Isdell

   X Chair   X

Robert D. Krebs

 X X   Chair  

Philip A. Laskawy (2)

       X  

Kathryn V. Marinello

 X       X

James J. Mulva

     X X X

Patricia F. Russo

   Chair X X  

Thomas M. Schoewe (3)

 Chair     X  

Theodore M. Solso

 X X X    

Carol M. Stephenson

   X X    

Cynthia A. Telles

   X     X
Number of Meetings in 2012 9 6 9 7 5

DirectorAudit
Directors and
Corporate
Governance
Executive
Compensation
FinancePublic Policy
David Bonderman (1)  XX 
Erroll B. Davis, Jr.X   Chair
Stephen J. Girsky   XX
E. Neville Isdell XChair  
Robert D. Krebs (2)XX Chair 
Kathryn V. MarinelloX   X
Michael G. MullenX   X
James J. Mulva  XXX
Patricia F. Russo ChairXX 
Thomas M. SchoeweChair  X 
Theodore M. Solso (3)XXX  
Carol M. Stephenson XX  
Cynthia A. Telles (1)   XX
Number of Meetings in 201385655
(1)In August 2012,Not standing for re-election to the Finance and Risk Committee was renamedBoard at the Finance Committee. Please see “Finance Committee” below for further details.2014 annual meeting.
(2)Retiring from the Board effective as of the 2013 Annual Meeting,2014 annual meeting, pursuant to the Board’s retirement age policy.

 22
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




(3)Appointed Chairnon-executive Chairman of the Audit CommitteeBoard on February 13, 2013.January 15, 2014.

Admiral Michael G. Mullen

Ms. Barra joined the Board on February 1, 2013January 15, 2014 and has not yet been named to any Committees of the Board.

The primary responsibilities for each of the Committees of the Board are set forth below.

Audit Committee

The Audit Committee assists the Board in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities with respect to the financial reports and other financial information provided by us to stockholders and others; our system of internal controls; our compliance procedures for the employee code of ethics and standards of business conduct; and our audit, accounting, and financial reporting processes. Our Board has determined that all of the members of the Committee are independent, financially literate, and have accounting or related financial management expertise as defined by the NYSE. The Board also has determined that Mr. Davis, Mr. Krebs, Ms. Marinello, Mr. Schoewe, and Mr. Solso all qualify as “audit committee financial experts” as defined by the SEC.

Directors and Corporate Governance Committee

The Governance Committee gives direction and oversight to the identification and evaluation of potential Board candidates and ultimately recommends candidates to be nominated for election to the Board, including any individuals designated under the Stockholders Agreement described on page 30.28. It periodically conducts studies of the appropriate size and composition of the Board and reviews and makes recommendations concerning compensation for non-employee directors. Among other items, the Governance Committee is responsible for: reviewing and recommending revisions, as appropriate, to the Company’s corporate governance framework, including our Certificate of Incorporation, Bylaws, and Corporate Governance Guidelines; overseeing the self-evaluation process of the Board and its standing Committees and reporting an assessment of the Board’s performance annually to the Board; and recommending memberships and Chairs for all Committees of the Board.

Executive Compensation Committee

The Compensation Committee’s overall objective is to ensure that our compensation policies and practices support the recruitment, development, and retention of the executive talent needed to ensure the long-term success of the Company. The Committee has a charter which is available for review on our website as discussed previously and has the authority under its charter to engage the services of outside advisors as described on page 38. The Committee meets at least annually with our General Auditor and Chief Risk Officer to assess executive compensation risk as discussed on page 39. The Committee may also invite various members of management to its meetings to assist it in carrying out its duties and responsibilities as the need arises. In doing this,2013, the Senior Vice President, Global Human Resources, attended all committee meetings as did the Executive Director, Global Compensation and Benefits, in her capacity as Secretary to the Committee. The Chairman and CEO was invited to participate in a portion of all meetings. The Compensation Committee also meets in executive session without members of management. The executive sessions may or may not include participation by the external advisors as deemed necessary by the Committee. External advisors may also engage in discussions throughout the year with the Committee Chair and other Committee members without management present.
In carrying out its duties during 2013, the Compensation Committee musthas had to balance the need to provide competitive compensation and benefits with the guidelines and requirements of the U.S. DepartmentUST and the Special Master for Troubled Asset Relief Program ("TARP") Compensation (the "Special Master"). As a result of the Treasury (the “UST”). TheUST completing its sale of our Common Stock in December 2013, GM’s compensation programs ceased to be subject to UST guidelines and requirements. In planning for 2014, the Compensation Committee reviewed our talent and our executive development program with senior management, and approved equity plans and corporatenew compensation plans. The Committee has responsibility to set goals and objectives related to compensation and set individual award targets for the CEO and other Senior Executive Officers (“SEOs”) who are also Named Executive Officers (“NEOs”),NEOs, as well as our other executive officers and certain other senior leaders subject to its review. None
Below that level, the Committee has delegated authority, within prescribed limits, to the CEO or the Senior Vice President, Global Human Resources for certain individual incentive and equity-based compensation awards for new executives, and to the Secretary of the membersCommittee for equity-based grants to new executives.

23
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




Finance Committee

In August 2012, the Board approved amendments to the charter of the Finance and Risk Committee, and the Committee was renamed the Finance Committee.

The Finance Committee is responsible for assisting the Board in its oversight of our financial policies and strategies, including our capital structure. In addition, the Finance Committee periodically receives reports regarding our U.S. employee benefit plans for the purpose of reviewing the administration, financing, investment performance, risk and liability profile, and funding of such plans, in each case including with respect to regulatory compliance. Before the amendments to the charter, the Finance and Risk Committee had responsibility for assisting the Board in its oversight of our risk management strategies and policies, including overseeing management of market, credit, liquidity, and funding risks. These responsibilities have been assumed by the Audit Committee.

Public Policy Committee

The Public Policy Committee provides oversight and guidance to management on public policies to support the Company’s progress in growing the business globally within the framework of its core values. The Public Policy Committee discusses, and brings to the attention of the Board and management as appropriate, current and emerging global political, social, and public policy issues that may affect the business operations, profitability, or public image or reputation of the Company. The Public Policy Committee oversees global public policy matters

as well as specific functions of the Company, as appropriate. Company functions reviewed by the Public Policy Committee include Global Public Policy, diversity, corporate social responsibility, employee health and safety, and philanthropic activities.

Executive Committee

In addition to the above committees, our Board has an Executive Committee composed of the Chairman of the Board and the Chairs of each of our standing Committees. The Executive Committee is empowered to act for the full Board in intervals between Board meetings, with the exception of certain matters that by law may not be delegated. The Executive Committee meets as necessary, and all actions by the Executive Committee are reported at the next Board meeting.

Non-Employee Director Compensation

Compensation for our non-employee directors is set by our Board at the recommendation of the Governance Committee. With respect to non-employee directors,Our Board has maintained the Company’s philosophy is to provide directors with fair and competitive compensation, while ensuring that their compensation is closely aligned with stockholder interests and with the performance of the Company. Pursuant to the Board’s Corporate Governance Guidelines, the Governance Committee, which consists solely of independent directors, is responsible for conducting an annual assessment of non-employee director compensation.

In making non-employee director compensation recommendations, the Governance Committee takes various factors into consideration, including, but not limited to, the responsibilities of directors generally as well as Committee Chairs, and the form and amount of compensation paid to directors at peer companies having similar size, scope, and complexity.

In December 2012, our Board determined to maintain the same level of director compensation (i.e., annual Board and Committeecommittee retainers) as originally established on July 10, 2009. Each member of the Board who is not an employee receives an annual retainer of $200,000 for service on the Board and, if applicable, one or both of the following annual retainers: (1) $10,000 for service as Chair of any Board Committee; and (2) $20,000 for service on the Audit Committee. The fee paid for service as Lead Director is $30,000 per year.

Effective January 15, 2014, the fee paid for service as non-executive Chairman of the Board is $250,000 per year.

Under the General Motors Company Deferred Compensation Plan for Non-Employee Directors (the “Director Compensation Plan”), which became effective January 1, 2011, non-employee directors are required to defer 50 percent of their annual Board retainer (i.e., $100,000) into share units of our Common Stock (“Deferred Share Units”) and may elect to defer all or half of the remainder in additional Deferred Share Units. Deferred Share Units under this plan may not be voted and will not be available for disposition until after the director retires or otherwise leaves the Board. After leaving the Board, the director will receive a cash payment or payments under this plan based on the number of Deferred Share Units in the director’s account, valued at the average daily closing market price for the quarter immediately preceding payment. Directors will be paid in a lump sum or in annual installments for up to five years based on their deferral elections.

Only non-employee directors receive fees for serving on the Board. Non-employee directors are not eligible to participate in any of the savings or retirement programs for our employees. Other than as described in this section, there are no separate benefit plans for directors.

Non-employee directors are reimbursed for reasonable travel expenses incurred in connection with their duties as directors.

In addition, we pay for the cost of personal accident insurance coverage, and directors are responsible for associated taxes on the imputed income from the coverage.

To familiarizeenhance the public image of our vehicles, we provide directors with our products, we provide the use of a company vehicle on a six-month rotating basis, and directorsbasis. Directors are expected to submit product evaluations to us. Directors are charged with imputed income based on the lease value of the vehicle provided and are responsible for associated taxes. In addition, we pay forAfter leaving the costBoard at age 72 or older, retired directors receive the use of personal accident insurance coverage, for whicha company vehicle on an annual

24
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




rotating basis, on the same terms as active directors. Non-employee directors are also responsible for associated taxeswho leave the Board before the age of 72 or with less than five years of service will be handled on imputed income.

a case-by-case basis.

The fees for a director who joins or leaves the Board or assumes additional responsibilities during the year are pro-rated for his or her period of service. The fees listed in the tabletables below reflect any pro-rata adjustments that occurred in the year ended December 31, 2012.

20122013.

2013 Non-Employee Director Compensation
Table 1 — Total Non-Employee Director Compensation

Director  

Fees Earned or

Paid in Cash (1)

($)

   

All Other

Compensation (2)

($)

   

Total

($)

 
                

David Bonderman

   200,000     11,957     211,957  

Erroll B. Davis, Jr.

   230,000     13,074     243,074  

E. Neville Isdell

   210,000     11,957     221,957  

Robert D. Krebs

   230,000     11,957     241,957  

Philip A. Laskawy

   230,000     12,912     242,912  

Kathryn V. Marinello

   220,000     11,957     231,957  

James J. Mulva

   116,667     60     116,727  

Patricia F. Russo

   240,000     11,957     251,957  

Thomas M. Schoewe

   211,667     11,957     223,624  

Theodore M. Solso

   128,333     6,965     135,298  

Carol M. Stephenson

   200,000     11,957     211,957  

Cynthia A. Telles

   200,000     11,957     211,957  

Director
Fees Earned or
Paid in Cash (1)
($)
All Other
Compensation (2)
($)
Total
($)
David Bonderman200,000
5,964
205,964
Erroll B. Davis, Jr.230,000
7,857
237,857
E. Neville Isdell210,000
7,133
217,133
Robert D. Krebs230,000
7,133
237,133
Philip A. Laskawy (3)105,000
7,073
112,073
Kathryn V. Marinello220,000
7,133
227,133
Michael G. Mullen (4)193,333
4,785
198,118
James J. Mulva200,000
3,042
203,042
Patricia F. Russo240,000
7,133
247,133
Thomas M. Schoewe228,333
7,133
235,466
Theodore M. Solso220,000
7,133
227,133
Carol M. Stephenson200,000
7,133
207,133
Cynthia A. Telles200,000
7,133
207,133

Table 2 — Retainer Fees Deferred
Director
Retainer Fees Deferred in Share
Units of Common Stock under the
Director Compensation Plan
($)
David Bonderman100,000
Erroll B. Davis, Jr.100,000
E. Neville Isdell100,000
Robert D. Krebs100,000
Philip A. Laskawy50,000
Kathryn V. Marinello200,000
Michael G. Mullen91,667
James J. Mulva200,000
Patricia F. Russo100,000
Thomas M. Schoewe100,000
Theodore M. Solso200,000
Carol M. Stephenson200,000
Cynthia A. Telles100,000
(1)Includes annual retainer fees, Chair and Audit Committee fees, as well as Lead Director fees. The totals in this column include amounts required or elected to be deferred under the Director Compensation Plan and converted into share units at the average daily closing price of our Common Stock for 2012 (or2013 (and prorated as applicable for a newly elected director who has joined or retired from the portion ofBoard during the year after joining the Board) as disclosed in the table below:calendar year).

Director

Retainer Fees Deferred in Share

Units of Common Stock under the

Director Compensation Plan

($)

David Bonderman

200,000

Erroll B. Davis, Jr.

100,000

E. Neville Isdell

100,000

Robert D. Krebs

100,000

Philip A. Laskawy

100,000

Kathryn V. Marinello

200,000

James J. Mulva

116,667

Patricia F. Russo

100,000

Thomas M. Schoewe

100,000

Theodore M. Solso

116,667

Carol M. Stephenson

200,000

Cynthia A. Telles

100,000

(2)“All Other Compensation” includes among other items incremental costs for the use of company vehicles and the costs associated with personal accident insurance. See tableTable 3 below.


25
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




(3)Mr. Laskawy retired from the Board effective June 6, 2013.
(4)Admiral Mullen joined the Board on February 1, 2013.
Table 3 — All Other Compensation

Totals for amounts reported as “All Other Compensation” in the preceding “2012 Non-Employee Director Compensation” table are described below:

Director  

Aggregate

Earnings on
Deferred

Compensation
($)

   

Perquisites/

Company

Vehicles (1)
($)

   Other (2)
($)
   Total
($)
 

David Bonderman

        —     11,837     120     11,957  

Erroll B. Davis, Jr. (3)

   1,117     11,837     120     13,074  

E. Neville Isdell

        —     11,837     120     11,957  

Robert D. Krebs

        —     11,837     120     11,957  

Philip A. Laskawy

        —     12,792     120     12,912  

Kathryn V. Marinello

        —     11,837     120     11,957  

James J. Mulva

        —            —     60     60  

Patricia F. Russo

        —     11,837     120     11,957  

Thomas M. Schoewe

        —     11,837     120     11,957  

Theodore M. Solso

        —     6,905     60     6,965  

Carol M. Stephenson

        —     11,837     120     11,957  

Cynthia A. Telles

        —     11,837     120     11,957  

Director
Aggregate
Earnings on
Deferred
Compensation
($)
Perquisites/
Company
Vehicles (1)
($)
Other (2)
($)
Total
($)
David Bonderman
5,844
120
5,964
Erroll B. Davis, Jr. (3)724
7,013
120
7,857
E. Neville Isdell
7,013
120
7,133
Robert D. Krebs
7,013
120
7,133
Philip A. Laskawy
7,013
60
7,073
Kathryn V. Marinello
7,013
120
7,133
Michael G. Mullen
4,675
110
4,785
James J. Mulva
2,922
120
3,042
Patricia F. Russo
7,013
120
7,133
Thomas M. Schoewe
7,013
120
7,133
Theodore M. Solso
7,013
120
7,133
Carol M. Stephenson
7,013
120
7,133
Cynthia A. Telles
7,013
120
7,133
(1)Includes incremental costs for company vehicles, which are calculated based on the average monthly cost of providing vehicles to all directors, including lost sales opportunity and incentive costs, if any; insurance claims, if any; licensing and registration fees; and use taxes. In addition, Mr. Laskawy received tickets and hotel accommodations in connection with attending an event sponsored by the Company. Taxes related to imputed income are the responsibility of the director.
(2)Reflects cost of premiums for providing personal accident insurance. Taxes related to imputed income are the responsibility of the director.
(3)We assumed the General Motors Corporation Compensation Plan for Non-Employee Directors, and it remains in place with respect to past deferrals of compensation to former directors of General Motors Corporation who are members of our Board. The amounts reported under “Aggregate Earnings on Deferred Compensation” reflect interest on fees for service on the board of directors of General Motors Corporation deferred in cash-based alternatives. General Motors Corporation did not credit interest at above-market rates. In general, General Motors Corporation did not pay deferred amounts until January following the director’s retirement or separation from its board of directors. General Motors Corporation then paid those amounts, either in lump sum or in annual installments for up to ten years based on the director’s deferral election.

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

No executive officer of GM served on any board of directors or compensation committee of any other company for which any of our directors served as an executive officer at any time during the year ended December 31, 2012.

2013.

Director Stock Ownership and Holding Requirements

The Board’s Corporate Governance Guidelines establish a stock ownership requirement for non-employee directors intended to enhance the link between the interests of GM’s directors and stockholders. Each non-employee director is required to own our Common Stock or Deferred Share Units with a market value of at least $300,000. Each director has up to five years from the later of the effective date of the requirement, (i.e., January 1, 2011)2011, or the date he or she is first elected to the Board to meet this ownership requirement. Under this policy, non-employee directors are prohibited from selling any GM securities or derivatives of GM securities such as Deferred Share Units while they are members of the Board. Ownership guidelines are reviewed each year to ensure they continue to be effective in aligning the interests of the Board and our stockholders.


26
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT





SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF DIRECTORS, NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS,

AND CERTAIN OTHERS

The beneficial ownership as of April 1, 2013,2014, of our Common Stock by each director, each nominee for election to the Board, each NEO, and all directors and executive officers as a group is shown in the following tables, as well as ownership of Deferred Share Units and Deferred Salary Stock Units. Each of the individuals listed in the following tables owns less than 1one percent of the outstanding shares of our Common Stock; all directors and officers as a group own less than 1one percent of the outstanding shares. The persons named have furnished this information to us. None of the shares shown in the following tables as beneficially owned by directors and executive officers was hedged or pledged as security for any obligation.

Non-Employee Directors

         
Director 

Shares of

Common Stock

Beneficially

Owned

  

Deferred

Share

  Units (1)  

 
         
David Bonderman  800    15,595  

Erroll B. Davis, Jr.

  800    9,568  
E. Neville Isdell  16,300    7,798  

Robert D. Krebs

  5,000    7,798  
Philip A. Laskawy  3,000    7,798  

Kathryn V. Marinello

  800    15,595  
James J. Mulva      5,082  

Michael G. Mullen

        
Patricia F. Russo  800    7,798  

Thomas M. Schoewe

  7,645    5,058  
Theodore M. Solso  5,000    5,082  

Carol M. Stephenson

  800    15,595  

Cynthia A. Telles

  800    7,798  

Director
Shares of
Common Stock
Beneficially
Owned
Deferred
Share
  Units (1)  
Joseph J. Ashton

David Bonderman800
18,580
Erroll B. Davis, Jr.800
12,553
E. Neville Isdell16,300
10,783
Robert D. Krebs5,000
10,783
Kathryn V. Marinello800
21,564
Michael G. Mullen
2,705
James J. Mulva
11,051
Patricia F. Russo800
10,783
Thomas M. Schoewe7,645
8,043
Theodore M. Solso5,000
11,051
Carol M. Stephenson800
21,564
Cynthia A. Telles800
10,783
(1)Deferred Share Units - Represents the unit equivalents of our Common Stock under the Director Compensation Plan described on page 24.

Named Executive Officers and

All Directors and Executive Officers as a Group

         
Name 

Shares

Beneficially

Owned (1)

  

Deferred Salary
Stock

Units (2)

 
         

Daniel F. Akerson

  123,395    505,038  

Daniel Ammann

  23,214    193,686  

Stephen J. Girsky

  30,442    271,984  

Mary T. Barra

  25,824    182,137  

Timothy E. Lee

  500    224,769  

All Directors and Executive Officers as a Group
(28 persons, including the foregoing)

  339,612    2,159,272  

Name
Shares
Beneficially
Owned (1)
Deferred Salary
Stock
Units (2)
Daniel F. Akerson235,032
436,146
Daniel Ammann81,413
162,722
Stephen J. Girsky23,804
229,525
Mary T. Barra32,996
160,418
Karl-Thomas Neumann
57,182
All Directors and Executive Officers as a Group
(27 persons, including the foregoing)
488,827
1,617,561
(1)Includes shares held directly by the executive officer as well as vested restricted stock, and excludes shares shown in the “Deferred Salary Stock Units” column.
(2)Includes vested and undelivered salary stock units, which are denominated in stock units and will be delivered in cash based onor stock at the fair market value of the stock on each dateexecutive's election pursuant to their respective delivery schedules.



27
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




Certain Beneficial Owners

The beneficial ownership as of April 1, 2013 (except as noted below)2014 of our Common Stock by each person or group of persons who is known to be the beneficial owner of more than 5five percent of our outstanding shares of Common Stock on a fully diluted basis is shown in the following table.

Name and Address of Beneficial Owner of Common Stock  

Number of

Shares

  

Percent of

Outstanding Shares

 
          

The U.S. Department of the Treasury
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20220

   241,673,176 (1)   16.4%  

Brock Fiduciary Services LLC (2)
622 Third Avenue, Floor 12
New York, NY 10017

   205,604,545 (3)   14.0%  

Canada GEN Investment Corporation
1240 Bay Street, Suite 302
Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5R 2A7

   140,084,746    9.5%  

Capital Research Global Investors
333 South Hope Street
Los Angeles, CA 90071

   99,065,165 (4)   6.7%  

Motors Liquidation Company GUC Trust
c/o Wilmington Trust Company, as Trust Administrator Wilmington Trust Company
Rodney Square North
1110 North Market Street
Wilmington, DE 19890

   82,013,919 (5)   5.6%  

Name and Address of Beneficial Owner of Common Stock
Number of
Shares
 
Percent of
Outstanding Shares
UAW Retiree Medical Benefits Trust, as advised by its fiduciary and investment advisor Brock Fiduciary Services LLC (1)
200 Walker Street
Detroit, MI 48207
140,150,000
 8.7%
Canada GEN Investment Corporation (2)
1240 Bay Street, Suite 302
Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5R 2A7
110,084,746
  6.9%
(1)Beneficial ownership as of April 17, 2013.
(2)(1)Brock Fiduciary Services LLC (“Brock Fiduciary”) is an independent fiduciary and investment adviser to the VEBA Trust. PursuantTrust and pursuant to an Independent Fiduciary Agreement, dated August 8, 2011, between Brock Fiduciary and the VEBA Trust, Brock Fiduciary has been given the power to vote and dispose of any GM securities held by the VEBA Trust, including any of our Common Stock. The address of Brock Fiduciary is 622 Third Avenue, Floor 12, New York, NY 10017.
(3)
(2)Includes 45,454,545 sharesCanada GEN Investment Corporation ("Canada Holdings") is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Canada Development Investment Corporation ("CDIC") and the direct owner and record holder of our Common Stock issuable upon exercise of a warrant issued to the VEBA Trust in connection with the 363 Sale described in footnote 5 below. The warrantStock. CDIC is exercisable at any time before December 31, 2015, with an exercise price of $42.31 per share.
(4)Sole dispositive power as investment advisor.
(5)Motors Liquidation Company GUC Trust (“GUC Trust”) is the successor to Motors Liquidation Company (formerly known as General Motors Corporation) (“MLC”) within the meaning of Section 1145 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. The GUC Trust holds, administers, and directs the distribution of certain assets pursuant to the terms of the GUC Trust Agreement, dated as of June 11, 2012 and as amended from time to time, and pursuant to the Second Amended Joint Chapter 11 Plan, dated March 18, 2011, of MLC and its debtor affiliates (collectively, along with MLC, the “Debtors”), for the benefit of holders of allowed general unsecured claims against the Debtors. Includes 52,912,042 sharesindirect beneficial owner of our Common Stock issuable upon exercise of two series of warrants issued to MLC (and subsequently assumed by GUC Trust), each to acquire 26,456,021 shares. These warrants were issuedStock. CDIC is a Canadian federal Crown corporation, meaning that it is a business corporation established under the Canada Business Corporations Act, owned by the Company in connection with MLC’s salefederal Government of substantially all of its assets to the Company in July 2009 (the “363 Sale”). One warrant is exercisable at any time before July 10, 2016, with an exercise price of $10.00 per share, and the other warrant is exercisable at any time before July 10, 2019, with an exercise price of $18.33 per share. GUC Trust and Wilmington Trust Company, as Trust Administrator, have shared dispositive power over the Common Stock and the two warrants reported in the table.Canada.

Stockholders Agreement

Three of our stockholders—the UST, Canada GEN Investment Corporation (“Canada Holdings”),Holdings, and the VEBA Trust—have entered into a Stockholders Agreement with us (the “Stockholders Agreement”) under which at least two-thirds of the directors are required to be determined by our Board of Directors to be independent within the meaning of NYSE rules.

In December 2013, the UST sold its remaining holdings of our Common Stock and is no longer subject to the terms of the Stockholders Agreement.

As long as the VEBA Trust holds at least 50 percent of the shares of our Common Stock it held on July 10, 2009, it has the right under the Stockholders Agreement to designate one nominee to our Board of Directors. The VEBA Trust’s choice isDirectors, subject to the consent of the UAW and, if its designee is not independent of General Motors, to the consent of the UST.UAW. Under this provision, the VEBA Trust designated Mr. Girsky,Ashton, who was nominated by the Board as part of the slate of candidates it recommends for election at the annual meeting.

The Stockholders Agreement provides that the UST and Canada Holdings (the “Government Holders”) will not vote theirits shares of our Common Stock, with certain exceptions. With regard to the election of directors, the Government HoldersCanada Holdings will vote for any nominee designated by the VEBA Trust as described above and otherwise will vote at theirits discretion with respect to any candidates nominated by the Board of Directors or third parties. With regard to the other matters to be presented to the stockholders at the annual meeting, if the vote of the Government HoldersCanada Holdings is required for stockholder action, theyit will vote in the same proportionate manner as the holders of Common Stock other than the VEBA Trust and its affiliates and the directors and executive officers of the Company. Similarly, the Stockholders Agreement further provides that the VEBA Trust will vote its shares of our Common Stock on each matter presented to the stockholders at the annual meeting in the same proportionate manner as the holders of our Common Stock, other than our directors and executive officers.

Each of the UST,

Canada Holdings and the VEBA Trust will each be subject to the terms of the Stockholders Agreement until it beneficially owns less than two percent of the shares of our Common Stock then issued and outstanding.

CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

Our Board of Directors has adopted the Related Party Transactions Policy, a written policy regarding the review, approval or ratification of “related party transactions.” Related party transactions are transactions in

28
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT

Table of Contents



which our Company is a participant, the amount involved exceeds $120,000, and a “related party” has or will have a direct or indirect material interest. Related parties of our Company consist of directors (including nominees for election as directors), executive officers, stockholders beneficially owning more than 5 percent of the Company’s voting securities (“Significant Stockholders”), and the immediate family members of these individuals.

Each director and executive officer is responsible for providing written notice to the SeniorExecutive Vice President and General Counsel (“General Counsel”) of any potential related party transaction involving him or her or his or her immediate family member, including any additional information about the transaction that the General Counsel may reasonably request. In addition, each director and executive officer is required to complete an annual questionnaire that requests information about their immediate family members and any current, past, and proposed related party transactions, and that includes a reminder of his or her obligations under the Related Party Transactions Policy. The General Counsel in consultation with other members of management and with outside counsel, as appropriate, will determine whether the transaction does, in fact, constitute a related party transaction requiring compliance with this policy.

Related party transactions involving a Significant Stockholder, director, the CEO or the General Counsel and/or their immediate family members will be referred to the Governance Committee for review and approval or ratification. (TheNote however, the Governance Committee in its discretion, may refer any transaction to the Board for review and approval or ratification.) Any member of the Governance Committee who has a potential interest in any related party transaction will recuse himself or herself and abstain from voting on the approval or ratification of the related

party transaction, but may participate in all or a portion of the Governance Committee’s discussions of the related party transaction, if requested by the Chair of the Governance Committee. Related party transactions involving executive officers other than the CEO or the General Counsel and/or their immediate family members will be referred to the General Counsel for review and approval or ratification. All determinations by the General Counsel will be reported to the Governance Committee at its next regularly scheduled meeting.

In determining whether to approve or ratify a related party transaction, the Governance Committee or the General Counsel will consider the following factors, among others, to the extent relevant to the related party transaction:

Whether the terms of the related party transaction are fair to the Company and would apply on the same basis if the transaction did not involve a related party;

Whether there are any compelling business reasons for the Company to enter into the related party transaction and the nature of alternative transactions, if any;

Whether the related party transaction would impair the independence of an otherwise independent director;

Whether the Company was notified about the related party transaction before its commencement, and if not, why pre-approval was not sought and whether subsequent ratification would be detrimental to the Company; and

Whether the related party transaction would present an improper conflict of interest for any director or executive officer of the Company, taking into account the size of the transaction, the overall financial position of the director, executive officer, or other related party, the direct or indirect nature of the director’s, executive officer’s, or other related party’s interest in the transaction, and the ongoing nature of any proposed relationship and any other factors the Governance Committee deems relevant.

In any case where the Governance Committee or the General Counsel determines not to ratify a related party transaction that has been commenced without approval, the Governance Committee or the General Counsel, as appropriate, may direct additional actions including, but not limited to, immediate discontinuation or rescission of the transaction, or modification of the transaction to make it acceptable for ratification. The Governance Committee has authority to oversee our Related Party Transactions Policy and to amend it from time to time. In addition, the Governance Committee is responsible for annually reviewing the independence of each director and the appropriateness of any potential related party transaction and related issues. Our Related Party Transactions Policy is available on our website atwww.gm.com/investor, under “Corporate Governance.”

On December 21, 2012, GM repurchased 200 million shares of our Common Stock from

David Bonderman, who is not standing for re-election at the UST, a Significant Stockholder, at a cash price of $27.50 per share for a total consideration of $5.5 billion (“the Sale”). The price paid in the Sale represented a 7.9 percent premium over the closing price of our Common Stock on December 18, 2012, the day before the Sale was announced. In connection with the Sale, the UST publicly announced its intention to sell the remainder of its holdings of our Common Stock within 12 to 15 months after the Sale, subject to market conditions. GM incurred a special charge of approximately $400 million in the fourth quarter of 2012 as a result of the Sale. The transaction was approved pursuant to the Company’s Related Party Transactions Policy.

Pernilla Ammann, the wife of Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Daniel Ammann, is an officer and partner at an advertising firm, which in 2012 provided services to GM for which it received approximately $1.8 million. The payment was approved pursuant to the Company’s Related Party Transactions Policy.

Thomas G. Stephens, retired as Vice Chairman and Chief Technology Officer of the Company in April 2012. Mr. Stephens’ sister-in-law, Juli A. Stephens, was employed by General Motors LLC, an indirect subsidiary of the Company, throughout 2012, and Mr. Stephens’ brother, George T. Stephens was employed by General Motors LLC until his death in November 2012. Mr. Stephens’ family members each received less than $320,000 in total compensation in 2012, and their respective salary and benefits were comparable to those provided to other GM employees in similar positions. Their employment on these terms was approved pursuant to the Company’s Related Party Transactions Policy.

David Bonderman2014 annual meeting, is a founding partner of TPG, a private investment firm, whose affiliate invests in automobile dealerships in Asia representing various


29
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT

Table of Contents



vehicle manufacturers. These investments include dealerships in China that sell Chevrolet and Buick brand vehicles under a distribution agreement with Shanghai General Motors Co., Ltd (“SGM”), a joint venture in which GM has a significant interest. Under the terms of SGM’s joint venture agreement, we do not control SGM’s distribution activities.

In September 2013, we purchased 120 million shares of our Series A Preferred Stock (or 43.5 percent of the total shares outstanding) held by the VEBA Trust at a price equal to 108.1 percent of the aggregate liquidation amount for $3.2 billion. We recorded a loss for the difference between the carrying amount of the Series A Preferred Stock purchased and the consideration paid, which reduced the Company's 2013 net income attributable to common stockholders by approximately $816 million. The purchase from the VEBA Trust was approved by the Board pursuant to the Company’s Related Party Transaction Policy.
SECTION 16(a) BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP REPORTING COMPLIANCE

Federal securities laws require that our directors and executive officers and stockholders that own more than 10ten percent of our Common Stock report to the SEC and the Company certain changes in ownership and ownership information within specified periods. Based upon information furnished by these persons, we believe that all required filings for 20122013 were made in a timely manner.


30
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

Executive Summary

Fiscal Year 2012

2013 Corporate Performance

2012

2013 was another year of important accomplishments, for General Motors, building on theincreased financial momentum, we achieved in 2010 and 2011. We repaid our loan from the UST in 2010 and have no outstanding loans from the U.S. or Canadian governments. The U.S. economic recovery, continued strong demand for GM vehicles in China, and the global growth of the Chevrolet brand have helped deliver very solid results. Despite the challenging environment, particularly in Europe, we have now delivered a thirdfourth straight year of profitability and have taken significant actions to putrevenue growth for General Motors. Our relationship with the Company on a solid path for future growth. As a resultUST concluded with the sale of implementing key strategic initiatives, we:

Achieved 2012 fiscal year revenue totaling $152.3 billion and Earnings Before Interest and Taxes (“EBIT”)—Adjusted of $7.9 billion on sales of 9.3 million vehicles;

Increased Adjusted Free Cash Flow (“Adjusted FCF”) to $4.3 billion, compared to $3.0 billion for 2011;

Continued to report strong sales in China, with deliveries topping 2.8 million units;

Continued to execute the plan we outlined for investors by investing in our products, further strengthening our balance sheet, generating cash and profits each quarter, sustaining profitable growth in emerging markets, and maintaining our low break-even level. The next level of performance improvement will come as we systematically eliminate complexity and cost throughout the organization;

Completed a significant pension de-risking initiative and settled more than $28 billion in U.S. salaried pension liability through a combination of lump-sum payments and third-party annuitizations;

Announced plans to acquire automotive financing operations in Latin America, Europe, and China from Ally Financial, which will help make financing available to our customers in 80 percent of the markets where we compete;

Repurchased 200 millionits remaining shares of Common Stock fromon December 9, 2013 and, continuing our disciplined implementation of key strategic initiatives, we achieved the UST for $5.5 billion, representing 40 percentfollowing important results:

Continued strong vehicle sales in the U.S. and China, with deliveries of 9.7 million units globally;
Achieved year-over-year revenue growth, with 2013 revenue of $155.4 billion;
Achieved net income attributable to stockholders of $5.3 billion and EBIT - Adjusted(1) of $8.6 billion, and reduced losses in Europe;
Launched 36 new vehicles globally;
Achieved industry-leading quality in becoming the first domestic automaker to finish on top of the government’s stake on December 21, 2012,J. D. Power Initial Quality Study in the U.S.; and announced the UST’s plan to sell down its remaining equity over
Ended 2013 with a period of 12 to 15 months; and

Ended 2012 with total liquidity of $37.2 billion,fortress balance sheet, including $26.1$29 billion of cash and marketable securities.

Although 2012 wassecurities, providing a year marked by areas of significant accomplishmentstrong base to fund important product development and continued profitability, it was tempered by continuing weakness in Europe. However, we believe that themarket expansion initiatives outlined above are the basis of our continued success and will be reflected in sustained improvement in our business results and Total Shareholder Return over the long term.

a cushion against cyclical industry trends.

2012 Compensation ProgramsKey Leadership Changes

We could not have maintained our competitive focus and

On January 15, 2014, Daniel F. Akerson, under whose leadership GM achieved these important successesmilestones, stepped down as Chairman and CEO and is serving as Senior Advisor until he leaves the Company in July 2014.
Mary T. Barra, who was Executive Vice President, Global Product Development, Purchasing & Supply Chain, was elected by the Board of Directors to replace Mr. Akerson as CEO. Ms. Barra has extensive experience in GM engineering, manufacturing, and product development operations. Theodore M. Solso was elected to succeed Mr. Akerson as Chairman of our Board of Directors.
Daniel Ammann was named President of the Company with responsibility for managing regional operations around the world, global Cadillac and Chevrolet brand organizations, and GM Financial. Charles K. Stevens, III was named Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer on January 15, 2014, replacing Mr. Ammann.
In addition, on January 15, 2014, Stephen J. Girsky stepped down as Vice Chairman and is serving as Senior Advisor until he leaves the Company in July 2014. He remains on our Board of Directors.
Performance-Based Compensation Structure
Following the UST’s sale of its remaining shares of Common Stock, we have implemented a more appropriate performance-based compensation structure for our NEOs comprised of both short- and long-term incentives based on financial and operational metrics for fiscal year 2014 and beyond. In addition to base salary, this structure, shown below, will include: 1) an annual short-term incentive that may be earned upon achievement of annual financial and operating performance goals and individual contribution, and 2) long-term incentives comprised of both RSUs and PSUs.

(1)Excludes interest income, interest expense, income taxes, gains or losses on the settlement or extinguishment of obligations, impairment charges related to goodwill and certain investments, and gains or losses on the sale of non-core investments. For more complete information, please refer to "Reconciliation of Consolidated, Automotive and GM Financial Segment Results," on page 36 of our 2013 Annual Report on Form 10-K filed on February 6, 2014.


31
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT

Table of Contents



General Motors Company 2014 Short-Term Incentive Goals
Performance Measures
● EBIT-Adjusted
● Adjusted AFCF
● Global Market Share
● Quality
Payout Range0%–200% of target

General Motors Company 2014 Long-Term Incentive Goals
Performance Share Units (75% of 2014 LTI)
Performance Measures: ● ROIC
● Global Market Share
Payout Range: 0%–200% of target
Performance Period: 2014–2016
 RSUs (25% of 2014 LTI)Ratable vesting over a 3-year period

We believe that linking pay to the achievement of both short- and long-term goals is an important cornerstone of employee engagement and achieves the following goals to support the long-term success of the Company:
Links individual and business performance to our stockholders’ interests;
Maintains a critical line of sight between company performance and individual rewards;
Supports good corporate governance objectives and compensation best practices;
Mitigates business risk; and
Enhances our ability to attract, retain, and reward critical talent.
Corporate Governance and Compensation Best Practices
Our compensation plans are founded on the governance features described below:
Say-on-Pay and Say-on-Frequency Vote: We have held an advisory vote on executive compensation on an annual basis and recommend that this frequency continue;
Investor Outreach:We considered feedback from discussions with our largest institutional investors in developing our executive compensation program;
Director Independence: Our Compensation Committee is composed only of independent directors and may meet in executive session without management present;
Clawback and Recoupment:Incentive award payouts are subject to our Policy on Recoupment of Incentive Compensation;
Stock Ownership Requirements: We are implementing stock ownership requirements in 2014 with the approval of our proposed incentive plans;
Limited Perquisites: We provide only a limited number of perquisites;
No Tax Gross Ups:We provide no tax gross ups, except under our relocation and foreign service policies covering all employees;
Pre-Approval of Equity Transactions:Our Securities Trading Policy requires directors and executive officers to contact the GM Legal Staff prior to any sales or purchases of Common Stock;
Hedging Prohibition:Trading in GM derivatives and short sales is prohibited;
Compensation Consultant:Our Compensation Committee has retained Compensation Advisory Partners (“CAP”) as its independent executive compensation consultant;
Compensation Risk Management:Our Compensation Committee meets at least annually with our General Auditor and Chief Risk Officer to assess executive compensation risk;

32
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT

Table of Contents



Performance-Driven Incentive Plans:Our new short- and long-term incentive plans for executives are predominantly based on achievement of performance targets correlated to our business goals and budget commitments to the Board; and
Change-in-Control Provisions:Our new General Motors Company 2014 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the "2014 LTIP") requires both a change in Company ownership and a termination of employment (“double-trigger”) to initiate protection provisions for outstanding incentive awards.
2013 Compensation Programs
Our sustained focus on execution of our strategic plans and performance toward key business metrics is based on the dedicated efforts of our employees, particularly the members of our senior management team, many of whom joined the Company in recent years to assist us in reestablishing our brand dominance. Theleadership. We continued to strengthen our leadership hard work and sacrifice required to maintain operational effectiveness and continue to implement structural and financial improvements to assure our future success speaks to their exceptional capabilities. However, it is challenging to maintain an effective compensation program based on pay for performance within the compensation constraints

and rules promulgated by the UST. Without offering standard forms of incentive compensation, there are challengesteam in aligning executives with stockholders and in providing incentives to achieve the Company’s financial and business objectives.

Although we have attempted to maintain a strong focus on performance recognition, our executive compensation plans are strictly constrained by our compliance2013 with the rules promulgated byaddition of key leaders in Europe and Consolidated International Operations, and results in Europe have continued to improve despite the UST and additional determinationscontinuing regional effects of the Special Master, which dictate the maximum amounts payableEuropean debt crisis.

Our 2013 fiscal year NEOs were:
Daniel F. Akerson - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer
Daniel Ammann - Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer
Stephen J. Girsky - Vice Chairman, Corporate Strategy, Business Development, and the form and timing of grants and payments for all 2012 compensation paid to our 25 most senior executives, including the NEOs. Accordingly, during 2012Global Product Planning
Mary T. Barra - Executive Vice President, Global Product Development, Purchasing & Supply Chain
Karl-Thomas Neumann - Executive Vice President & President, Europe
During 2013, the compensation structure for these executives continued to include onlyincluded the following core elements:

Base salary;

Salary stock units (“SSUs”);

units; and

Long-term restricted stock units (“RSUs”); and

units.

A limited number of perquisites and personal benefits.

Individual Recommendations. The following changes were made to the NEOs’ compensation to recognize their contributions in returning the business to profitability and motivating the leadership team to achieve key business initiatives. Additional information regarding these compensation decisions is provided in “2012 Compensation for Named Executive Officers” on page 38. No adjustments were made to base salaries for NEOs.

NEOs in 2013. Mr. Akerson’s mixSSU awards remained at the 2012 level. The other NEOs, with the exception of pay elements was adjustedDr. Neumann, received increases in SSU awards to allocate a greater portion of hismaintain their total target remuneration to SSUs (while maintaining his total annual compensation at $9 million),competitive levels.

Mr. Akerson did not receive an RSU grant in acknowledgement2013 in acknowledgment of the possibility of his retirement before the completion of the three-year vesting period for RSUs. His realized compensation forThe other NEOs, with the exception of Dr. Neumann, received RSU grants based on achievement of target 2012 (i. e., earned during the fiscal year performance period) is shownAdjusted AFCF performance.
Dr. Neumann was hired in the table belowMarch 2013, and his compensation structure in 2013 will remain the same as in 2012.

Realized Annual Compensation  
Chairman & CEO, Daniel F. Akerson  
  

  

  2010   2011   2012 

Duration

   4 months     12 months     12 months  

Annual Compensation

       

Salary

  $566,667    $1,700,000    $1,700,000  

Stock Awards

       

SSUs

  $1,766,664    $5,284,238    $7,346,373  

RSUs Earned (1)

  $662,991    $1,986,286    $  

Pension & Nonqualified Deferred Compensation

  $    $    $  

All Other Compensation

  $194,088    $55,514    $70,149  

Total

  $3,190,410    $9,026,038    $9,116,522  

Annualized Compensation

  $9,571,230    $9,026,038    $9,116,522  

(1)Granted in year following the annual performance period; Mr. Akerson’s SSUs were increased in 2012 to reflect that he will not be eligible for an RSU award in 2013 for 2012 performance.

As discussed in the following Compensation Discussion and Analysis (the “CD&A”) beginning on page 36, because of UST constraints, our CEO’s 2012 total compensation remained in the lowest quartile of compensation for CEOs of comparable companies for the last two years and below the 10th percentile for 2012.

Mr. Ammann’sbase salary, SSU grantawards, and RSU grant were increasedset pursuant to bring his total compensation closer to the median pay level for our 2012 compensation comparator group.

Mr. Girsky’s SSU grant was increased to bring his total compensation closer to the median pay level for our 2012 compensation comparator group.

Ms. Barra’s SSU grant and RSU grant were increased to bring her total compensation closer to the median pay level for our 2012 compensation comparator group.

Mr. Lee’s SSU grant was increased and the mix of pay elements was adjusted to allocate a greater portion of his total target remuneration to SSUs in acknowledgement of the possibility of his retirement before the completion of the three-year vesting period for RSUs.

Additional Compensation Considerations. In addition to the compensation for our 25 most senior executives, including the NEOs, the Special Master’s directives also determined the compensation structure for our next 75 most highly compensated employees, including the mix of fixed versus variable compensation, limiting the use of performance-based cash incentives, and increasing the proportion of compensation paid in long-term equity.

As a result of the limitations on the Compensation Committee’s flexibility in establishing executive pay levels or the mix of pay for our top 100 employees, our mix of cash and equity compensation and fixed and incentive compensation is out of step with market practices and does not support our desired pay-for-performance philosophy. Because of the rigid approach mandated by the UST for our 25 most senior executives, our ability to implement a robust, performance-driven compensation program remains constrained. Further, we are limited in our ability to grant competitive levels of equity-based compensation to our senior executives and are limited to granting incentive compensation only in the form of RSUs, which the UST requires to be in strict proportion to the permitted amount of total compensation. This structure does not meet normally accepted pay-for-performance criteria, and as a result we are not able to deliver compensation for critical personnel to drive their efforts in alignment with GM’s internal business plan for sustained long-term growth.

Currently, annual and long-term incentives are strictly limited by the rules that the UST has promulgated. During 2012 and through today, we increasingly recognized that our need to offer competitive pay, particularly a more appropriate mix of annual cash and non-cash compensation is a growing concern. Such constraints on our ability to compensate critical personnel in a competitive manner inhibits our ability to align incentives and rewards with our business plan, which is fundamental to any successful commercial enterprise, and creates potential recruitment and retention risks at key management levels within the Company. We continue to rely heavily on the loyalty and dedication of our critical personnel and their commitment to optimal execution of the elements of our business plan, notwithstanding the lack of focused incentives. We are concerned, however, that certain key employees, seeing no prospect of change this year, will lose patience and accept opportunities elsewhere.

Plan Changes and Best Practices. Consistent with our continued efforts to improve operating efficiencies and reduce costs, we made the following modifications to certain personal benefit and insurance plans during 2012:

employment agreement.

The medical evaluation program for executives was eliminated; and


The executive Personal Umbrella Liability Insurance program was expanded to a broad-based plan available to all salaried employees on a self-paid basis.

Return to Competitive Compensation Structure

Our pay-for-performance compensation philosophy would ordinarily compel us to reward our executives based on GM’s business performance on a more strategic basis than what is prescribed by UST regulations,

which strictly limit performance-based compensation for senior management and rely only on stock price performance for the incentives that are permitted. As soon as we move to a compensation structure that is consistent with our performance compensation philosophy, we will adopt a more balanced approach to compensation comprised of both short- and long-term incentives based on financial and operational metrics, including an appropriate mix of cash and equity to maintain focus on business results and alignment with our stockholders.

This structure will include an annual bonus that may be earned upon achievement of our annual financial and operating performance goals and individual contribution, as well as longer term components with performance periods over varying time horizons. We believe that the achievement of both short- and long-term goals is an important cornerstone of employee engagement that maintains a critical line of sight between company performance and individual rewards. We also believe that this balanced approach to total compensation will link individual and business performance to our stockholders’ interests and support good governance objectives and compensation best practices, while mitigating risk to our business and enhancing our ability to attract, retain, and reward talent to support the long-term success of the Company.

**********

Total Compensation DiscussionFramework and AnalysisOverview

The following discussion of our executive compensation programsplans and compensation decisions affecting our NEOs during the year ended December 31, 20122013 is intended to enhance and provide a basis for understanding the information appearing in the tables beginning on page 45.

During 2012, our NEOs were:

Daniel F. Akerson – Chairman & Chief Executive Officer

Daniel Ammann – Senior Vice President & Chief Financial Officer

Stephen J. Girsky – Vice Chairman, Corporate Strategy, Business Development, Global Product

                                   Planning & Global Purchasing and Supply Chain

Mary T. Barra – Senior Vice President, Global Product Development

Timothy E. Lee – Vice President, Global Manufacturing & President, International Operations

41.

In 2012,2013, the compensation provided to our senior executives was designed to adhere to theguided by six general principles mandated by UST regulations:

principles:

Avoidance of incentives to take excessive risk — The compensation structure should avoid incentives to take unnecessary and excessive risk (e.g., should be paid over a period of time horizon that takes into account the appropriatepotential risk horizon)over the same time period);


Taxpayer

33
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT

Table of Contents



Investor return — The compensation paid should recognize the need to remain viable and competitive, and to retain and recruit critical talent;

Appropriate allocation of components of compensation — The structure should appropriately allocate total compensation to fixed and variable pay elements resulting in an appropriate mix of long-short- and short-termlong-term pay elements;

Performance-based compensation — An appropriate portion of total compensation should be performance based over a relevant performance period;

Comparable structures and payments — Structures and amounts should be competitive with those paid to persons in similar positions at similarly situated companies; and

Employee contribution — Compensation should reflect the current and prospective contributions of the individual employee.

TotalElements of 2013 Compensation Framework

With these principles and the other UST regulations in mind, we followed several core requirements established by the Special Master determined that the following standards would be appliedUST in setting compensation for our NEOs:

Base salarySalary — Base salary paid in cash maywas permitted to exceed $500,000 per year only in appropriate cases for good cause shown. Guarantees of “bonus” or “retention” awards are not permitted for NEOs;

shown;

SSUs — The majority of each NEO’s total annual compensation iswas generally comprised of SSUs.SSUs whose value is determined by the price of our Common Stock. The SSUs are not earned based on any performance measure, vest immediately, andquarterly SSU grants are payable in three equal annual installments beginning on the first anniversary of the end of the quarter in which they were deemed to have been granted;

Long-Term Equity (RSUs)RSUsNotWith limited exceptions, not more than one-third of total annual compensation may bewas comprised of RSUs, which arewere granted based on annual business performance.and financial performance and capped at the target level. The RSUs will be settled and two-thirds will be delivered after the second anniversary date of the grant, with one-third delivered after the third anniversary date of the grant, if applicable vesting conditions have been satisfied. TheExcept in the case of disability or death, the executive will forfeit any unsettled RSUs if he or she does not satisfy the requirements of the General Motors Company 2009 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “2009 LTIP”) or remain with the Company for at least three years (two years, if retirement eligible)the required time period following the grant;grant. Dr. Neumann's RSUs were granted pursuant to the terms of his employment agreement; and

Perquisites and “other compensation”Other Compensation — Perquisites and “other compensation” areother compensation were limited to $25,000 or less for each NEO absent independent justification and good cause shown. There arewere no severance payments to the NEOs or accruals of any U.S. non-qualified deferred compensation or supplemental executive retirement plan benefits for the NEOs.

NEOs prior to December 16, 2013.

The only incentives allowable – RSUs – are capped at the target level, and may not be increased based on performance.

Assessing Compensation Competitiveness

Absent

Subject to UST constraints, we generally target our overall compensation levels to be at or near the median of the comparator group, while recognizing that some individual roles may be positioned above or below the market median based on the tenure, experience, and specific responsibilities of the incumbent.individual. We do not limit our comparator group to our industry alone, because compensation information is not available from most of our major competitors. We alsowe believe it is important to understand the compensation practices for NEOs at other U.S.-based multinationals as they affect our ability to attract and retain diverse talent around the globe.

In 2012,addition, compensation information is not available for most of our major competitors.

In 2013, we used a comparator group of 20 companies whose selection was based on the following criteria:

Large Fortune 100 companies (2011(2012 annual revenue from $29.6$29.9 billion to $253.7$241.9 billion, with median revenue of $66.5$63.7 billion, versus GM revenue of $150.3$152.3 billion);

Complex business operations, including significant research and development, design, engineering, and manufacturing functions with large numbers of employees;

Global enterprises; and


34
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT

Table of Contents



Broad representation across several industries of companies that produce products rather than provide services.

This peer


We used the same comparator group of 20 companies is slightly smaller thanin 2012. In reviewing the 2011comparator group of 23 companies, and is more homogeneous with regard to revenues and net income. This is becausein 2013, we replaced companies with very highdid not find that modifications or low relative revenues with appropriate companies whose revenues are closer to the group median, while maintaining the core companies in the prior group. The companies whichadjustments were removed from our peer group were Alcoa Inc., Archer-Daniels-Midland Company, Abbott Laboratories, Dell, Inc., and Exxon-Mobil Corporation. Two new companies in the Industrials sector were added to the group, 3M Company and Deere & Company.

required.

20122013 Comparator Companies

CompanyGICS Category (1)CompanyCompanyGICS Category (1)
Ford Motor Company

Consumer

Discretionary

PepsiCo, Inc.Consumer Staples
Johnson Controls Inc.

Consumer

Discretionary

The Procter & Gamble CompanyConsumer Staples
3M CompanyIndustrialHewlett-Packard CompanyChevron CorporationEnergyInformation Technology
The Boeing CompanyIndustrialHoneywell International Inc.IndustrialConocoPhillipsEnergy
Caterpillar Inc.IndustrialInternational Business Machines CorporationInformation Technology
Chevron CorporationEnergyJohnson Controls Inc.
Consumer
Discretionary
ConocoPhillipsEnergyJohnson & JohnsonHealth Care
Deere & CompanyIndustrialPfizer Inc.Health Care
General Electric CompanyIndustrialHewlett-Packard CompanyIT
Honeywell International Inc.IndustrialInternational Business Machines CorporationIT
Lockheed Martin CorporationIndustrial
The Dow Chemical CompanyIndustrialMaterialsPepsiCo, Inc.Consumer Staples
E.I. du Pont De Nemours & CompanyMaterialsMaterialsPfizer, Inc.Health Care
Ford Motor Company
Consumer
Discretionary
The Procter & Gamble CompanyConsumer Staples
General Electric CompanyIndustrialUnited Technologies CorporationIndustrialThe Dow Chemical CompanyMaterials

(1)Global Industry Classification Standard ("GICS") comprised of ten major business sectors.

How We Use Comparator Data to Plan Compensation.The benchmarking process we used to assist us in planning NEO compensation for 20122013 was derived from the 20112012 fiscal year proxy statement disclosures by our peercomparator companies. Since the 20112012 proxy statement disclosures reflected 20102011 total earned compensation, we adjusted this data appropriately for known compensation growth in 2011. It should be noted that, in using2012. Because of this process, the data thus utilizedwe used to determine compensation structures for 20122013 may not entirely reflect current compensation competitiveness.

Objectives of Our Compensation Program

Historically, our compensation philosophy has been based on the following principles:

Aligning long-term interests of our executives with those of our stockholders;

Recognizing both Company and individual performance;

Aligning long-term interests of our senior executives with those of our stockholders;

Attracting, rewarding, and retaining critical leadership and technical talent; and

Fostering a culture of ownership and accountability.

As noted above, the

The Compensation Committee must attempt to balance, as best it can,balanced the need to provide competitive compensation and benefits with the restrictions of UST regulations and the additional provisions of the Special Master. Working within the confining restrictions established by the UST regulations and Special Master’s determinations,these parameters, the Compensation Committee set individual compensation amounts for our CEO and our other NEOs considering comparator compensation data, UST regulations, and established the corporate performance required for the RSUs granted to the NEOs, which were limited to only one-third of their total compensation.

2012individual performance.

2013 Compensation for Named Executive Officers

Our leadership team was selected for their strategic visionDecisions and ability to ensure that decisions are implemented quickly and effectively. Based on the compensation objectives and elements described above and the constraints imposed by UST rules and the Special Master, 2012 compensation was established for our NEOs as described below and in the tables that follow this section. Although we reviewed competitive data in developing our total annual compensation recommendations for our NEOs, as a result of the constraints imposed by UST rules and the Special Master, the total target compensation for our CEO in 2012 was unchanged from 2011 and his total target compensation was below the 10RSU Performance Metric

th percentile of our comparator group in 2012.

2012 NEO Annual Target Compensation Structure (1)

   Cash
Salary
  SSUs  RSUs  Total  2011 Comparator
Name ($)  ($)  ($)  ($)  Group Percentile

Daniel F. Akerson

  1,700,000    7,300,000        9,000,000   Below 10th

Daniel Ammann

  750,000    2,600,000    1,650,000    5,000,000   At Median

Stephen J. Girsky

  600,000    3,300,000    1,500,000    5,400,000   Below Median

Mary T. Barra

  750,000    2,500,000    1,600,000    4,850,000   Below Median

Timothy E. Lee

  750,000    3,500,000        4,250,000   At Median

(1)Actual compensation amounts paid or earned by the NEOs during fiscal year 2012 are reflected in the totals that are included in the “2013 Summary Compensation Table” on page 45. The RSUs that were granted on March 15, 2012 and appear in the “2012 Summary Compensation Table” and the “2012 Grants of Plan Based Awards” table on page 47 are based on the approved 2011 NEO target compensation structure.

Base Salaries Salary Stock Units, Restricted Stock Units, and Performance Metric

Base Salaries. We attempt to rely onreview our comparator company information for similar positions as well as a review ofand consider the relative internal pay equity among our NEOs to guide the base salary determination for each NEO. However, base salaries exceeding $500,000 for our NEOs had to be approved by the Special Master based on independent justification and good cause shown (e.g., the retention of critical talent and the Special Master’s assessment of


35
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT

Table of Contents



competitive compensation data for individuals in comparable positions at similarly situated companies). Since base salary is an important element in providing total compensation that is competitive with the pay offered for positions of comparable scope and responsibility at comparator companies, base salaries for NEOs exceed the $500,000 amount, based on competitive data.

Salary Stock Units. In addition to base salary, the Special Master prescribed the amount of SSUs. Pursuant to the Special Master’s directives, during 2012During 2013, SSUs were granted to NEOs as part of their total annual compensation under the provisions of the General Motors Company Salary Stock Plan (the “SSP”). SSUs were an element of the compensation structure fostered by the UST and Special Master rules. SSUs are determined as a dollar amount through the date they are earned, accrued at the same time as salary would otherwise be paid, and vested immediately upon accrual, with the number of SSUs granted based on the average of the high and low trading prices of our Common Stock on the date of each quarterly grant. Each grant is delivered over three years in three annualquarterly installments, and the value of each installment depends upon the price of our Common Stock at the time of delivery. Compensation structures utilized by our comparator companies consist of both annual and long-term incentives based on achievement of significant business measures over varying time horizons. Annual and long-term performance-based awards with specific performance targets are key components in competitive pay structures at comparator companies. However, these types of awards are not permitted for our NEOs under the UST regulations. Our determination of the amount of SSUs which are a part of each NEO’s structure were based on a combination of UST regulations and individual circumstances rather than competitive benchmarking, as there is no competitive benchmarking for salary stock. SSUs are not an effective form of compensation from a pay-for-performance perspective as the size of the award cannot vary with the performance of the company or the NEO. SSUs are also of limited value as a retention vehicle, since they are immediately vested upon accrual and paid in cash over a three year period.

Restricted Stock Units and Performance Metric. As described above, compliance with UST regulations means that our NEOs are not allowed to participate in typical types of incentive plans, and we may grant only a limited number of RSUs. Under such limitations, while consistent with rules and determinations promulgated by the UST, the RSU awards are not supportive of our pay-for-performance philosophy. RSUs were awarded to NEOsMr. Ammann, Mr. Girsky, and Ms. Barra on March 15, 20121, 2013 under the General Motors Company 2009 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “LTIP”).LTIP. The awards were granted in recognition of the achievement of 2011positive 2012 Adjusted FCFAFCF performance and individual performance metrics.(which was $4.3 billion for 2012). Dr. Neumann received an RSU grant on April 1, 2013, pursuant to the provisions of his employment agreement.

An

Adjusted FCF target of $1.5AFCF is based on automotive operating cash flow which was $9.6 billion was set for these purposes in early 2011. Actual Adjusted FCF for 2011 was $3.0 billion, computed by cash flows generated from operating activities2012, less capital expenditures and adjusted for the termination of an in-transit wholesale advance agreement in GMNA resulting in an increase to accounts receivable of $1.1 billion and OPEB payments of $0.8 billion relating to the health care trust settlement (asmanagement actions as described in our discussion titled“Free “Free Cash Flow and Adjusted Free Cash Flow” on page 57 in our 2012 Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on February 15, 2013).2013. Consistent with the UST regulations and award maximums, the RSU grants were made at the target level to the NEOsMr. Ammann, Mr. Girsky, and Ms. Barra on March 15, 2012.

1, 2013.

As discussed in the “2012“2013 Grants of Plan Based Awards” table on page 47,44, two-thirds of the RSUs granted in 20122013 to the NEOsMr. Ammann, Mr. Girsky, and Ms. Barra will become non-forfeitable on the second anniversary date of the grant and one-third will become non-forfeitable on the third anniversary of the grant date provided that the executive remains continuously employed with GM through that date and the other requirements of the 2009 LTIP plan are satisfied. In case of death, the executive or the executive’s estate will receive a prorated portion of the award. Retiring executives are eligible to receive a prorated portion of their RSU grants after two years of active service. RSUs will be settled when they become non-forfeitable, subject to applicable UST rules. Each RSU represents one share of Common Stock upon settlement. RSUs granted under the plan are subject to recoveryrecoupment or clawback if payments are later found to be based on materially inaccurate financial statements or other materially inaccurate performance metrics, or if the executive is terminated due to any misconduct that occurred during the period in which the incentive was earned.

Dr. Neumann's RSUs were awarded pursuant to his employment agreement and are not conditioned upon repayment of GM's TARP obligations.

Perquisites, Benefits, and Other Compensation. During 2013, no more than $25,000 in perquisites and other compensation could be provided to any NEO, absent independent justification and good cause shown. Payments related to expatriate assignments were not subject to this limitation. Detailed disclosure of these items for the NEOs appears in footnote 4 of the “2013 Summary Compensation Table” on page 41.
UST regulations imposed additional limitations that prohibited certain benefit practices that market-based surveys indicate are competitive. Accordingly, accruals were not permitted during 2013 prior to the UST’s sale of its remaining GM equity for non-qualified executive retirement restoration or deferred compensation plans for our NEOs as described in footnote 4 of the “2013 Summary Compensation Table” on page 41.
Individual Compensation Recommendations for Named Executive OfficerOfficers
Applying these elements and constraints, we established 2013 compensation for our NEOs as described below and in the tables that follow this section. Although we reviewed competitive data in developing our total annual compensation recommendations for our NEOs, limitations imposed by UST rules and the Special Master directives resulted in the total target compensation for our CEO being below the median of our comparator group.


36
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




2013 NEO Annual Target Compensation Recommendations

Structure (1)

 
Cash
Salary
SSUsRSUsOtherTotal2012 Comparator
Name($)($)($)($)($)Group Percentile
Daniel F. Akerson1,700,000
7,300,000


9,000,000
Below 10th
Daniel Ammann750,000
2,825,000
1,750,000

5,325,000
Below Median
Stephen J. Girsky600,000
4,250,000
1,000,000

5,850,000
Below Median
Mary T. Barra750,000
2,840,000
1,750,000

5,340,000
Below Median
Karl-Thomas Neumann (2)800,000
2,200,000
1,500,000
1,343,549
5,843,549
Above Median
(1)Actual compensation amounts paid or earned by the NEOs during fiscal year 2013 are reflected in the totals that are included in the “2013 Summary Compensation Table” on page 41. The RSUs that were granted on March 1, 2013 and appear in the “2013 Summary Compensation Table” and the “2013 Grants of Plan Based Awards” table on page 44 are based on the approved 2012 NEO target compensation structure. Dr. Neumann's RSUs were granted on April 1, 2013 pursuant to his employment agreement.
(2)"Other" includes amounts paid to Dr. Neumann to provide for a buyout of restrictions from his former employer.
The following summary of compensation for our NEOs reflects their roles and responsibilities during the 2013 fiscal year and before the succession changes in January 2014.
Mr. Akerson has beenwas our CEO since September 2010 and Chairman of our Board since January 2011. His total compensation hashad not increased since joining the Company in September 2010 and remainsremained below the 10th percentilemedian for executives in comparable positions due to the restrictions imposed by the Special Master,in 2013, despite his significant contributions to operating performance and outstanding leadership. However, recognizing the long-term vesting scheduleHe did not receive an RSU award for the RSU portion of compensation, the mix of pay elements was adjusted (while maintaining his total annual compensation at $9 million) to allocate a greater portion of his annual remuneration to SSUs,2012 Adjusted AFCF performance in acknowledgementMarch 2013 in acknowledgment of the possibility of his retirement duringbefore the completion of the three-year vesting period for RSUs. As shown below,Mr. Akerson stepped down from his payposition effective January 2014 and is serving as disclosedSenior Advisor until he leaves the Company in the 2012 Summary Compensation Table on page 45 appears to have “increased” during 2012. Because he will receive no RSU grant for achievement of the 2012 Adjusted FCF performance objective, however, his total compensation for 2012 has not changed from 2011. Additional information regarding Mr. Akerson’s realized pay is included on page 34.July 2014.

Daniel F. Akerson 2012 Compensation

   

2012 Target
Compensation

($)

  

2012 Realized
Compensation

($)

  

2012
Summary
Compensation
Table

($)

 

Salary

  1,700,000    1,700,000    1,700,000  

Stock Awards

            

SSUs

  7,300,000    7,346,373    7,346,373  

RSUs

          1,986,286(1) 

Pension & Nonqualified Deferred Compensation

            

All Other Compensation (2)

      70,149    70,149  

Total

  9,000,000    9,116,522    11,102,808  

(1)Granted in 2012 for 2011 performance; SSUs were increased in 2012 to recognize that Mr. Akerson will not be granted an RSU award in 2013 for 2012 performance.
(2)“All Other Compensation” is not a part of the annual compensation target structure.

Mr. Ammann was elected Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer in April 2011.2011 and named Executive Vice President in July 2013. Although his annualized base salary remained unchanged from 20112012 to 2012,2013, his RSU grant and his SSU grant were increased in 20122013 to bring his total compensation closer to the median level.

Mr. Girskywas elected Vice Chairman in March 2010 and has been a member of our Board of Directors since July 2009. From July 2012 to February 2013, he also assumed additional responsibilities as Interim President, Europe. HisHe did not receive a base salary increase in 2013, but his SSU grant wasand RSU grant were increased in 20122013 to bring his total compensation closer to the median level. Mr. Girsky stepped down from his position effective January 2014 and is serving as Senior Advisor until he leaves the Company in July 2014.

Ms. Barrawas named Senior Vice President, Global Product Development in February 2011.2012, and Executive Vice President, Global Product Development, Purchasing & Supply Chain in August 2013. Although her annualized base salary remained unchanged from 20112012 to 2012,2013, her RSU grant and her SSU grant were increased in 20122013 to bring her total compensation closer to the median level.

Mr. LeeDr. Neumann joined GM in March 2013 as CEO, Adam Opel AG and President, Europe, and his compensation was established in accordance with the provisions of his employment agreement. He was named Executive Vice President Global Manufacturing & President, International OperationsEurope in September 2012. He had been President, International Operations since December 2009. HisJuly 2013. At that time, he was also named Chairman of the Management Board of Adam Opel AG.
Employment Agreements - We have no employment agreements with our U.S. NEOs that provide them with special compensation was increased in 2012arrangements. Pursuant to bring his total compensation closer to median level and, recognizingEuropean market practice, we entered into an employment agreement with Dr. Neumann at the long-term vesting schedule for the RSU compensation, the mix of pay elements was adjusted to allocate a greater portiontime of his annual remuneration to SSUs in acknowledgementhire. A discussion of the possibilitymaterial provisions of his retirement before the completion of the three-year vesting period for RSUs.

Perquisites, Benefits, and “Other Compensation”

The Special Master determined that no more than $25,000 in perquisites and “Other Compensation” may be provided to any NEO, absent independent justification and good cause shown. Payments related to expatriate assignments are notDr. Neumann’s employment agreement is included in this total. Detailed disclosure of these items for the NEOs appears in footnote 6 of the “2012 Summary Compensation Table” on page 45.

UST regulations impose additional limitations that exclude certain benefit practices that market-based surveys indicate are competitive. We did not make accruals in 2012 for non-qualified executive retirement restoration51.


37
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT

Table of Contents



Compensation Policies and deferred compensation plans for our NEOs as described in footnote 6(ii) of the “2012 Summary Compensation Table” on page 45. In addition, severance payments to which a NEO becomes entitled in the future may not take into account any salary increase or grant of SSUs during 2012; and no NEO may receive a severance payment of any kind for termination of employment under the UST rules. These benefit plan restrictions, taken together with the restrictions on payment of cash compensation and appropriate incentives, have created an increasingly non-competitive structure.

Governance Practices

Stock Ownership Requirements

Under the direction of the Special Master, the annual compensation planned and delivered to our NEOs includes a substantial portion in share units (i. e., SSU and RSU grants). These share units derive their value directly from the performance of our Common Stock. In addition, several NEOs also purchased shares of Common Stock during and after the Company’s initial public offering. The Compensation Committee periodically reviews the NEO’s stock holdings, and we do not believe that additional ownership requirements are appropriate at this time. However, we - We believe it is important to align the interests of senior executives with those of our stockholders and will continue to review the levels ofCompensation Committee has adopted stock ownership requirements to be implemented with the approval of our proposed incentive plans in 2014. The requirements provide for a viewperiod of five years for executives to adopting appropriate ownership guidelines whenacquire and hold GM securities in the Company is no longer restricted in incentive plan design.

following amounts:

PositionOwnership Requirement as a Multiple of Salary
 CEOSix
 President & Executive Vice PresidentFour
 Senior Vice PresidentThree
 Senior ExecutiveOne

Employment AgreementsPolicy on Recoupment of Incentive Compensation

- We have no employment agreements with our NEOs that provide them with special compensation arrangements. In addition, we do not maintain any plans providing benefits related to a change in control of the Company and none of our current incentive plans contain such provisions.

Clawback and Recoupment Policy on Incentive Compensation

Pursuant to UST regulations, we are subject to strict clawback provisions for any bonus or incentive plan payments made to our NEOs and other senior executives if the payments were made based on materially inaccurate financial statements or performance metrics. In addition, we haveadopted a corporate policy regarding the recoupment of incentive compensation paid to executive officers in situations involving financial restatement due

to employee fraud, negligence, or intentional misconduct. The policy, which is posted on our website,www.gm.com/investor, under “Corporate Governance,” provides that if our Board or an appropriate Board committee determines that any bonus, retention award, or incentive compensation has been paid to any NEO or any of the next 20 most highly compensated employees of the Companyexecutive officer based on materially inaccurate misstatement of earnings, revenues, gains, or other criteria, the Board or Compensation Committee, in its discretion, will take such action as it deems necessary to recover the compensation paid, remedy the misconduct, and prevent its recurrence. For this purpose, a financial statement or performance metric shallwill be treated as materially inaccurate with respect to any employee who knowingly engaged in providing inaccurate information or knowingly failed to timely correct information relating to those financial statements or performance metrics. We will continue to review our policy to assure that it is consistent with all legal requirements and in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders.

Securities Trading Policy

- We also maintain a securities trading policy that prohibits our NEOs from buying or selling GM securities when in possession of material non-public information, and any sales or purchases of GM stockCommon Stock by directors and executive officers require the specific prior approval of ournotice to the GM Legal Staff.

Trading in GM derivatives (i.e., puts or calls) and engaging in short sales of GM securities are also prohibited, and no GM executive officer has pledged any shares of GM stock.Common Stock. This policy is posted on our website,www.gm.com/investorsinvestor, under “Corporate Governance.”

General Motors Expense Policy

- We have adopted an expense policy and posted it on our website, atwww.gm.com/investorsinvestor, under “Corporate Governance.” The policy’s governing principles establish expectations for every business expense, reflecting the integrity and values that promote the best interests of the enterprise.

Luxury or excessive expenditures are not reimbursable by GM under the policy. Such expenditures may include, but are not limited to, expenditures on entertainment or events, office and facility renovations, aviation, transportation services, or other activities or events that are not reasonable expenditures for staff development, performance incentives, or other similar measures conducted in the ordinary course of business operations. Guidelines relating to transportation expenses are discussed in the section entitled “Personal Benefits” on page 46.

42

Tax Considerations

- Pursuant to UST regulations, we may deduct 20122013 base salaries for NEOs up to an individual maximum of $500,000. We may not take a tax deduction for any other form of 2013 compensation for NEOs.

Corporate Governance, Risk Assessment,

Compensation Committee and Say-On-Pay

Consultant Independence

Our Compensation Committee is composed entirely of independent directors as determined by the Board under NYSE guidelines, and as defined for various regulatory purposes. The Compensation Committee is assisted in its work by Compensation Advisory Partners (“CAP”),CAP, an independent compensation consulting firm whichthat takes direction from and is

38
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




solely responsible to the Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee is also aided in its deliberations by outside legal counsel.

Compensation Committee Consultant Independence

Under its charter, the Compensation Committee has the authority to engage outside consultants and advisors at the Company’s expense. During 2012,2013, the Compensation Committee continued to retain the services of CAP to advise the Compensation Committee regarding compensation for the NEOs and certain other compensation related matters. A representative of CAP attends all Compensation Committee meetings, either in person or via telephone conference, consults with and advises Compensation Committee members on executive compensation matters—including the form and amount of various pay elements—as needed, and develops and

interprets executive benchmarking data for the Compensation Committee’s use in its deliberations. CAP provides no services to the Company’s management.

The Compensation Committee annually reviews the performance and independence of CAP and the consultant and CAP’s policy on consultant independence. During thein accordance with applicable standards. The most recent review which occurred in October 2012, the Compensation Committee found that the work of the consultant posedNovember 2013 and no areas of concern or any conflict of interest. In reaching such determination, the Company considered the following factors, all of whichindependence issues were attested to or affirmed by CAP:

identified.

During 2012, CAP provided no services to and received no fees from the Company other than in connection with the services performed for the Compensation Committee;

The amount of fees paid by the Company to CAP in respect of these services is less than three percent of CAP’s total revenue for the 12-month period ended December 31, 2012;

CAP has adopted adequate policies and procedures that are designed to prevent conflicts of interest and has provided a copy of its Conflict of Interest Policy to the Compensation Committee;

There are no business or personal relationships between CAP and any member of the Compensation Committee other than in respect of (i) the services performed for the Compensation Committee, or (ii) work performed by CAP for any other company, board of directors, or compensation committee for whom such Compensation Committee member also serves as an independent director;

CAP and its consultant to GM own no stock of the Company; and

There is no business or personal relationship between CAP and any executive officer of the Company other than in respect of the services described above.

Compensation Risk Assessment and Management Process

During 2012,2013, the Compensation Committee met with our General Auditor and Chief Risk Officer to review and discuss the short-termshort- and long-term risks that could threaten the value of the Company and GM’s compensation and benefit arrangements for NEOs and other employees of the Company and its subsidiaries in light of those risks. The assessments are intended to assure that within the limits imposed by the UST rules and the Special Master’s determinations, an appropriate balance has been established between focus on short-termshort- and long-term business performance and between cash and non-cash incentives, to provide adequate current compensation for personal financial security, and to provide incentives to strive for greater team and individual contributions to the continued overall growthsuccess of the enterprise.

The 2012 plan

Compensation risk reviews were conducted on October 10, 2012March 18, 2013 and MarchNovember 18, 2013. Based on the reviews, the Compensation Committee determined that the 20122013 compensation structure appropriately mitigates risk and we certified to the U.S. Treasury that the design of the compensation structure for our NEOs does not encourage these individualsour NEOs to take unnecessary or excessive risks that threaten the value of the Company.

Although not a formal part of the semi-annual review process, the Compensation Committee also considers, on a regular basis, the impact of these compensation constraints and highly restricted compensation structures on our ability to appropriately reward the performance of our senior executives and to attract and retain leadership and technical talent critical to our operational competitiveness. This inability to provide incentives and rewards aligned with the business plan and performance has created growing retention concerns, particularly for our highest performing employees.

Working within the parameters of the UST regulations and the constraints imposed by the Special Master, we

We took the following risk considerations into account in developing our incentive plans:

Focus on long-term performance aligned with stockholder interests and incentives that are paid over a period of time that takes into account the potential risk over the same time period;

Incentive plan metrics must be aligned with our business strategy;

Performance objectives are balanced with the quality and sustainability of business results;

The full range of potential payouts under each plan is understood;

Payouts are capped;

Leverage and ratio of incentive compensation to salary and total compensation are understood;

Performance, structure, and target incentive plan opportunities are comparable to those of industry or peerscomparator companies for employees not subject to UST limitations on compensation;

The Compensation Committee may exercise discretion where appropriate, with the concurrence of the Special Master;

Focus on long-term performance aligns with stockholder interests and incentives are paid over a time horizon that takes into account the risk horizon;

The recoupment policy provides for clawback of incentive payouts based onif financials were revised financialsdue to a material misstatement that would result in lower incentive payouts;

Our securities trading policySecurities Trading Policy prohibits NEOsemployees from buying or selling GM securities when in possession of material non-public information; and

The Compensation Committee reviews and discusses material risks when considering incentive programs.

Based on its reviews of the proposed compensation structure, including base salary, the incentive compensation recoupment provision, and the limit on severance pay, the Compensation Committee found that the constraints imposed by the UST regulations and the Special Master impair our ability to offer optimal compensation structures but also that:

The elements of our compensation programs do not create negative incentives for the executives that are hazardous to the long-term health of the Company, the quality of earnings, or the interests of stockholders, and the interestsstockholders;


39
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




The mix of cash and equity awards does not create a hazardous imbalance between short-termshort- and long-term risk and reward decisions; and

The incentive compensation recoupment feature appropriately supports the accuracy of our financial statements and encourages the executives to focus on maintaining accurate financial records and on complying with relevant accounting policies.

2012 Advisory Vote to Approve Executive Compensation (Say-On-Pay)(Say-on-Pay) and Advisory Vote to Approve the Frequency of a Stockholder Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation (Say-on-Frequency)

At the 20122013 annual meeting, GM stockholders approved the 20112012 compensation for our NEOs on an advisory basis by a 97.498.2 percent favorable vote. Noting this level of support and remaining consistent with the UST rules, the Compensation Committee made no material changes to the compensation structures for NEOs for 2012. 2013.
At the 20132014 annual meeting, the Board will again submit a proposal(Item No. 3 Advisory Vote to Approve Executive Compensation) enabling stockholders to provide feedback on our compensation policies and practices for our NEOs. In addition, the Board will submit a proposal (Item No. 4 — Advisory Vote to Approve the Frequency of a Stockholder Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation) allowing stockholders to vote on the frequency with which we should conduct our advisory vote to approve executive compensation in the future. The non-binding Say-on-Pay proposal may be foundand Say-on-Frequency proposals are on page 6054 and 55 of this proxy statement. Our Board and the Compensation Committee intendsintend to review the feedback provided by thisthese stockholder votevotes and evaluate any significant stockholder concerns as it considersthey consider future compensation planning proposals.planning.

2013

2014 Compensation for Named Executive Officers

In setting 2013

With the changes in leadership described on page 31 and the implementation of an appropriate performance-based compensation structure in 2014, each of the NEOs will receive short- and long-term incentive awards as part of a new core compensation structure, and Dr. Neumann will receive a special one-time RSU award vesting after three years. The new annual incentive awards are subject to achievement of equally weighted EBIT - Adjusted, Adjusted AFCF, global market share, and quality metrics, and final assessment of individual performance, with potential payouts ranging from 0 to 200 percent of target based on actual performance. The 2014 LTIP structure for NEOs will include 75 percent PSUs that will be earned at a level between 0 to 200 percent of target, based on the achievement of performance conditions relating to ROIC and global market share over a three-year performance period from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2016, with the maximum payout being 200 percent of target; and 25 percent RSUs vesting over a three-year period. These PSU performance measures were chosen to foster both long-term growth and prudent use of capital. The proposed PSU and RSU grants will be made upon the stockholders’ approval of the 2014 LTIP presented in Item No. 6 on page 58 of this proxy statement. These awards will be reported in the Company’s 2015 proxy statement.
 As previously disclosed in a Form 8-K/A filed on January 17, 2014, Ms. Barra’s salary for 2014 is $1,600,000, and her short-term incentive target is $2,800,000.  When combined with the long-term incentive target of $10,000,000, for which stockholder approval is being sought, her total target compensation for 2014 is $14,400,000.  Mr. Ammann’s salary for 2014 is $1,000,000, and his short-term incentive target is $1,250,000.  (This includes an adjustment made by the Compensation Committee chosein March 2014 to developreflect more precise comparator compensation structuresdata for our NEOs consistenthis position.) When combined with the provisionslong-term incentive target of UST rules$4,550,000, for which stockholder approval is being sought, his total target compensation for 2014 is $6,800,000. Mr. Stevens’ salary for 2014 is $700,000, and Special Master’s determinations. The elementshis short-term incentive target is $875,000.  When combined with the long-term incentive target of these plans are$2,425,000, for which stockholder approval is being sought, his total target compensation for 2014 is $4,000,000.
2014 Tax Considerations - Internal Revenue Code 162(m)
Internal Revenue Code Section 162(m) generally based ondisallows Federal tax deductions for compensation in excess of $1 million paid to the same principles asChief Executive Officer and the next three of our 2012 plans. Any RSUs that are earned based on achievement of 2013 Adjusted FCF objectives willhighest paid officers (other than the Chief Financial Officer) whose compensation is required to be granted atreported in the conclusionSummary Compensation Table of the proxy statement (‘‘Covered Executives’’). Certain performance-based compensation is not subject to this deduction limitation. As noted in Item No. 5, "Approval of the 2014 Short-Term Incentive Plan", on

40
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




page 55 and Item No. 6, "Approval of the 2014 Long-Term Incentive Plan", on page 58, we are seeking your approval of the performance criteria used in the 2014 Short-Term Incentive Plan and the 2014 Long-Term Incentive Plan in order to be able to make performance-based awards to Covered Executives pursuant to those plans. Generally, we strive to maximize the tax deductibility of compensation arrangements. The Committee, however, retains discretion to award compensation that is not fully tax deductible if it deems this to be appropriate in designing compensation that will attract and retain talented executives in the highly competitive market for talent.
For 2013 and prior years when the Company was subject to TARP rules, special provisions under these rules restricted the compensation we were able to provide for Covered Executives and limited our deduction of this compensation as described on page 40. Our 2014 short-term incentive awards were granted under our plans adopted when we were subject to TARP and accordingly, these 2014 awards will not be tax-deductible. Going forward, however, we intend to use our new plans assuming they are approved by stockholders, which provide the utility to again grant deductible performance-based awards.
Investor Outreach Initiatives
Ongoing discussions with investors continue to provide positive feedback regarding our company performance period. RSU grants madeand planned compensation programs.  The senior leadership changes announced in MarchDecember 2013 were based on results of 2012 Adjusted FCF performance.

and January 2014 have been positively received.

2012
2013 SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE

      Salary Bonus 

Stock

Awards (4)

 Option
Awards
 Non-Equity
Incentive Plan
Compensation
 

Change in
Pension Value
and NQ
Deferred
Compensation

(5)

 

All Other
Compensation

(6)

 TOTAL
Name and Principal Position Year $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
Daniel F. Akerson (1) 2012 1,700,000  9,332,659            —   70,149 11,102,808
Chairman & Chief Executive Officer 2011 1,700,000  5,947,229            —   55,514   7,702,743
  2010 566,667  1,766,664            — 194,088   2,527,419
Daniel Ammann (2) 2012 750,000  4,007,056          799   31,810   4,789,665
Senior Vice President & Chief 2011 687,500  2,789,832          354   30,507   3,508,193
Financial Officer                  
Stephen J. Girsky (3) 2012 600,000  4,811,291       1,052   34,578   5,446,921
Vice Chairman, Corporate Strategy, 2011 600,000  4,682,223          408   24,583   5,307,214
Business Development, Global Product 2010 416,667  3,225,000       6,782   63,609   3,712,058
Planning & Global Purchasing and Supply Chain                  
Mary T. Barra 2012 750,000  3,906,484   250,771   28,445   4,935,700
Senior Vice President, Global Product Development                  
Timothy E. Lee 2012 750,000  4,678,616   530,220 619,851   6,578,687
Vice President, Global Manufacturing                  
& President, International Operations                  

  SalaryBonus
Stock
Awards
 (2)
Option
Awards
Non-Equity
Incentive 
Plan
Compensation
Change in
Pension Value
and NQ
Deferred
Compensation
(3)
All Other
Compensation
(4)
TOTAL
Name and Principal PositionYear$$$$$$$$
Daniel F. Akerson (1)
Chairman & Chief Executive Officer
20131,700,000

7,302,206


2,833
66,270
9,071,309
20121,700,000

9,332,659



70,149
11,102,808
20111,700,000

5,947,229



55,514
7,702,743
Daniel Ammann (1)
Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer
2013750,000

4,481,562


1,844
28,475
5,261,881
2012750,000

4,007,056


799
31,810
4,789,665
2011687,500

2,789,832


354
30,507
3,508,193
Stephen J. Girsky (1)
Vice Chairman, Corporate Strategy, Business Development, and Global Product Planning
2013600,000

5,757,077


1,542
30,965
6,389,584
2012600,000

4,811,291


435
34,578
5,446,304
2011600,000

4,682,223


2,987
24,583
5,309,793
Mary T. Barra (1)
Executive Vice President, Global Product Development, Purchasing & Supply Chain
2013750,000

4,446,504



36,636
5,233,140
2012750,000

3,906,484


258,558
28,445
4,943,487
Karl-Thomas Neumann (5) Executive Vice President & President, Europe2013684,029

3,698,075


75,754
1,350,472
5,808,330
        

(1)Titles in the table reflect the NEOs' positions as of December 31, 2013. On January 15, 2014, Mr. Akerson has been a member ofstepped down from his position as Chairman & CEO and is serving as Senior Advisor until he leaves the Board sinceCompany in July 2009. He2014. Ms. Barra was named CEO, replacing Mr. Akerson. At the same time, Mr. Ammann was appointed President. In addition, Mr. Girsky stepped down from his position as Vice Chairman on the same date and is serving as Senior Advisor until he leaves the Company in September 2010 and Chairman in January 2011. Information regarding his realized pay is included on page 34, and a discussion of the mix of pay elements in his 2012 compensation is included on page 40 of the CD&A.July 2014.
(2)Mr. Ammann was elected Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer in April 2011.
(3)Mr. Girsky was named Vice Chairman in March 2010. He has been a member of the Board since July 2009.
(4)For 2012, theThe amounts shown in this column reflect the value of SSUs and RSUs at the time they were grantedtheir grant dates to each of the NEOs. Individual grants for 2013 are discussed in the “2012"2013 Grants of Plan Based Awards”Awards" table on page 47.the following pages. We describe the valuation assumptions used in measuring the 2013 expense in Note 2623 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, “Stock"Stock Incentive Plans”Plans" in our 20122013 Annual Report on Form 10-K (“Consolidated Financial Statements”). SSUs10-K. Quarterly SSU grants are non-forfeitable and are deliveredbecome transferable in three equal installments at each of the first, second, and third anniversary of the grant date.

For 2011, the amounts shown in this column reflect the value

41
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




(5)
(3)These amounts represent the actuarial increasechange in the present value of the executive’sexecutive's accrued benefit for 20122013 attributed to year-over-year variances in applicable discount rates, lump sum interest rate, mortality rates, and employer contributions to tax-qualified and non-qualified plans as described in the section entitled “Pension"Pension Benefits and Retirement Programs Applicable to Executive Officers”Officers" on page 49.45. In 2013 the actuarial values decreased in the amount of $205,624 for Ms. Barra’s pension, but the negative amounts are not reflected in the table pursuant to proxy reporting regulations. The Company does not credit interest at above-market rates to any deferred accounts and no interest amounts are included in these totals.
(6)
(4)Totals for amounts included as “All"All Other Compensation”Compensation" are disclosed below.described on page 42.

2012
(5)Dr. Neumann’s salary, which is paid in Euros, has been converted to U.S. dollars, applying an average foreign exchange rate for the period from March 1, 2013 to December 31, 2013.

2013 All Other Compensation

   

D. F. Akerson

$

  

D. Ammann

$

  

S. J. Girsky

$

  

M. T. Barra

$

  

T. E. Lee

$

 

Perquisites & Other Personal Benefits (i)

  39,796    13,716    13,603    18,312    9,108  

Employer Contributions to Savings Plans (ii)

  19,998    17,500    20,000    8,750    10,000  

Life and Other Insurance Benefits (iii)

  6,332    594    975    1,283    4,111  

Foreign Service Related Allowances and Cost Reimbursements (iv)

                  596,632  

Other (v)

  4,023            100      

Total All Other Compensation

  70,149    31,810    34,578    28,445    619,851  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
 
D. F. Akerson
$
D. Ammann
$
S. J. Girsky
$
M.T. Barra $
K.T. Neumann
$
Perquisites & Other Personal Benefits (1)27,254
9,093
8,581
15,203
12,535
Employer Contributions to Savings Plans (2)23,233
18,788
21,400
19,875

Life and Other Insurance Benefits (3)15,083
594
984
1,296
232
Other (4)700


262
1,337,705
Total All Other Compensation66,270
28,475
30,965
36,636
1,350,472
(i)
(1)See “Personal Benefits”Personal Benefits table below for additional information.
(ii)
(2)Includes employer contributions to tax-qualified savings and retirement benefit plans. For Mr. Akerson, Mr. Ammann, and Mr. Girsky amounts also include tax-qualified retirement plan contributions made by GM prior to October 1, 2012.plans during 2013. No employer contributions have beenwere made to non-qualified savings or retirement plans for NEOs during 2012.2013 prior to December 16, 2013.
(iii)
(3)Includes premiums paid by the Company for Group Variable Universal Life (GVUL)("GVUL") insurance for executives. Employees are responsible for any ordinary income taxes resulting from the cost of the GM-paid premium.premiums. Amounts also include the Company’sCompany's cost of premiums for providing personal accident insurance for members of the Board for Mr. Akerson and Mr. Girsky.Girsky, and group accident insurance for Dr. Neumann under the plan for Opel Management Board members.
(iv)Includes foreign service related living allowances and cost reimbursements for Mr. Lee related to his assignment in Shanghai.
(v)(4)Totals for Mr. Akerson and Ms. Barra include incremental costs for entertainment expenses and event tickets. Under the General Motors Expense Policy, NEOs may use charter aircraft for travel with the prior approval of the CEO or General Counsel when a clear business rationale is stated. A spouse may accompany the executive on the aircraft when the executive is traveling for business purposes if the spouse’s participation is required and imputed income is assessed to the executive. No personal use of the aircraft is permitted. Dr. Neumann joined the Company on March 1, 2013, and amounts for him include payments made to provide for a buyout of restrictions from his former employer. The payments were made in Euros and have been converted to U.S. dollars using the foreign exchange spot rate on each payment date as provided by Reuters.

Personal Benefits

Amounts shown below for personal benefits include the incremental costs for executive security services and systems, the executive company vehicle program, and financial counseling.

   D. F. Akerson
$
  

D. Ammann

$

  

S. J. Girsky

$

  

M. T. Barra

$

  

T. E. Lee

$

 

Security (vi)

  5,601                  

Company Vehicle Program (vii)

  34,195    13,716    13,603    9,312    108  

Financial Counseling (viii)

              9,000    9,000  
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total

  39,796    13,716    13,603    18,312    9,108  

 
D. F. Akerson
$
D. Ammann
$
S. J. Girsky
$
M.T. Barra
$
K.T. Neumann
$
Security (1)1,756




Company Vehicle Program (2)25,498
9,093
8,581
5,843
12,535
Financial Counseling (3)


9,360

Total27,254
9,093
8,581
15,203
12,535

(vi)
Actual
42
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




(1)Amounts include the actual costs of residential security systems maintenance and monitoring for Mr. Akerson.
(vii)
(2)Includes the incremental cost of cars and drivers provided by the Company for various events and incremental cost to maintain the executive company vehicle program fleet that is allocated to each executive (including lost sales opportunity and incentive costs, if any; fuel, maintenance, and repair costs; insurance claims, if any; licensing and registration fees; and use taxes). Participants in the program are required to purchase or lease at least one GM vehicle every four years and asked to evaluate the vehicles they drive, thus providing feedback about our products. Participants are also required to pay a monthly administration fee of $300 and are charged with imputed income based on the value of the vehicle they choose to drive. Taxes assessed on imputed income are the responsibility of the participant. Mr. Akerson’sAkerson's and Mr. Girsky’sGirsky's vehicles were provided under the provisions of the vehicle program for the Board which does not require payment of an administration fee and is described on pages 24-26.
(viii)Cost of
(3)Costs associated with financial counseling and estate planning services with one of several approved providers.

2012

2013 Grants of Plan Based Awards

Under

    In order to provide for grants of SSUs within the guidelines of the Special Master, GM adopted the SSP. Pursuant to the SSP terms and upon approval of the Special Master, NEOs receivedreceive a portion of their total annual compensation in the form of SSUs based on the average of the high and low trading price of our Common Stock on the NYSE on each grant date. SSUsQuarterly SSU grants are non-forfeitable and will be transferrabletransferable in three equal installments at each of the first, second, and third anniversary of the grant date. Additional information regarding SSUs may be found beginning on page 39.

RSUs were awarded to NEOsMr. Ammann, Mr. Girsky, and Ms. Barra under the 2009 LTIP based on the average of the high and low trading price of our Common Stock on the NYSE on each grant date. Pursuant to the terms of the LTIP, awardsAwards are subject to forfeiture until vested.vested and settlement is conditioned upon repayment of GM's TARP obligations. On the second anniversary date of the grant, two-thirds of the awards will vest and onsettle ratably with each 25 percent of the TARP obligations that have been repaid. On the third anniversary date of the grant, the remaining one-third of the awards will vest.

   

Award

  

Grant

  

Approval

  

Estimated Future Payouts

Under Non-Equity Incentive
Plan Awards

 

Estimated Future Payouts

Under Equity Incentive

Plan Awards (1)

  All Other
Stock
Awards:
Number of
Shares of
Stock  or
Units (2)
  

All Other
Option
Awards:
Number of
Securities
Underlying

Options

 

Exercise
or Base
Price of
Option

Awards

 

Grant Date
Fair Value
of Stock
and Option

Awards

 
      Threshold Target Maximum Threshold Target  Maximum     
Name Type  Date  Date  ($) ($) ($) (#) (#)  (#)  (#)  (#) ($/Share) ($) 

Daniel F. Akerson

  RSU    3/15/2012    1/11/2012         76,249    76,249        1,986,286  
   SSU    3/31/2012    1/11/2012            52,063       1,335,416  
   SSU    6/30/2012    1/11/2012            118,503       2,336,879  
   SSU    9/30/2012    1/11/2012            79,660       1,812,265  
   SSU    12/31/2012    1/11/2012            64,579       1,861,813  
                

 

 

     

 

 

 
                               314,805        9,332,659  

Daniel Ammann

  RSU    3/15/2012    1/11/2012         53,374    53,374        1,390,393  
   SSU    3/31/2012    1/11/2012            20,138       516,540  
   SSU    6/30/2012    1/11/2012            40,139       791,541  
   SSU    9/30/2012    1/11/2012            28,372       645,463  
   SSU    12/31/2012    1/11/2012            23,001       663,119  
                

 

 

     

 

 

 
                               111,650        4,007,056  

Stephen J. Girsky

  RSU    3/15/2012    1/11/2012         57,187    57,187        1,489,721  
   SSU    3/31/2012    1/11/2012            31,435       806,308  
   SSU    6/30/2012    1/11/2012            43,324       854,349  
   SSU    9/30/2012    1/11/2012            36,011       819,250  
   SSU    12/31/2012    1/11/2012            29,194       841,663  
                

 

 

     

 

 

 
                               139,964        4,811,291  

Mary T. Barra

  RSU    3/15/2012    1/11/2012         53,374    53,374        1,390,393  
   SSU    3/31/2012    1/11/2012            20,138       516,540  
   SSU    6/30/2012    1/11/2012            37,590       741,275  
   SSU    9/30/2012    1/11/2012            27,281       620,643  
   SSU    12/31/2012    1/11/2012            22,117       637,633  
                

 

 

     

 

 

 
                               107,126        3,906,484  

Timothy E. Lee

  RSU    3/15/2012    1/11/2012         44,415    44,415        1,157,011  
   SSU    3/31/2012    1/11/2012            15,570       399,371  
   SSU    6/30/2012    1/11/2012            69,000       1,360,680  
   SSU    9/30/2012    1/11/2012            38,193       868,891  
   SSU    12/31/2012    1/11/2012            30,963       892,663  
                

 

 

     

 

 

 
                               153,726        4,678,616  

settle ratably with each 25 percent of the TARP obligations that have been repaid. In December 2013, the UST sold its remaining shares of Common Stock and it was subsequently determined that 25 percent of the outstanding shares remaining for TARP–related RSU grants would be forfeited. Dr. Neumann’s RSUs were awarded under the 2009 LTIP based on the average of the high and low trading price of Common Stock on the NYSE on the grant date. His RSUs were awarded pursuant to the terms of his employment agreement and are contingent on his continued service on each vesting date. They are not conditioned upon repayment of GM’s TARP obligations. Pursuant to his employment agreement, one-half of the shares vested and were delivered on February 28, 2014, and the second installment will vest and be delivered on February 28, 2015.


43
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




  
Award TypeGrant DateApproval Date
Estimated Future Payouts
Under Non-Equity Incentive
Plan Awards
Estimated Future Payouts
Under Equity Incentive
Plan Awards (1)
All Other
Stock
Awards:
Number of
Shares of
Stock or
Units (2) (#)
All Other
Option
Awards:
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Options
(#)
Exercise
or Base
Price of
Option
Awards ($/Share)
Grant Date
Fair Value
of Stock
and Option
Awards
($)
Threshold ($)Target ($)Maximum ($)Threshold (#)Target (#)Maximum (#)
Name
Daniel F. AkersonRSU3/1/20131/14/2013    

   
 SSU3/31/20131/14/2013      65,483
  1,821,737
 SSU6/30/20131/14/2013      54,871
  1,827,753
 SSU9/30/20131/14/2013      50,737
  1,825,010
 SSU12/31/20131/14/2013      44,720
  1,827,706
         
 
215,811
  7,302,206
Daniel AmmannRSU3/1/20131/14/2013    60,841
60,841


  1,655,484
 SSU3/31/20131/14/2013      23,323
  648,846
 SSU6/30/20131/14/2013      22,926
  763,665
 SSU9/30/20131/14/2013      19,635
  706,271
 SSU12/31/20131/14/2013      17,306
  707,296
         
 
83,190
  4,481,562
Stephen J. GirskyRSU3/1/20131/14/2013    55,310
55,310


  1,504,985
 SSU3/31/20131/14/2013      29,602
  823,528
 SSU6/30/20131/14/2013      39,086
  1,301,955
 SSU9/30/20131/14/2013      29,539
  1,062,518
 SSU12/31/20131/14/2013      26,036
  1,064,091
         
 
124,263
  5,757,077
Mary T. BarraRSU3/1/20131/14/2013    58,998
58,998
   1,605,336
 SSU3/31/20131/14/2013      22,426
  623,891
 SSU6/30/20131/14/2013      23,903
  796,209
 SSU9/30/20131/14/2013      19,739
  710,012
 SSU12/31/20131/14/2013      17,398
  711,056
         
 
83,466
  4,446,504
Karl-Thomas NeumannRSU4/1/201312/10/2012    53,822
53,822


  1,496,252
 SSU3/31/201312/10/2012      7,894
  219,611
 SSU6/30/201312/10/2012      26,459
  881,349
 SSU9/30/201312/10/2012      15,291
  550,017
 SSU12/31/201312/10/2012      13,478
  550,846
         
 
63,122
  3,698,075
(1)

On January 11, 2012,14, 2013 the Compensation Committee took action to approve RSU awards to be granted on March 15, 20121, 2013 in recognition of 20112012 Adjusted FCFAFCF performance. The awards were made at the target amount, which is also the maximum amount payable. Pursuant to the terms of the 2009 LTIP, the value used to determine the number of RSUs granted on March 15, 20121, 2013 was $26.23$27.12 based on the average of the high and low trading price of our Common Stock on the NYSE on the grant date. However, the grant date fair

value shown here is based on the closing price of our Common Stock on the grant date ($26.05)27.21) consistent with accounting practice and the valuation assumptions used in measuring expense in Note 2623 of the Consolidated Financial Statements. Dr. Neumann's RSUs were granted on April 1, 2013, based on the average of the high and low trading price of Common Stock on the NYSE on the grant date ($27.87). However, the grant date fair value shown here is based on the closing price of Common Stock on the grant date ($27.80) consistent with accounting practice and the valuation assumptions used in measuring expense in Note 23 of the Consolidated Financial Statements.
(2)On the same date, theThe Compensation Committee approved SSU grants to be made on various salary payment dates. Pursuant to Plan terms, the value used to determine the number of unitsRSUs granted on March 31, 20122013 was $25.45;$27.87; June 30, 2012, $19.62;2013, $33.26; September 30, 2012, $22.91;2013, $35.97; and December 31, 2012, $28.26,2013, $40.81, based on the average of the high and low trading price of our Common Stock on the NYSE on the grant date. However, the grant date fair value shown here is based on the closing price of our Common Stock on the grant dates (March 31, 2012, $25.65;2013, $27.82; June 30, 2012, $19.72;2013, $33.31; September 30, 2012, $22.75;2013, $35.97; and December 31, 2012, $28.83)2013, $40.87) consistent with accounting practice and the valuation assumptions used in measuring expense in Note 2623 of the Consolidated Financial Statements.



44
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End 2012

   Option Awards Stock Awards (1) 
(a)    (b) (c) (d) (e) (f)     (g) (h) (i)  (j) 
   Grant Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options (#
Exercisable)
 Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options (#
Unexercisable)
 Equity
Incentive
Plan Awards:
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Unearned
Options
 Option
Exercise
Price
 Option
Expiration
 Grant  Number
of
Shares
or Units
of Stock
That
Have
Not
Vested
 Market
Value
of
Shares
or
Units
of
Stock
That
Have
Not
Vested
 Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Number
of
Unearned
Shares,
Units, or
Other
Rights
That
Have Not
Vested
  Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Market
or Payout
Value of
Unearned
Shares,
Units,  or
Other
Rights
That
Have Not
Vested
 
Name Date (#) (#) (#) ($) Date Date  (#) ($) (#)  ($) 

Daniel F. Akerson

              3/15/2012        76,249    2,198,259  
               2/10/2011        18,478    532,721  

Daniel Ammann

              3/15/2012        53,374    1,538,772  

Stephen J. Girsky

              3/15/2012        57,187    1,648,701  
               2/10/2011        41,575    1,198,607  

Mary T. Barra

              3/15/2012        53,374    1,538,772  

Timothy E. Lee

              3/15/2012        44,415    1,280,484  
               2/10/2011        24,021    692,525  
               3/15/2010        30,375    875,711  

2013
  
Option AwardsStock Awards (1)
(a)
  
(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)
  
(g)(h)(i)(j)
  
Grant Date
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options (#
Exercisable) (#)
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options (#
Unexercis-able) (#)
Equity
Incentive
Plan Awards:
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Unearned
Options
(#)
Option
Exercise
Price
($)
Option
Expiration Date
Grant
Date
Number
of
Shares
or Units
of Stock
That
Have
Not
Vested
(#)
Market
Value
of
Shares
or
Units
of
Stock
That
Have
Not
Vested
($)
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Number
of
Unearned
Shares,
Units, or
Other
Rights
That
Have Not
Vested
(#)
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Awards:
Market
or Payout
Value of
Unearned
Shares,
Units, or
Other
Rights
That
Have Not
Vested
($)
Name
Daniel F. Akerson      3/15/2012  76,249
3,116,297
       2/10/2011  18,478
755,196
Daniel Ammann      3/1/2013  60,841
2,486,572
       3/15/2012  53,374
2,181,395
Stephen J. Girsky      3/1/2013  55,310
2,260,520
       3/15/2012  57,187
2,337,233
       2/10/2011  41,575
1,699,170
Mary T. Barra      3/1/2013  58,998
2,411,248
       3/15/2012  53,374
2,181,395
Karl-Thomas Neumann      4/1/2013  53,822
2,199,705
(1)The amounts in Column (j) reflect 2012 and 2013 RSU grants that vest as described in the narrative accompanying the “2012above under "2013 Grants of Plan Based Awards” tableAwards." The 2011 awards are subject to forfeiture for three years and conditioned upon repayment of GM's TARP obligations. On the third anniversary date of the grant, the 2011 awards settle ratably with each 25 percent of GM's TARP obligations that have been repaid. The awards are valued in this column based on page 47the closing price of Common Stock on December 31, 2013 ($40.87). In December 2013, the UST sold its remaining shares of Common Stock and init was subsequently determined that 25 percent of the CD&Aoutstanding TARP-related RSU grants would be forfeited. Accordingly, 25 percent of the shares remaining for TARP-related grants outstanding on page 40.December 31, 2013, for each of the NEOs was forfeited as follows: Mr. Akerson, (23,682); Mr. Ammann, (28,554); Mr. Girsky, (28,125); and Ms. Barra, (28,094). Dr. Neumann’s grant on April 1, 2013 is contingent on continued service on each vesting date as described above under "2013 Grants of Plan Based Awards."

The 2010 and 2011 awards are subject to forfeiture for three years. On the third anniversary date of the grant, awards will vest and settle pursuant to the terms of the LTIP.

The awards are valued in this column based on the closing price of our Common Stock on December 31, 2012 ($28.83).

2012

2013 Option Exercises and Stock Vested

There were no options granted or exercised orand no stock awards vested for NEOs during 20122013 (table omitted intentionally).

Pension Benefits and Retirement Programs Applicable to Executive Officers

Pension benefits for most of our U.S. executives may be from both tax-qualified plans that are subject to the requirements of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) and from a non-qualified plan that provides supplemental benefits. We assumed both types of plans from General Motors Corporation in connection with the 363 Sale.Corporation. Tax-qualified benefits are pre-funded and paid out of either the trust assets of the General Motors Salaried Retirement Program (the “SRP”), the General Motors Retirement Savings Plan for Salaried Employees in the United States (the “RSP”), or both. Non-qualified benefits under the General Motors Executive Retirement Plan (the “ERP”) are not pre-funded and are paid out of our general assets. The ERP provides benefits under both Defined Contribution (“DC”) and Defined Benefit (“DB”) formulas. Benefit accruals and company contributions under GM’s non-qualified pension

45
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




plan and deferred compensation plans have beenwere suspended for SEOsNEOs and certain most highly compensated employees sincepursuant to TARP regulations, and they were reinstated effective December 11, 2009.

16, 2013.

U.S. executive employees must be at least age 55 with a minimum of ten years of eligibility service to be vested in benefits accrued prior to October 1, 2012 in the ERP, and must have been an executive employeeemployees on the active payroll of General Motors Corporation as of December 31, 2006 to be eligible for any frozen accrued non-qualified ERP benefit. Benefits accrued in the ERP on and after October 1, 2012 are subject to three-year vesting.

For service rendered January 1, 2007 through September 30, 2012, non-qualified retirement benefits for executive employees were determined under one of two methods (a DBDC formula or a DCDB formula), depending on an executive’s length of service date. For executives with a length of service date prior to January 1, 2001 a total benefit accrued (SRP plus DB ERP) equal to 1.25 percent of monthly base salary and annual incentive awards under the 2009 General Motors Company Short TermShort-Term Incentive Plan (the “STIP”"2009 STIP"). and predecessor plans. For executives with a length of service date on or after January 1, 2001, total contributions (RSP plus DC ERP) accrued equal to four percent of monthly base salary and STIP.annual incentive awards. For both formulae, benefits calculated on base salary and STIPannual incentive awards below the applicable U.S. Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) limits accrued in the appropriate qualified plan (SRP or RSP) according to length of service date. For both formulae, benefits calculated on base salary and STIPannual incentive awards above the applicable IRS limits accrued in the ERP.

Effective September 30, 2012, pension accruals under the 1.25 percent SRP and ERP formulas described above were frozen, and qualified and non-qualified retirement benefits have been replaced for future service, effective October 1, 2012, with a defined contribution formula (four percent or six percent of monthly base salary and STIPannual incentive awards depending on an employee’s length of service date) subject to the IRS limits noted above.

above for tax-qualified plans.

Upon retirement, executives will have all vested non-qualified retirement benefits accrued prior to October 1, 2012, paid as a five-year annuity. Any non-qualified benefits accrued and vested on or after September 30,October 1, 2012 will be paid as a lump sum upon retirement. The interest rate used in determining the non-qualified five-year annuity retirement benefits referenced above is the average of the 30-year U.S. Treasury Securities Rate for the month of July and is determined annually. This annual interest rate is then effective for retirements commencing October 1 through September 30 of the succeeding year. In the event of death, an executive’s surviving spouse may be eligible for benefits under the ERP.

Adam Opel AG in Germany offers a cash balance pension plan. Participants hired after 2006 accrue “pension elements” each year. The pension element equals a “pay credit” multiplied by an “age factor.” The pay credit is 1.75 percent times annual income for the year, plus 10.5 percent times the portion of the annual income in excess of the social security threshold for the year. The age factor is designed to accumulate the pay credit with interest to age 60 and ranges from 4.0 for the youngest employees to 1.0 for the oldest. Between age 60 and retirement, in addition to pension elements continuing to accrue, the accumulated pension elements are increased at the minimum guaranteed rate of interest application for German life insurance contracts, currently 1.75 percent. The normal retirement benefit age is 63. Upon termination, the vested benefit is based on the accrued balance, but participants must wait until normal retirement benefit age before commencing benefits. Full vesting is provided after five years of service and 25 years of age. The normal form of payment is twelve annual installments. Payments in six installments, a lump sum or a lifelong annuity are available, but subject to company consent.








46
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




Pension Benefits

(a) (b)  (c)  (d)  (e)  (f) 
      Number of years of
Eligible Credited
Service as of
December 31, 2012
  Present Value of
Accumulated Benefit
(2)
  Annual Lifetime or
Five-Year
Annuity Payable Under
GM Pension Plans
  Payments During
Last Fiscal Year
 
Name Plan Name  (1)  ($)  ($)  ($) 

Daniel F. Akerson (3)

  ERP    2.3              

Daniel Ammann (3)

  ERP    2.7    4,141    1,645      

Stephen J. Girsky (3)

  ERP    2.8    8,243    2,390      

Mary T. Barra (4)

  SRP    30.3    848,553    75,635      
   ERP   30.3    800,688    229,619      

Timothy E. Lee (5)

  SRP    43.4    1,952,983    126,241      
   ERP    43.4    3,490,185    753,633      

 (a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g)
 NamePlan Name
Number of years of
Eligible Credited
Service as of
December 31, 2013
(1)  
Present Value of
Accumulated Benefit
(2)(3) 
($)
Annual Lifetime Annuity for SRP, Five-Year
Annuity for Pre-10/1/2012 ERP, or Twelve-Year Annuity for OPEL Under
GM Pension Plans
($)
Lump Sum Payable for Post-9/30/2012 ERP Under GM Pension
 ($)
Payments During
Last Fiscal Year
($)
 
 Daniel F. Akerson (4)ERP3.3
2,833

2,833

 Daniel Ammann (5)ERP3.7
5,985
1,791
  4,308

 Stephen J. Girsky (6)SRP4.6
16,697
1,634


 ERP3.8
9,946
2,670
1,757

 Mary T. Barra (7)SRP31.3
750,410
75,635


 ERP31.3
714,935
215,998
3,217

 Karl-Thomas Neumann (8)OPEL0.8
75,754
9,708


(1)Eligible service recognizes credited service under the frozen qualified SRP, in addition to service under the new plan formulae. The 35-year cap on ERP service used in calculating the frozen accrued ERP benefits still applies.
(2)The present value of the SRP benefit amount shown takes into consideration the ability to elect a joint and survivor annuity form of payment. For SRP and ERP benefits, the present value represents the value of the benefit accrued through December 31, 20122013 and payable at age 60 (or immediately if over age 60). Benefits and present values reflect the provisions of the SRP and ERP as of December 31, 2012.2013. Present values shown here are based on the mortality and discount rate assumptions used in the December 31, 20122013 Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Section 715, “Compensation—“Compensation–Retirement Benefits” except where needed to meet SEC disclosure.proxy requirements. The discount rates used for the SRP are 4.21 percent for calculations as of December 31, 2011 and 4.02 percent for calculations as of December 31, 2012.2012 and 5.01 percent for calculations as of December 31, 2013. The discount rates used for the ERP are 3.89 percent for calculations as of December 31, 2011 and 3.21 percent for calculations as of December 31, 2012.2012 and 4.08 percent for calculations as of December 31, 2013.
(3)Tax qualified retirement benefits for Mr. Akerson, Mr. Ammann,The present value of the Opel benefit represents the value of the benefit accrued through December 31, 2013 and Mr. Girsky were accumulated usingpayable at age 63. The benefit and present value reflect the four percent defined contribution formulaprovisions of the Opel plan as of December 31, 2013. The present value shown here is based on the mortality and are includeddiscount rate assumptions used in the “All Other Compensation” table on page 46. December 31, 2013 FASB ASC Section 715, “Compensation–Retirement Benefits” except where needed to meet proxy requirements. The discount rate used for the Opel plan is 3.35 percent for calculations as of December 31, 2013.
(4)Pursuant to USTTARP regulations, ERP accruals were not permitted for Mr. Akerson from December 11, 2009, through December 15, 2013. He is eligible to receive his ERP benefits accrued on or after October 1, 2012 (DC ERP), payable as a lump-sum in the amount of $2,833 at December 31, 2013, because he is vested with three years of service.
(5)Currently Mr. Ammann and Mr. Girsky during 2012 because they were SEOs and amongis not eligible for any five-year certain benefits, but at age 60 he is eligible for a five-year certain benefit of $1,791, as shown in (e), for the Top 25 most highly compensated employees. Any amountsportion of the non-qualified ERP benefit accrued prior to October 1, 2012. Pursuant to TARP regulations, ERP accruals were not permitted for Mr. Ammann from December 11, 2009, through December 15, 2013. He is eligible to receive the portion of his ERP benefit accrued on or after October 1, 2012 are included, and(DC ERP), payable as a lump sum in the ERP amount of $1,250 at December 31, 2013 or in column (d) represents the accumulated benefit under the four percent defined contribution formula, valued and payableamount of $4,308 at age 60 as a five-year annuity form of payment. Mr. Akerson, Mr. Ammann, and Mr. Girsky were not eligible to retire under the provisions of the ERP asshown in (f).
(6)
As of December 31, 2013, Mr. Girsky is eligible to commence his benefit under the tax-qualified GM retirement plan (under the Account Balance Plan provisions). His accrued benefit in the form of a single-life annuity is $1,634, as shown in (e), payable at age 60. The SRP benefit is based on his previous employment with General Motors Corporation from August 2005 to June 2006 which became vested when combined with his current period of employment. Currently, he is not eligible for any five-year certain benefits but at age 60 he is eligible for a five-year certain benefit of $2,670, as shown in (e), for the portion of the non-qualified ERP benefit accrued prior to October 1, 2012. Pursuant to TARP regulations, ERP accruals were not permitted for Mr. Girsky from December 11, 2009, to December 15, 2013. He is eligible to receive the portion of his ERP benefits accrued on or after October 1, 2012 (DC ERP), payable as a lump-sum in the amount of $1,000 at December 31, 2013 or in the amount of $1,757 at age 60 as shown in (f). Mr. Girsky's SRP benefit was inadvertently omitted in the 2011 and 2012 "Pension Benefits" tables and the revised amounts of the resulting year-over-year change in present value is reflected in the "2013 Summary Compensation Table" on page 41.

(4)
47
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT

Table of Contents



(7)As of December 31, 2012,2013, Ms. Barra is eligible to retire under the tax qualifiedtax-qualified GM retirement plan. SheHer accrued benefit in the form of a single life annuity reduced from age 62 is $39,519 payable immediately or is $75,635, as shown in (e), payable at age 60. Currently she is not eligible to retire under the non-qualified ERP. The amounts shown in column (d) represent the present value offor any five-year certain benefits, accrued through December 31, 2012, payablebut at age 60 she is eligible for a five-year certain benefit of $215,998, as a lifetime annuity form of paymentshown in (e), for the SRP with reduction from age 62, and payable as a five-year annuity formportion of payment for the ERP.non-qualified ERP benefit accrued prior to December 11, 2009 (DB ERP). Pursuant to USTTARP regulations, ERP accruals were not permitted for Ms. Barra afterfrom December 11, 2009.2009 to December 15, 2013. She is eligible to receive the portion of her ERP benefits accrued on or after October 1, 2012 (DC ERP), payable as a lump-sum in the amount of $1,875 at December 31, 2013, or in the amount of $3,217 at age 60. Ms. Barra's 2012 ERP benefit has been adjusted to acknowledge a minor revision in the pension actuarial calculations and the revised amount of the resulting year-over-year change in present value is reflected in the "2013 Summary Compensation Table" on page 41.
(5)
(8)As of December 31, 2012, Mr. Lee2013, Dr. Neumann is eligible for an unreduced benefit payable at age 63 in 12 annual installments (12-year certain) with a current guaranteed annual increase in benefit amount of 1.75 percent. He is not eligible to retire under both the tax qualified and the non-qualified GM retirement plans. The amounts shown in column (d) represent the present value of benefits accrued through December 31, 2012, payable immediately since he is overcommence his benefit prior to age 60, as a lifetime annuity form of payment for the SRP and payable as a five-year annuity form of payment for the ERP. Pursuant to UST regulations, ERP accruals were not permitted for Mr. Lee after December 11, 2009.63.

2012

2013 Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plans

We maintain certain deferred compensation programs and arrangements for executives, including the NEOs.

The General Motors Defined Contribution portion of the Executive Retirement Plan (the “DC ERP”),DC ERP, formerly known as the Benefit Equalization Plan, allows for the equalization of benefits for highly compensated salaried employees under the SRP and the RSP when such employees’ contribution and benefit levels exceed the maximum limitations on contributions and benefits imposed by Section 2004 of ERISA, as amended, and Section 401(a)(17) and 415 of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code, as amended (the “IRC”). The DC ERP is maintained as an unfunded plan and we bear all expenses for administration of the plan and payment of amounts to participants. Our contributions to employee accounts are currently invested in the same investment funds as the RSP.

employees elected in their tax-qualified RSP accounts.

Aggregate account balances disclosed below include both vested and unvested contributions by GM. Contributions made prior to 2007 were vested immediately. Notional contributionsContributions made between January 1, 2007 and September 31,30, 2012 vest when the participant attains age 55 with ten years of service. Notional contributionsContributions made on October 1, 2012 and later vest when the participant attains three years of service, regardless of age. Pursuant to USTTARP regulations, no accruals or contributions to the DC ERP were permitted during 2012until December 16, 2013 for NEOs who were also SEOs in 2012.

SSP—2013.

Salary Stock Plan - NEOs receive a portion of their total annual compensation in the form of SSUs. The SSUs, which are granted to NEOs each quarter as described in the “2012“2013 Grants of Plan Based Awards” table on page 47.44. SSUs are non-forfeitable and become deliverable quarterly in three equal installments at each of the first, second, and third anniversaries of the grant date.

The table below reflects December 31, 20122013 balances for the various nonqualified deferred compensation plans, including vested but unpaid SSUs, based on the closing price of our Common Stock ($28.83)40.87) and any contributions, earnings, and withdrawals during the year.

  

 (a)  (b)  (c)  (d)  (e)  (f) 
      Executive
Contributions
in the Last
Fiscal Year
  Registrant
Contributions
in the Last
Fiscal Year (1)
  Aggregate
Earnings in
the Last
Fiscal Year (2)
  Aggregate
Withdrawals
and
Distributions (3)
  Aggregate
Balance at
2012 Fiscal
Year-End (4)
 
Name Plan  ($)  ($)  ($)  ($)  ($) 

Daniel F. Akerson

  SSU        7,346,373    3,552,787    (2,287,513  13,824,706  
   DC ERP                     

Daniel Ammann

  SSU        2,616,663    1,363,492    (1,052,265  5,329,946  
   DC ERP           206        1,570  

Stephen J. Girsky

  SSU        3,321,570    2,265,336    (2,305,852  8,068,767  
   DC ERP                     

Mary T. Barra

  SSU        2,516,091    1,363,413    (1,168,216  5,135,315  
   DC ERP           4,794        35,183  

Timothy E. Lee

  SSU        3,521,605    1,638,658    (1,240,518  6,242,646  
   DC ERP            930        19,973  


48
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT

Table of Contents



 (a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)
NamePlanExecutive Contributions in the Last Fiscal Year
Registrant Contributions in the Last Fiscal Year (1)
($)
Aggregate Earnings in the Last Fiscal Year (2)
($)
Aggregate Withdrawals and Distributions (3)
($)
Aggregate Balance at 2013 Fiscal Year End (4)
($)
Daniel F. AkersonSSU
7,302,206
6,145,174
(6,921,156)20,350,930
DC ERP
2,833


2,833
Daniel AmmannSSU
2,826,078
2,290,633
(2,862,370)7,584,287
DC ERP
938
327

2,835
Stephen J. GirskySSU
4,252,092
3,236,606
(4,882,180)10,675,285
DC ERP
1,000


1,000
Mary T. BarraSSU
2,841,168
2,210,743
(2,714,923)7,472,303
DC ERP
1,250
10,796

47,229
Karl-Thomas NeumannSSU
2,201,823
377,974

2,579,796
(1)
SSUs were granted on a quarterly basis to each of the NEOs on the dates and in the amounts described in the “2012"2013 Grants of Plan Based Awards”Awards" table on page 47,44, and the aggregate value of these awards is included for each NEO in the “Stock Awards”"Stock Awards" column of the “2012“2013 Summary Compensation Table” on page 4541.

(2)None of the earningsEarnings that may be included in column (d) are not reported in the “Change in Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation” totals and footnote 53 included in the “2012“2013 Summary Compensation Table” on page 45,41, because we do not pay above-market earnings on U.S. deferred compensation.
(3)Payments of vested SSUs granted on various dates and at various share prices were made to each of the NEOs as described in the “2012"2013 Grants of Plan Based Awards”Awards" table on page 47.44.
(4)Aggregate balances include both vested and unvested contributions subject to forfeiture as described for each NEO in the section titled, “Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control” below.on page 49.

No

Pursuant to TARP regulations, no new accruals arewere permitted to the DC ERP for the NEOs.NEOs until December 16, 2013. The balancesbalance shown for Ms. Barra and Mr. Lee includeincludes amounts credited to their respectiveher DC ERP accountsaccount by both GM and General Motors Corporation because these accounts were assumed by GM with the closing of the 363 Sale and were not subject to cancellation during MLC liquidation proceedings.

from General Motors Corporation.

All amounts reported in column (f), except earnings at prevailing market rates, have been reported in the “2012“2013 Summary Compensation Table” on page 45 for41for each NEO. Mr. Ammann’s 2011 DC ERP account balance was inadvertently omitted from the previous year’s table and the revised amount for 2011 “All Other Compensation” is reflected in the “2012 Summary Compensation” table on page 45. Amounts earned in previous years for other NEOs were reported in earlier summary compensation tables, if that executiveNEO's compensation was an NEO in the prior year.required to be disclosed. Amounts previously reported in such years include previously earned Company matching contributions. The totals in column (f) above reflect the cumulative value of these contributions and investment choices for each NEO.

Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control

We maintain compensation and benefit plans that will provide payment of compensation to NEOs in the event of termination of employment due to retirement or death. These provisions are generally applicable to all plan participants and are not reserved only for NEOs. The amount of compensation payable to each NEO in these situations is described below.

We do

During 2013, we did not provide severance or change-in-control benefits for executives, and we utilizeutilized employment or severance agreements on an infrequent basis. Employment agreements with NEOs are described below.

Retirement and Pension Benefits.Plan provisions and pension benefits for NEOs are described in the “Pension Benefits and Retirement Programs Applicable to Executive Officers” on page 49.45.





49
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT

Table of Contents



As of December 31, 2012,2013, Mr. Akerson, Mr. Ammann, and Mr. Girsky were not eligible to retirevested in the qualified RSP and the non-qualified DC ERP. Mr. Girsky is also vested in the SRP under any qualified or non-qualified retirement plan.the Account Balance Plan provisions. Upon termination of employment, theirMr. Ammann's and Mr. Girsky's unvested benefits in the DC ERP would behave been forfeited.

As of December 31, 2012,2013, Ms. Barra was eligible to retire pursuant to the provisions of the qualified SRP, but notis vested only in the non-qualified ERP.

AsDC ERP benefits accrued on or after October 1, 2012. Upon termination of employment, unvested benefits in the DC ERP would have been forfeited.

Dr. Neumann participates in the Opel pension plan as described in the section titled, “Pension Benefits and Retirement Programs Applicable to Executive Officers”. Upon termination of employment on December 31, 2012, Mr. Lee was eligible to retire pursuant to2013, his vested benefit would have been based on the provisions of both the qualified SRP and the non-qualified ERP.

accrued balance, but he must wait until normal retirement benefit age before commencing benefits.

Benefits Payable at Death.Upon death of an active employee, we provide a special death payment equal to one month of base salary to certain dependents, including surviving spouses, members of the employee’s family, or other individuals who are to be responsible for payment of funeral expenses. This benefit is provided generally for all salaried employees in active status at the time of death. In addition, pursuant to SRP plan terms we provide eligible surviving spouses a monthly pension benefit based on a percentage of the monthly retirement benefit payable to the employee. Under the terms of the ERP, survivor benefits, if applicable, are payable as a lump sum. Only Mr. Lee was vested in the ERP on December 31, 2012, and the lump sum benefitBenefits payable to a survivor upon histhe NEOs death on that date was $3,768,164.December 31, 2013 would have been as follows: Mr. Akerson, $2,833 payable as a lump sum from his DC ERP ; Mr. Ammann, $1,250 payable as a lump sum from his DC ERP; Mr. Girsky, an annual benefit of $1,049 payable immediately from the SRP and $1,000 payable as a lump sum from his DC ERP; and Ms. Barra, an annual benefit of $50,161 payable immediately from the SRP and $22,371 payable as a lump sum from DC ERP. Dr. Neumann’s survivor benefit from the Opel Versorgungskonto plan on December 31, 2013, would have been $7,636 payable in 12 annual installments, increasing each year at a rate determined by insurance companies (currently 1.75 percent).

Life insurance benefits are provided for all U.S. salaried employees.

Unvestedemployees and Dr. Neumann participates in the plan provided for Opel Management Board members as described below.

Under the 2009 LTIP, unvested and outstanding RSUs are prorated for time worked and paid immediately to eligible survivors. RSU amounts that would have been payable to survivors as of December 31, 20122013 for the NEOs arewould have been as follows: Mr. Akerson, $951,015;$1,976,102; Mr. Ammann, $427,462;$1,515,602; Mr. Girsky, $1,223,776;$3,189,465; Ms. Barra, $427,462;$1,499,931; and Mr. Lee, $1,625,234.

Dr. Neumann, $823,668.

Deferred Compensation Plans.Under the provisions of the SSP, awards are vested when earned, and will continue to be paid in accordance with their terms as described in this proxy statement upon the executive’s separation.

As of December 31, 2012, Mr. Akerson, Mr. Ammann, and Mr. Girsky,2013, NEOs had no vested notional contributions in the DC ERP.ERP in the following amounts:
Mr. Akerson, $2,833; Mr. Ammann, $938; Mr. Girsky, $1,000; and Ms. Barra, $20,496. Upon termination of employment, their unvested benefits would be forfeited.

As of December 31, 2012, Ms. Barra had vested notional contributions in the amount of $14,707 Dr. Neumann does not participate in the DC ERP. All other unvested contributions would be forfeited.

As of December 31, 2012, Mr. Lee had vested notional contributions in the amount of $19,973 in the DC ERP. He had no unvested contributions subject to forfeiture.

ERP plan.

Incentive Plans.RSUs granted in 20122013 under the 2009 LTIP vest two-thirdsas described in the section titled, “2013 Grants of Plan Based Awards” on the second anniversary date of the grant and one-third on the third anniversary of their grant date.page 44. Unvested RSUs are forfeited upon termination of employment, except in cases of retirement.retirement and death (discussed above). As of December 31, 2013, only Mr. Akerson was eligible to retire under the terms of the 2009 LTIP. If he had commenced retirement on that date, he would have received a prorated portion of his February 10, 2011 RSU grant (13,474 shares, net of TARP obligations) delivered on their original settlement date of February 10, 2014. His March 15, 2012 grant would have been forfeited.

Vacation Pay.Salaried employees terminating employment under approved retirement plans are entitled to receive full vacation based on their length of service with the Company and its predecessor as of the date of separation and may receive pay in lieu of unused vacation in the calendar year of termination of employment.

Health Care and Life Insurance Coverage Continuation.Under provisions of the General Motors Salaried Health Care Program covering all U.S. salaried employees, Mr. Akerson, Mr. Ammann, and Mr. Girsky could continue health care coverage as provided under applicable federalFederal laws (i.e., The Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act). Based on theirher ability to retire, Ms. Barra and Mr. Lee areis eligible to receive corporate contributions toward health care coverage in retirement until the earlier of Medicare eligibility, or turning age 65, pursuant to program terms, andterms. U.S. salaried employees are also eligible for Company paidto continue life insurance in retirement.retirement on a self-paid basis.


50
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT

Table of Contents



Dr. Neumann participates in the insurance plan provided for Opel Management Board members, which would have provided a benefit of $211,996 in the case of death, or $845,232 in the case of disability on December 31, 2013.
Employment Agreements
Karl-Thomas Neumann. On December 10, 2012, we entered into an employment agreement for a period of one year with Dr. Neumann, to commence with his employment on March 1, 2013. Our employment agreement with Dr. Neumann provided an annual cash base salary of EUR 618,560 and Arrangements

We have no employment agreements with our NEOs that provide them with specialparticipation in the benefit plans available to executive officers in Germany. He also received a portion of his 2013 total annual compensation arrangements. We are currently prohibited from paying any severance or bonusin the form of SSUs, in the amount of $2,200,000, which will be delivered quarterly over three years beginning in 2014, and incentive compensation amounts to any SEOs upon termination or change in control. We do not maintain any plan providing benefits related to a change in control of the Company, and none of our current incentive plans contain such provisions.

COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORTwas granted 53,822 RSUs on April 1, 2013 valued at $27.87 each.

Compensation Committee Report
The Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed with management the Compensation Discussion and Analysis ("CD&A&A") and, based on that review and discussion, has recommended to the Board of Directors that the CD&A be included in this proxy statement and incorporated by reference in the GM 20122013 Annual Report on Form 10-K.

The

During 2013, the Compensation Committee reviewsreviewed the incentive compensation arrangements of our NEOs with the General Auditor and Chief Risk Officer within 120 days of the completion of each fiscal year to ensure that the incentive compensation arrangements for these officers do not encourage them to take unnecessary and excessive risks that may threaten the value of the Company.

The Compensation Committee also reviewsreviewed all employee compensation plans, makesmade all reasonable efforts to eliminate unnecessary risks that the plans may pose to GM, and eliminates anydetermined that there were no features of these plans that would encourage the manipulation of GM’s reported earnings to enhance the compensation of any employees.

The 2012 annual

During 2013, risk reviewreviews of the Company’s compensation arrangements waswere completed on March 18, 2013, and November 18, 2013, and a discussion of our review process is included in the section entitled “Compensation Risk Assessment and Management Process” on page 43.

Upon concluding the review, the Compensation Committee Chair, on behalf of the Compensation Committee, provided the following certificate set forth below to the UST.

39.

Executive Compensation Committee

E. Neville Isdell (Chair)

David Bonderman

James J. Mulva

Patricia F. Russo

Theodore M. Solso

Carol M. Stephenson

EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGES AND COMPENSATION COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE

March 28, 2013

This certificate is delivered pursuant to Section 111 of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (“EESA”), as amended by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (“ARRA”).

The undersigned hereby certifies in his capacity as chair of the Executive Compensation Committee of General Motors Company (the “Compensation Committee”) and not in his individual capacity, to the best of his knowledge after due inquiry and investigation, as follows:

(1)The Compensation Committee has reviewed with the General Auditor and Chief Risk Officer the senior executive officer (“SEO”) compensation plans and has made all reasonable efforts to ensure that these plans do not encourage SEOs to take unnecessary and excessive risks that threaten the value of the Company;

(2)The Compensation Committee has reviewed with the General Auditor and Chief Risk Officer the employee compensation plans and has made all reasonable efforts to limit any unnecessary risks these plans pose to the Company;

(3)The Compensation Committee has reviewed with the General Auditor and Chief Risk Officer the employee compensation plans to eliminate any features of these plans that would encourage the manipulation of reported earnings of the Company to enhance the compensation of any employee.

(4)The following narrative description identifies each SEO compensation plan and explains, in conjunction with the factors in paragraphs (5), (6), and (7), how the SEO compensation plan does not encourage the SEOs to take unnecessary and excessive risks that threaten the value of the Company:

In 2012, the SEO executive compensation program consisted of four elements:

1.Base salary,
2.Salary stock,
3.Long-term restricted stock, and
4.Perquisites and other compensation.

This compensation structure design does not encourage SEOs to take unnecessary and excessive risks that threaten the value of the Company. A description of the pay planning process and each plan element is provided below.

The GM Board and GM Management regularly discuss GM’s financial outlook, operating and enterprise risks, global competitor strategies, legislative and regulatory issues, and governance matters. Directors review how GM Management is addressing these risks and how these risks could impact GM’s financial structure. Other groups within GM are also involved in managing risks and compliance issues on an ongoing basis, including the Treasurer’s Office, General Motors Asset Management Corporation (“GMAM”), Legal Staff, Information Technology, GM Audit Services, Corporate Accounting, and Global Purchasing and Supply Chain. Our General Auditor and Chief Risk Officer meets regularly with the Audit Committee to assist the Board in its oversight of our risk management strategies and policies.

As compensation and incentive plans are developed they are periodically reviewed to ensure balance between fixed and variable pay and between risk and reward and the General Auditor and Chief Risk Officer participates in the compensation risk assessment with the Compensation Committee to determine if plan changes are necessary. As described below, our outside advisors also participate in the process. The Compensation Committee also reports its findings and recommendations to the CEO and the Board.

(5)During 2012, the Compensation Committee specifically took the following actions in developing the compensation plans for SEOs and the next 20 most highly compensated employees to ensure that their annual compensation was appropriate and compliant:

Base Salaries: Targeted salaries at the 50th percentile of compensation for persons in similar positions or roles at similar entities based on a competitive analysis of peer company pay practices;

Generally, base salaries paid in cash and limited to less than $500,000. Appropriate exceptions may be made for good cause shown;

Salary Stock: Allocated a significant portion of salaries to salary stock to be credited to each executive’s account each pay period and converted to equity grants each quarter. The salary stock vests immediately upon grant, with the number of share units based on the average of the high and low price of a share of common stock on the date of the grant. These share units become redeemable in three equal, annual installments beginning on the first anniversary of the grant;

Long-Term Restricted Stock: Planned long-term incentive awards equal to up to one third of 2012 compensation and based on 2012 Company performance. The awards were granted in March 2013 and will vest as follows: two-thirds after two years and one third after three years of service based on the repayment of GM’s TARP obligations; and

Perquisites and other compensation: Limited the payment of perquisites and other compensation to $25,000 or less for all SEOs and next 20 most highly compensated employees, unless good cause was shown. Severance payments to SEOs were prohibited and the accrual of any non-qualified deferred compensation or supplemental executive retirement plan benefit for SEOs was also prohibited.

Working within the established parameters, the following risk considerations were taken into account as we developed incentive plans for all executives:

Incentive plan metrics must be aligned with business strategy;

Performance objectives must be balanced with quality/sustainability of such performance;

The full range of potential payouts under each plan must be understood;

Payouts must be capped;

Leverage and ratio of incentive compensation to total compensation must be appropriate;

Performance, structure, and incentive plan payouts for executives below the Top 100 must be comparable to industry/peers;

The Compensation Committee reserves the right to exercise discretion where appropriate and within the established parameters;

The plans must focus on long-term performance that aligns with stockholder interests;

A recoupment policy must provide for clawback of incentive payouts based on revised financials that would result in lower incentive payouts; and

The Compensation Committee discusses risk when considering incentive programs.

In addition, the Compensation Committee also took the following actions:

Maintained a clawback policy that renders incentive awards subject to recoupment when reasonable to do so if the award was based on materially inaccurate financial statements or materially inaccurate performance metric criteria;

Maintained a securities trading policy that prohibits executive officers from buying or selling GM securities when in possession of material non-public information and any transactions require the specific approval of our Legal Staff. Trading in GM derivatives (i.e., puts and calls) and short sales of GM Securities are also prohibited;

Prohibited the accrual of any bonus or retention award for SEOs; and

Prohibited tax gross ups for SEOs and next 20 most highly compensated employees after October 22, 2009, for the remaining 26 – 100 employees after December 11, 2009, and for all other executives after February 1, 2010, except where permitted in conjunction with expatriate or foreign service related allowances and cost reimbursements.

(6)The following narrative description identifies other employee compensation plans and explains how any unnecessary risks posed by the other employee compensation plans have been limited, and further explains how the other employee compensation plans do not encourage the manipulation of reported earnings to enhance the compensation of any employee:

GMAM Incentive Plans

Annual Incentive Plan (“AIP”): Performance based on a combination of overall GMAM investment performance, unit/group investment performance, individual fund investment performance, business metrics (e.g., de-risking strategies), and reduction of third party assets. Overall GMAM investment performance is measured over one-year and three-year performance periods (with 75 percent weight given to the three-year performance), providing a longer term focus and discouraging risk for short-term gain.
Safeguards include: regular meetings with the Investment Policy Committee; ongoing oversight by senior GM financial management and internal audits by GM Audit Services; Compensation Committee approval of payout funds; and GM Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer’s review of individual awards. The GMAM CEO does not participate in this plan.

GM Financial Incentive Plans

Officer Bonus Plan – Performance based on a combination of GM Financial metrics (e.g., Adjusted EBT, credit losses, core originations, GM non-prime U.S. leases, GM Canadian leases, GM Floor Plan, and GM new originations)
Safeguards include: review of business plans and bonus metrics by the GM Senior Vice President & Chief Financial Officer, ongoing oversight by GM senior management, internal audits by GM Audit Services and GM Compensation Committee approval of funds and metrics.

Other Salaried Employee compensation plans in U.S. and non-U.S. locations are comprised of the following elements:

Base salary;
Benefits and welfare payments required by U.S. or foreign law;
Variable pay plans;
Recognition awards (lump sum payments);
Pension plans;
Savings plans;
Safeguards which include: approval of all compensation and benefit plans by GM Global Compensation Staff, and the Vice President, Global Human Resources (U.S. plans) or appropriate Regional President (non-U.S. plans).

(7)In carrying out its duties, the Compensation Committee has the authority to retain outside compensation, legal, and other advisors to assist in performing its functions. During 2012 the Compensation Committee engaged an independent executive compensation consulting firm, Compensation Advisory Partners LLC (“CAP”). A representative of the consulting firm attends all Committee meetings, either in person or via telephone conference, consults with and advises Committee members on executive compensation matters—including the form and amount of various pay elements—as needed, and develops and interprets benchmarking data for the Committee’s use in its deliberations.

During the past three years, CAP provided the following services for the Compensation Committee and provided no additional services to management:

Compensation Committee consultation and advice;
Meeting attendance and participation (both telephonic and in person);
Competitive market analysis of compensation and governance practices; and
Benchmarking data for executive positions

The Compensation Committee also retained independent outside legal counsel, Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP (“Davis Polk”).

The external advisors report directly to the Compensation Committee and all work performed by the external advisors is overseen by the Compensation Committee. The outside advisors participate in Compensation Committee meetings and discussions to help ensure Compensation Committee members have a thorough understanding of the issues under consideration, and they may be asked to provide additional materials or analysis to further clarify issues being discussed. In addition to information prepared by the Compensation Committee’s external advisors, GM’s Global Compensation Staff obtains compensation and benefit-related market data and analysis from several major providers and uses it to plan compensation for the broader executive group and other employee groups.

During 2012 there was no bonus, variable pay, or other employee benefit plan for salaried employees that could provide incentive for employees to manipulate reported earnings or enhance the compensation of any employee.

The foregoing certifications are made and delivered in my capacity described above for and on behalf of General Motors Company as of the date first written above.

GENERAL MOTORS COMPANY  

Executive Compensation Committee

E. Neville Isdell (Chair)David Bonderman
James J. MulvaPatricia F. Russo
Theodore M. SolsoCarol M. Stephenson




51
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




The following Audit Committee Report shall not be deemed incorporated by reference by any general statement incorporating by reference this proxy statement or any portion hereof into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and shall not otherwise be deemed filed thereunder.

Audit Committee Report

The Audit Committee of the General Motors Board of Directors is a standing committee composed of fivesix directors who meet the independence, financial expertise, and other qualification requirements of the NYSE and applicable securities laws. It operates under a written charter adopted by the Committee and approved by the Board of Directors, which is posted on our website atwww.gm.com/investor, under “Corporate Governance.” The members of the Committee are Thomas M. Schoewe (Chair), Erroll B. Davis, Jr., Robert D. Krebs, Kathryn V. Marinello, Admiral Michael G. Mullen and Theodore M. Solso. The Board has determined that Mr. Schoewe, Mr. Davis, Mr. Krebs, Ms. Marinello, and Mr. Solso qualify as “audit committee financial experts” as defined by the SEC’s regulations. The Committee annually selects the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm.

Management is responsible for the Company’s internal control and the financial reporting process and has delivered its opinion on the strength of controls. The independent registered public accounting firm is responsible for performing an independent audit of the Company’s consolidated financial statements and opining on the effectiveness of those controls in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (the “PCAOB”) and issuing their reports thereon. As provided in its charter, the Committee’s responsibilities include monitoring and overseeing these processes.

Consistent with its charter responsibilities, the Committee has met and held discussions with management and Deloitte & Touche LLP (“Deloitte”), the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for 2012,2013, regarding the Company’s audited financial statements as of December 31, 20122013 and for the year then ended. In this context, management represented to the Committee that the Company’s consolidated financial statements were prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. The Committee has reviewed and discussed the consolidated financial statements with management and the independent registered public accounting firm and discussed with the independent registered public accounting firm matters required to be discussed by the standards of the PCAOB.

The Company’s independent registered public accounting firm has also provided to the Committee the written disclosures required by the applicable requirements of the PCAOB regarding the independent registered public accounting firm’s communication with the Committee concerning independence. The Committee has also considered whether the provision of non-audit services is compatible with maintaining the independent registered public accounting firm’s independence. The Committee concluded that Deloitte is independent from the Company and its management.

Based upon the Committee’s discussions with management and the independent registered public accounting firm as described in this report and the Committee’s review of the representation of management and the report of the independent registered public accounting firm to the Committee, the Committee recommended to the Board of Directors and the Board of Directors approved the inclusion of the audited consolidated financial statements in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012,2013, filed with the SEC.

Audit Committee

Thomas M. Schoewe (Chair)

Erroll B. Davis, Jr.

Robert D. Krebs

Kathryn V. Marinello

Michael G. Mullen
Theodore M. Solso






52
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




Fees Paid to Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Audit Committee retained Deloitte to audit the Company’s consolidated financial statements and the effectiveness of internal controls, as of and for the year ended December 31, 2012.2013. The Company and its subsidiaries also retained Deloitte and certain of its affiliates, as well as other accounting and consulting firms, to provide various other services in 2012.

2013.

The services performed by Deloitte in 20122013 were pre-approved in accordance with the pre-approval policy and procedures established by the Audit Committee. This policy requires that during its first meeting of the year, the Audit Committee will be presented, for consideration, a description of the Audit-Related, Tax, and All Other Services expected to be performed by Deloitte during the fiscal year. Any requests for such services for $1 million or more not contemplated and approved during the first meeting must thereafter be submitted to the Audit Committee (or the Chair of the Audit Committee in an urgent case) for specific pre-approval. Requests for services less than $1 million individually must be pre-approved by the Audit Committee Chair and reported to the full Audit Committee at its next regularly scheduled meeting. The independent registered public accounting firm selected for the following year presents the proposed annual Audit services and their related fees to the Audit Committee for approval on an audit-year basis.

The Audit Committee determined that all services provided by Deloitte in 20122013 were compatible with maintaining the independence of Deloitte.

The following table summarizes Deloitte fees billed or expected to be billed in connection with 20122013 services. For comparison purposes, actual billings for 20112012 services are also displayed.

Type of Fees  

2012

(In millions)

  

2011

(In millions)

Annual Audit Services

  $36  $38

Audit-Related Services

    $6      6

Tax Services

    $5      5

Subtotal

  $47  $49

All Other Services

   —   —

Total

  $47  $49

Type of Fees
2013
(In millions)
2012
(In millions)
Annual Audit Services$38
$36
Audit-Related Services8
6
Tax Services8
5
Subtotal$54
$47
All Other Services

Total$54
$47
Audit Fees:$36 $38 million for the audit of the Company’s annual consolidated financial statements, including reviews of the interim financial statements contained in the Company’s Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and audits of statutory financial statements.

Audit-Related Fees:$6 $8 million for assurance and related services that are traditionally performed by the independent registered public accounting firm. More specifically, these services include employee benefit plan audits, due diligence related to mergers and acquisitions, accounting consultations and audits in connection with proposed acquisitions, internal control consultations, attestation services that are not required by statute or regulation, and consultation concerning financial accounting and reporting standards.

Tax Fees:$58 million for tax compliance, tax planning, and tax advice. Tax compliance involves preparation of original and amended tax returns and claims for refund. Tax planning and tax advice encompass a diverse range of services, including assistance with tax audits and appeals, tax advice related to mergers and acquisitions and employee benefit plans, and requests for rulings or technical advice from taxing authorities.

All Other Fees: The Company did not engage Deloitte for any significant services for the year ended December 31, 2012.2013.



53
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




Item No. 2

Ratification of the Selection of Deloitte & Touche LLP for 2013

2014

The Audit Committee has selected Deloitte as GM’s independent registered public accounting firm for 2013,2014, the Board of Directors has concurred in an advisory capacity with that selection, and the selection is now being submitted to the stockholders at the annual meeting for their ratification or rejection. If the stockholders do not ratify the selection of Deloitte as the independent registered public accounting firm, the Audit Committee will reconsider whether to engage Deloitte but may ultimately determine to engage that firm or another audit firm without re-submitting the matter to stockholders. Among the factors the Audit Committee may consider in making this determination are the difficulty and expense of changing independent registered public accounting firms in the middle of a fiscal year. Even if the stockholders ratify the selection of Deloitte, the Audit Committee may in its sole discretion terminate the engagement of Deloitte and direct the appointment of another independent registered public accounting firm at any time during the year, although it has no current intention to do so.

Deloitte and its predecessor companies have been GM's or General Motors Corporation's auditors since 1918. The Audit Committee considers Deloitte well qualified, with offices or affiliates in or near most locations in the U.S. and other countries where General Motors operates.

Representatives of Deloitte will attend the annual meeting and will have the opportunity to make any statement they wish. They will also be available to respond to appropriate questions.

The Board of Directors recommends a voteFOR the proposal to ratify the selection of Deloitte & Touche LLP as the independent registered public accounting firm for GM and its subsidiaries for 2013.

The Board of Directors recommends a vote FOR the proposal to ratify the selection of Deloitte & Touche LLP as the independent registered public accounting firm for GM and its subsidiaries for 2014.
Item No. 3

Advisory Vote to Approve Executive Compensation

Executive compensation is an important matter for our stockholders.

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act requires that we provide you with the opportunity to vote to approve, on a non-binding advisory basis, the compensation of our Named Executive Officers, as disclosed in this proxy statement in accordance with the compensation disclosure rules of the SEC.

In 2012,2013, more than 9798 percent of the votes cast at the annual meeting were “favorable” to our Say-on-Pay proposal. With this result in mind and recognizing the continued impact of UST requirements in 2013, the Compensation Committee has approved the compensation arrangements described in our CD&A beginning on page 3331 for our Named Executive Officers. We urge you to read the CD&A section of this proxy statement for a more complete understanding of our executive compensation plans, including our compensation philosophy and objectives and the 20122013 compensation of Named Executive Officers.

When we no longer comply with UST requirements, in accordance with SEC regulations we will ask stockholders whether they would prefer to participate in the advisory Say-on-Pay vote every year, every two years, or every three years.

We are asking stockholders to vote on the following resolution:

RESOLVED, that the compensation paid to the company’s Named Executive Officers, as disclosed pursuant to Item 402 of Regulation S-K, including the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, compensation tables and the related narrative discussion, is hereby APPROVED.

As an advisory vote, this proposal is non-binding. Although the vote is non-binding, the Board of Directors and the Compensation Committee value the opinions of our stockholders and will consider the outcome of the vote when making future compensation decisions for Named Executive Officers.

Vote Required

The affirmative vote of a majority of the shares of our Common Stock present or represented by proxy and entitled to vote at the annual meeting is required for approval of this proposal. If you own shares through a

broker, bank, or other nominee, you must instruct your broker, bank, or other nominee on how to vote your shares to ensure that your shares will be represented and voted on this proposal.

The Board of Directors recommends a vote FOR the advisory proposal to approve executive compensation.

54
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




Item No. 4
Advisory Vote to Approve the Frequency of a Stockholder Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act provides that stockholders be given the opportunity to vote, on a non-binding advisory basis, for how frequently we should seek advisory votes in the future on the compensation of our Named Executive Officers, as disclosed in accordance with the compensation disclosure rules of the SEC. By voting with respect to this Proposal, stockholders may indicate whether they would prefer that we conduct future advisory votes to approve the compensation of the Named Executive Officers once every one, two, or three years. Stockholders also may abstain from casting a vote on this proposal.
Our Board of Directors believes that an annual advisory vote to approve the compensation of the Named Executive Officers will allow our stockholders to provide timely, direct input on the Company’s executive compensation philosophy, policies and practices disclosed in the proxy statement each year. The Board has determined that an annual vote is therefore consistent with the Company’s interest in obtaining your input on executive compensation matters. The vote is advisory, which means that the vote is not binding on the Company, our Board of Directors, or the Compensation Committee.
Stockholders may cast a vote on the preferred voting frequency by selecting the option of one year, two years, or three years (or abstain) when voting in response to the resolution set forth below.
We will present the following resolution to the meeting:
RESOLVED, that the stockholders determine, on an advisory basis, whether the preferred frequency of an advisory vote on the executive compensation of the Company’s Named Executive Officers as set forth in the Company’s proxy statement should be every one year, every two years, or every three years.
As an advisory vote, this proposal is non-binding. Although the vote is non-binding, the Board of Directors and the Compensation Committee value the opinions of our stockholders and will consider the outcome of the vote when determining how often to submit an advisory vote on compensation for Named Executive Officers to our stockholders.
Vote Required
If the option of "one year," "two years," or "three years" receives votes from the majority of shares present in person or by proxy and entitled to vote, it will be deemed to win this non-binding advisory vote. The Board of Directors intends to adopt the option that receives the most votes . If you own shares through a broker, bank, or other nominee, you must instruct your broker, bank, or other nominee on how to vote your shares to ensure that your shares will be represented and voted on this proposal.

The Board of Directors recommends that you vote for the option of every ONE YEAR as the preferred frequency for a stockholder advisory vote on executive compensation.

Item No. 5
Approval of the General Motors Company 2014 Short-Term Incentive Plan
The Board of Directors recommends for stockholder approval the General Motors Company 2014 Short-Term Incentive Plan (the “2014 STIP”), including the menu of performance measures that may be used for awards thereunder. Upon approval, the 2014 STIP, a voteFORcash-based plan, will replace the advisory proposalCompany’s existing Short-Term Incentive Plan. The awards approved in January 2014 for performance during 2014 described in the CD&A on page 31 were awarded under the 2009 STIP, and the Company intends to approvemake awards under the 2014 STIP , if approved, starting in 2015.

Background

55
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




The Company’s prospective executive compensation.compensation program is designed so that a meaningful portion of each executive’s total compensation opportunity is placed at-risk through awards made under short-term and long-term incentive plans. The 2014 STIP will provide the Company with the ability to align the global executive team toward the achievement of Company performance objectives by conditioning annual cash incentive awards on performance conditions established by the Compensation Committee, which is comprised of independent directors. The final value of awards will be based upon the achievement of specified financial, operational, and individual goals.
The 2014 STIP has been designed to meet the requirements of Section 162(m) of the IRC for qualified performance-based compensation so that the Compensation Committee has the ability to issue awards to our senior executives and preserve deductibility for the Company with respect to those awards.
The 2014 STIP document is attached as Exhibit A, and the description set forth below is qualified in its entirety by the complete 2014 STIP document.
Summary of General Motors Company 2014 Short-Term Incentive Plan
Under the 2014 STIP, the Compensation Committee may grant awards from March 11, 2014 through May 31, 2019, subject to stockholder approval of the 2014 STIP.
Key ProvisionsDescription
Eligible ParticipantsEmployees of the Company and its subsidiaries, including employees who are subject to the limitations of Section 162(m) of the IRC, which generally include our CEO and certain other most-highly compensated executive officers, referred to as “Covered Employees.”
Plan AdministrationThe 2014 STIP is administered by the Compensation Committee, which has the authority to: identify the eligible individuals who will receive awards; determine the target amounts and terms and conditions of awards; interpret and administer the 2014 STIP; establish, amend, suspend or waive any rules and regulations under the 2014 STIP, and make any other determinations or take any other actions to administer the 2014 STIP. Subject to any limits established by the Compensation Committee, the Compensation Committee may delegate to one or more members of the Compensation Committee or officers of the Company (including the CEO) the authority to establish awards and take other actions under the 2014 STIP; provided that officers of the Company may not be delegated authority with respect to awards for Covered Employees whose awards are intended to constitute qualified performance-based compensation for purposes of Section 162(m) of the IRC.
Limitations of Individual AwardsIn any given calendar year, no award to a Covered Employee that is intended to constitute qualified performance-based compensation for purposes of Section 162(m) of the IRC may pay out at more than $7.5 million under the 2014 STIP.
Target AwardsThe Compensation Committee will establish the terms of awards under the 2014 STIP, including the applicable performance period, the participating employees, the target awards (including any minimum or maximum amounts), the applicable performance conditions and targeted achievement levels, and any other applicable terms and conditions.
Final AwardsAfter the end of the performance period, the Compensation Committee will determine the final awards by applying the performance conditions and making any adjustments (upward or downward) that the Compensation Committee deems appropriate, subject to the limitations applicable to Covered Employees whose awards are intended to constitute qualified performance-based compensation under Section 162(m) of the IRC.

56
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




Limits on 162(m) Qualified Awards
For any award to a Covered Employee that is intended to be qualified performance-based compensation for purposes of preserving tax deductibility under Section 162(m) of the IRC, during the beginning of the performance period, the Compensation Committee will establish and approve in writing one or more of the performance measures from the list described below, the targeted achievement levels for such performance measures, and an objective formula or methodology to determine the maximum amount payable under the award. After the end of the performance period, the Compensation Committee will certify in writing the extent to which the applicable performance measures have been satisfied and the amount payable with respect to the award. The Compensation Committee may then adjust such maximum amount downward as it deems appropriate, including to reflect any additional performance factors.

The performance measures from which the Compensation Committee may choose for awards to Covered Employees intended to be qualified for purposes of Section 162(m) of the IRC, are as follows:
Asset turnover, cash flow, contribution margin, cost objectives, cost reduction, earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT), earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA), earnings per share, economic value added, free cash flow, increase in customer base, inventory turnover, liquidity, market share, net income, net income margin, operating cash flow, operating profit margin, pre-tax income, productivity, profit margin, quality (internal or external measures), return on assets, return on net assets, return on capital, ROIC, return on equity, revenue, revenue growth, stockholder value, stock price, total shareholder return, and/or warranty experience.

These measures may be based on an absolute or relative basis (e.g., to the performance of other companies or an index).
AdjustmentsSubject to any limitations under Section 162(m) of the IRC, the Compensation Committee may modify performance objectives as it deems appropriate and equitable to account for any of the following: (i) the effects of currency fluctuations, (ii) any or all items that are excluded from the calculation of non-GAAP earnings as reflected in any Company press release or Form 8-K filing relating to an earnings announcement, (iii) asset write-downs, (iv) litigation or claim judgments or settlements, (v) the effect of changes in tax law, accounting principles or other such laws or provisions affecting reported results, (vi) reorganization and restructuring programs or capital return strategies, (vii) significant volume changes in any market or region, (viii) significant impacts or limitations to our production capacity, (ix) macro-economic or political assumption changes, (x) extraordinary and non-recurring accounting items, (xi) any other extraordinary or non-operational items.
Payment of AwardsFinal awards will be paid in cash after the end of the performance period; however, the Company may permit or require the deferral of awards pursuant to a deferred compensation plan or arrangement.
Clawback/RecoupmentAny awards issued under the 2014 STIP (including any amounts payable with respect to such awards) will be subject to any clawback or recoupment policies the Company has in place from time to time. The Company currently maintains the General Motors Policy on Recoupment of Incentive Compensation available on our website, www.gm.com/investor, under "Corporate Governance."

57
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




Effect of Termination of EmploymentExcept as the Compensation Committee may determine in any individual case, awards will be treated as set forth below upon a participant's termination of employment prior to payment of the final award.

● Death or Disability: The final award will be determined and paid after the end of the applicable performance period.

● Full career status termination: The final award will be determined and paid on a prorated basis after the end of the applicable performance period.

● Termination Pursuant to Approved Separation Agreement or Program: The participant will have no right to any portion of the final award.

● Other terminations: The final award will be forfeited.
Plan TermThe 2014 STIP will become effective upon approval by stockholders, and no new awards will be issued under the 2014 STIP after May 31, 2019.
New Plan Benefits.

There are approximately 200,000 employees eligible to receive awards under the 2014 STIP, however, we expect that awards will be made to up to approximately 1,600 executives annually, including approximately 14 executive officers of the Company. The benefits or amounts that will be received by or allocated to each executive and employee, and executives and employees in the aggregate, are not presently determinable. The 2014 STIP is being presented for stockholder approval in order to permit the Compensation Committee to make awards under the 2014 STIP that constitute “qualified performance-based compensation” under Section 162(m) of the IRC. If the 2014 STIP is not approved by stockholders, it will not be adopted.

The Board of Directors recommends a vote FOR the proposal to approve the 2014 Short-Term Incentive Plan.

Item No. 46
Approval of the General Motors Company 2014 Long-Term Incentive Plan
The Board of Directors recommends for stockholder approval the General Motors Company 2014 Long-Term Incentive Plan that would authorize up to 60 million shares to be granted under awards authorized by the Compensation Committee, which is comprised of independent directors. Upon approval, the 2014 LTIP will replace the 2009 LTIP and the SSP, cancelling the shares available for future awards under those plans, and going forward, will be our only equity compensation plan.
Background

The Board of Directors and the Compensation Committee believe that long-term equity-based compensation is a critical component of our executive compensation structure and serves to link the interests of our executives and stockholders. The Compensation Committee recommends that stockholders approve the 2014 LTIP to continue and enhance our long-term incentive compensation program and incorporate a performance-based component. The proposed 2014 LTIP provides for a variety of different types of awards from which the Compensation Committee can choose, including restricted stock, RSUs, stock options, stock appreciation rights ("SARs"), and performance-based awards. The additional shares available and the inclusion of performance-based and other types of awards under the 2014 LTIP will enable the Compensation Committee to deliver a significant portion of compensation in the form of equity, incorporate a meaningful performance-based component to provide targeted long-term incentives to our executives, and exercise the flexibility to adapt our compensation program to changes in our business objectives and the competitive environment in which we compete for talent. Our core long-term incentive program will initially include time-vesting RSUs and performance-based stock units, although other awards may be made from time to time as approved by the Compensation Committee. Our CEO may also recommend special awards to aid in retention of critical talent and/or reward for exemplary performance from time to time.


58
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




In determining the number of shares requested, the Company took several factors under consideration, including the 2014 compensation program described in the CD&A on page 31 of this Proxy Statement, the compensation levels we anticipate in the future, the types of awards the 2014 LTIP provides for and the potential range of shares issuable upon achievement of the vesting and performance conditions. In considering these factors, we anticipate an annual burn rate under the 2014 LTIP of less than 1 percent of the current number of shares of outstanding Common Stock on a fully-diluted basis. However, it is difficult for the Company to predict the annual burn rate or how long the shares available under the 2014 LTIP will last because the Company does not have a recent history of equity incentive award grant practice on which it can rely to determine potential future awards expectations. If future long-term incentive awards follow the amount and design of the proposed 2014-2016 LTI Awards described below, the 2014 LTIP share pool is likely to be adequate to fund long-term equity awards for at least three years of grants (possibly more), depending on multiple factors (e.g., stock price movement, employee turnover, etc.).
Key Features
We are proposing to authorize 60 million shares for issuance under the 2014 LTIP (representing 3.74 percent of the outstanding shares of Common Stock as of the record date), which may be granted in the form of stock options, SARs, RSUs, restricted stock, performance awards, or other share-based awards. Key features of the 2014 LTIP and the Compensation Committee’s intended implementation of the 2014 LTIP include:
Annual burn rate is expected to be less than 1 percent per year, consistent with our historical grant rate;
Total potential dilution, including awards outstanding and the entire newly authorized 60 million share pool, will be 4.52 percent of the outstanding Common Stock as of the record date on a fully diluted basis;
Awards that expire, are cancelled, forfeited or otherwise terminate without the delivery of shares will again become available for grant, but shares surrendered or withheld in payment for any exercise price or taxes related to an award will not again become available for grant;
Repricing of stock options or SARs, or any other action that has the effect of reducing the exercise price of options or SARs, as well as the exchange of underwater stock options or SARs for cash or any other security, will be prohibited without stockholder approval (other than adjustments in connection with a corporate transaction or restructuring); and
The plan has been designed to meet the requirements of Section 162(m) of the IRC, for qualified performance-based compensation, and, therefore, the Compensation Committee will have the ability to grant awards that are intended to be deductible under Section 162(m) of the IRC.
The 2014 LTIP document is attached as Exhibit B and the 2014 LTIP description set forth below is qualified in its entirety by reference to the complete text of the 2014 LTIP.

59
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




Summary of General Motors Company 2014 Long-Term Incentive Plan

Key ProvisionsDescription
Eligible ParticipantsEmployees, consultants, advisors, and non-employee directors.
Shares Subject to PlanThe 2014 LTIP authorizes a pool of 60,000,000 shares of Common Stock from which stock options, SARs, RSUs, restricted stock, performance awards, and other stock-based awards may be granted. No more than 60,000,000 shares may be issued in respect of incentive stock options.
Plan AdministrationThe 2014 LTIP is administered by the Compensation Committee, which has the authority to: identify the eligible individuals who will receive awards; determine the amounts and terms and conditions of awards (including vesting terms); interpret and administer the 2014 LTIP; prescribe the form of award documentation under the 2014 LTIP; establish, amend, suspend or waive any rules and regulations under the 2014 LTIP, and make any other determinations or take any other actions to administer the 2014 LTIP. Subject to the limits established by the Compensation Committee, the Compensation Committee may delegate to one or more members of the Compensation Committee or officers of the Company (including the CEO) the authority to grant awards and take other actions under the 2014 LTIP; provided that officers of the Company may not be delegated authority with respect to awards for executive officers of the Company.
Limitations of Individual Awards
In any given calendar year, for awards intended to qualify as performance-based compensation for purposes of Section 162(m) of the IRC, the following limitations apply:
● The number of shares underlying stock options and SARs issued to any individual may not exceed 1,000,000.
● The maximum number of shares under awards of restricted shares, RSUs, and performance-based awards issued to any individual may not exceed 1,000,000.
● The maximum payout under any performance awards designated in cash issued to any individual may not exceed $20 million.
Award TypesStock options, SARs, RSUs, restricted stock, performance awards, and other stock-based awards.
Stock Options and SARsThe Compensation Committee is authorized to grant stock options to purchase shares of Common Stock (including incentive stock options) and SARs (which provide the right to receive a payment or a number of shares equal to the increase in value above the exercise price). The exercise price of stock options and SARs may not be lower than the fair market value of the underlying shares on the date of grant. The term of any stock option or SAR will not be more than ten years and two days (or for incentive stock options, ten years) from the date of grant.
Restricted Stock and RSUsThe Compensation Committee is authorized to grant restricted stock and RSUs (which provide the right to receive the value of the underlying shares, either in cash, shares, or a combination thereof).
Performance AwardsThe Compensation Committee is authorized to grant performance awards, which may be denominated in cash, shares or units, or a combination thereof, to be earned upon the achievement of performance conditions specified by the Compensation Committee.

60
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




Performance Measures
If the Compensation Committee intends for a performance award to constitute qualified performance-based compensation for purposes of Section 162(m) of the IRC, the award will be subject to a formula established in advance based on the achievement during the performance period of one or more of the following performance criteria, which may be based on an absolute or relative measure (e.g., relative to the performance of other companies or an index):

Asset turnover, cash flow, contribution margin, cost objectives, cost reduction, earning before interest and taxes (EBIT), earning before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA), earnings per share, economic value added, free cash flow, increase in customer base, inventory turnover, liquidity, market share, net income, net income margin, operating cash flow, operating profit margin, pre-tax income, productivity, profit margin, quality (internal or external measures), return on assets, return on net assets, return on capital, return on invested capital, return on equity, revenue, revenue growth, stockholder value, stock price, total shareholder return, and/or warranty experience.

For performance awards not intended to constitute qualified performance-based compensation for purposes of Section 162(m) of the IRC, the Compensation Committee may select additional performance criteria.
AdjustmentsSubject to any limitations under Section 162(m) of the IRC, the Compensation Committee may modify performance objectives as it deems appropriate and equitable to account for any of the following: (i) the effects of currency fluctuations, (ii) items that are excluded from the calculation of non-GAAP earnings as reflected in any Company press release or Form 8-K filing relating to an earnings announcement, (iii) asset write-downs, (iv) litigation or claim judgments or settlements, (v) the effect of changes in tax law, accounting principles or other such laws or provisions affecting reported results, (vi) reorganization and restructuring programs or capital return strategies, (vii) significant volume changes in any market or region, (viii) significant impacts or limitations to production capacity, (ix) macro-economic or political assumption changes, (x) extraordinary and non-recurring accounting items, and (xi) any other extraordinary or non-operational items.
Dividend Equivalent RightsRestricted stock, RSUs, and performance awards will generally provide dividend equivalent rights, which will accumulate and be paid upon vesting or settlement of awards; provided that no dividend payments will be made with respect to shares that are not ultimately earned and settled. Stock options and SARs will not be eligible for dividend equivalent rights.
Minimum Vesting Period
Stock options and SARs: In general, no portion of an award is intended to vest prior to the first anniversary of the vesting commencement date; however, the Compensation Committee may provide for shorter vesting if appropriate under the circumstances.

Restricted Stock and RSUs: Awards will generally vest in whole or in part over a period of not less than three years from the vesting commencement date; however, the Compensation Committee may provide for shorter vesting, if appropriate under the circumstances.
Minimum Performance Period
The minimum performance period for performance awards is one year.
Performance awards presented for approval in the table below are subject to a three-year performance period.

61
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




Effect of Termination of Service
Except as otherwise provided for in an award agreement, or as the Compensation Committee may determine in any individual case, a participant’s outstanding awards will be treated as set forth below upon his or her termination of service:

Death:
● Stock options and SARs immediately vest and remain exercisable until the earlier of three years after death or the original expiration date.
● Restricted stock and RSUs vest and are settled within 90 days after death.
● Performance awards will have any service-based vesting waived, will be earned based upon the achievement of the applicable performance conditions, and will be paid or settled on the scheduled settlement date.

Disability:
● Stock options and SARs continue to vest and become exercisable in accordance with the vesting schedule and remain exercisable until the original expiration date.
● Restricted stock and RSUs continue to vest and settle on the scheduled settlement dates.
● Performance awards will have any service-based vesting waived, will be earned based upon the achievement of the applicable performance conditions, and will be paid or settled on the scheduled settlement date.

Full career status termination (age 55 with ten years of service or age 62 and older):
● Stock options and SARs continue to vest and become exercisable in accordance with the vesting schedule and remain exercisable until the original expiration date.
● Restricted stock and RSUs continue to vest and settle on the original settlement dates; provided that the amount of the award will be prorated if termination occurs prior to the one-year anniversary of grant (or if earlier, the vesting commencement date as set forth in the award document).
● Performance awards will have any service-based vesting waived, will be earned based upon the achievement of the applicable performance conditions, and will be paid or settled on the original settlement date or dates; provided that the award will be prorated if termination occurs within the first year of the performance period.

Termination Pursuant to Approved Separation Agreement or Program:
● The participant will not be entitled to retain any portion of any award

Other terminations:
● Upon any other termination of service, the participant will not be entitled to retain any unvested portion of any award. Vested stock options and SARs will remain exercisable until the earlier of 90 days after termination or the original expiration date.
Change in ControlThe 2014 LTIP generally provides for “double-trigger” change in control protection such that if awards are continued or converted into similar awards of the successor company, the awards will be subject to accelerated vesting in the event of a participant's termination of service by the Company without cause or by the participant for good reason within 24 months after the change in control. If awards are not continued or converted into similar awards of the successor company, then the awards will have accelerated vesting upon the change in control.
Clawback/RecoupmentAny awards granted under the 2014 LTIP (including any amounts or benefits payable under such awards) will be subject to any clawback or recoupment policies the Company has in place from time to time. The Company currently maintains the General Motors Policy on Recoupment of Incentive Compensation available on our website, www.gm.com/investor, under "Corporate Governance."
Plan TermThe 2014 LTIP is effective as of March 11, 2014, subject to the approval of stockholders, and no new awards will be granted under the 2014 LTIP after March 31, 2024 or such earlier time as the number of shares available for grant is exhausted or the Board terminates the 2014 LTIP.

62
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




Awards Subject to Plan Approval
Under the Company's prospective compensation policies, a significant proportion of the total compensation of the Company's executive team will be linked to the achievements of objective performance criteria approved by the Compensation Committee and individual service to the Company. 2014 LTI Awards proposed to be granted under the 2014 LTIP are composed of both RSUs and performance awards, with an increasing proportion of the LTI being in the form of performance awards for our most senior executives.
The Compensation Committee approved the long-term incentive awards presented below, subject to stockholder approval of the 2014 LTIP. These awards may be earned over the period 2014-2016 (the “2014-2016 LTI Awards”). Each 2014-2016 LTI Award consists of RSUs and share-settled performance awards in the form of PSUs. The RSUs will vest ratably on an annual basis over the period 2014-2016, based on continued service (subject to the termination of service provisions of the 2014 LTIP). The PSUs will be earned at a level between 0 to 200 percent of target, based on the achievement of performance conditions relating to ROIC and market share over a 3-year performance period from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2016, with the maximum payout being 200 percent of target. PSUs that are earned will then vest based on continued service through the settlement date (subject to the termination of service provisions of the 2014 LTIP). The proportion of each participant’s 2014-2016 LTI Award that is composed of PSUs ranges from 50 percent up to 75 percent for our most senior executives and NEOs. Each unit will have a value equal to one share of Common Stock. The earned PSUs, if any, will be settled in 2017 in shares of Common Stock. Award values presented below will be converted to units of Common Stock on their grant date which, if the 2014 LTIP is approved by stockholders, will be June 11, 2014. The proposed 2014-2016 LTI Awards are as follows:

2014-2016 LTI Awards
 
RSUs
($)
Target PSUs
($)
Mary T. Barra, Executive Vice President, Global Product Development, Purchasing & Supply
Chain (1)
2,500,000
7,500,000
Daniel Ammann, Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer (2)1,137,500
3,412,500
Karl Thomas-Neumann, Executive Vice President & President Europe675,000
2,025,000
Executive Officers (as a group, excluding the above-named officers)4,314,875
12,944,625
Other Employees (as a group, excluding the above-named officers and the above-listed executive group)78,358,739
118,124,606
   Total$86,986,114$144,006,731
(1)Mary T. Barra was elected by the Board of Directors to replace Mr. Akerson as CEO effective January 15, 2014
(2)Daniel Ammann was named President of the Company January 15, 2014
The 2014 LTIP and 2014-2016 LTI Awards will become effective with stockholder approval. The Compensation Committee determined that the appropriate vesting commencement date for the RSU portion of the 2014-2016 LTI Awards would be February 13, 2014 to reflect the intended timeframe for the RSU portion of the annual LTI grants going forward. In this particular circumstance, therefore, the vesting period for the RSU portion of the awards will be less than three years from the date of grant. There are approximately 200,000 employees and 10 non-employee directors eligible to receive awards under the 2014 LTIP, as well as certain of the Company’s consultants and advisors (who have not yet been identified); however, we expect that awards will be made to up to approximately 1,600 employees. We do not currently intend to make awards to non-employee directors, but have provided the flexibility to do so if deemed appropriate under the Board’s compensation structure.
Federal Income Tax Consequences for Stock Options. Applicable disclosure rules require us to include a brief summary of the federal income tax consequences applicable to stock options that may be granted under the 2014 LTIP:

63
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




Non-Qualified Stock Options: When an optionee exercises an stock option, the amount by which the fair market value of the stock underlying the stock option on the date of exercise exceeds the exercise price of the stock option is taxed as ordinary income to the optionee in the year of exercise and generally will be allowed as a deduction for federal income tax purposes to the Company in the same year. When an optionee disposes of shares acquired by the exercise of the stock option, any amount received in excess of the fair market value of the shares on the date of exercise will be treated as a long- or short-term capital gain to the optionee, depending upon the holding period of the shares. If the amount received is less than the market value of the shares on the date of exercise, the loss will be treated as a long- or short-term capital loss, depending upon the holding period of the shares.
Incentive Stock Options: When an optionee exercises an incentive stock option while employed by the Company or a subsidiary or within the three-month (one year for disability) period after termination of employment, no ordinary income (other than alternative minimum tax) will be recognized by the optionee at that time. If the shares acquired upon exercise are not disposed of until more than two years after the stock option was granted and one year after the date of exercise, the excess of the sale proceeds over the aggregate option price of such shares will be treated as long-term capital gain to the optionee, and the Company will not be entitled to a tax deduction under such circumstances. However, if the shares are disposed of prior to such date (a “disqualifying disposition”), any portion of the proceeds representing the excess of the fair market value of such shares at the time of exercise over the aggregate option price (but generally not more than the amount of gain realized on the disposition) will generally be ordinary income to the optionee at the time of such disqualifying disposition and the Company generally will be entitled to a federal tax deduction equal to the amount of ordinary income so recognized by the optionee. If an incentive stock option is exercised more than three months (one year for disability) after termination of employment, the tax consequences are the same as described above for non-qualified stock options.
The following table represents shares authorized for issuance under the 2009 Long-Term Incentive Plan and the Salary Stock Plan as of December 31, 2013. All of these equity compensation plans were approved by security holders. The features of these plans are discussed further in Note 23 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, "Stock Incentive Plans" in our 2013 Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Equity Compensation Plan Information for 2013

 
Number of Securities
to be Issued Upon
Exercise of
Outstanding
Options,
Warrants, and
Rights

Weighted-Average
Exercise Price of
Outstanding
Options,
Warrants, and
Rights (2)
Number of Securities
Remaining Available
For Future Issuance
Under Equity
Compensation
Plans (3)
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders (1)19,000,000 $ 31,000,000 
(1)The shares listed represent outstanding share awards and shares available under the 2009 LTIP and SSP.
(2)The awards under the 2009 LTIP as amended January 13, 2014 and SSP as amended January 13, 2014 are RSUs. The RSUs do not have an exercise price, and in limited situations certain executives could settle their awards in cash due to tax considerations of certain countries.
(3)Excludes securities reflected in the first column, “Number of Securities to be Issued Upon Exercise of Outstanding Options, Warrants and Rights.”
The Board of Directors recommends a vote FOR the proposal to approve the General Motors 2014 Long-Term Incentive Plan



64
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




Item No. 7
Stockholder Proposal Regarding Independent Board Chairman

Cumulative Voting

    Mr. John Chevedden, 2215 Nelson Ave., No. 205, Redondo Beach, CA 90278, owner of approximately 100 shares of Common Stock, has given notice that he intends to present for action at the annual meeting the following stockholder proposal:

RESOLVED:Resolved: Cumulative Voting. Shareholders recommend that our Board take the steps necessary to adopt cumulative voting. Cumulative voting means that each shareholder may cast as many votes as equal to number of shares held, multiplied by the number of directors to be elected. A shareholder may cast all such cumulated votes for a single candidate or focus on a few candidates. Under cumulative voting shareholders can withhold votes from poor-performing directors in order to cast multiple votes for other director candidates. This is an important protection for shareholders.
Cumulative voting also allows a significant group of shareholders to elect a director of its choice – safeguarding minority shareholder interests and bringing independent perspectives to Board decisions.
Cumulative voting could also give us a more meaningful opportunity to withhold votes for a number of GM directors associated with bankruptcies. Erroll Davis and Kathryn Marinello, both ironically on our audit committee, were negatively flagged by GMI Ratings, an independent investment research firm, due to their director duties at General Motors when GM filed for bankruptcy. David Bonderman, who received our highest negative votes – a whopping 24 percent and was on our executive pay committee, was negatively flagged due to his director duties at Magellan Health Services when it filed for bankruptcy.
Cumulative voting won 54%—support at Aetna and 51%—support at Alaska Air. It also received 53%—support at General Motors in two annual elections. The Council of Institutional Investors www.cii.org and CalPERS recommended adoption of this proposal topic.
This proposal should also be more favorably evaluated due to our Company’s clearly improvable environmental, social and corporate governance performance as reported in 2013:
GMI rated our company D for its directors. David Bonderman and Patricia Russo were over-burdened with director duties at 4 companies each. Stephen Girsky was another inside director in addition to our CEO. Dan Akerson, our 2013 Chairman and CEO, hand picked Michael Mullen as a GM director. Akerson and Mullen both graduated from Annapolis. Mullen said, ‘I do not know about business…’ GMI also rated our company D for accounting. GM announced it expected to write off up to $1 billion to withdraw Chevrolet from Europe. GMI also expressed concern regarding related party transactions at GM.
GMI said other limits on shareholder rights included:
Our board’s unilateral ability to amend company bylaws without shareholder approval
Lack of fair price provisions to help insure that all shareholders are treated fairly
Limits on the right of shareholders to convene a special or emergency shareholder meeting
Limits on the right of shareholders to take action by written consent
GMI rated our Company D for environmental issues and said GM should establish links between its incentive pay for executives and the effective management of its social and environmental impacts.
Returning to the core topic of this proposal from the context of our clearly improvable corporate governance, please vote to protect shareholder value:”


65
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




The Board of Directors recommends a vote AGAINST the adoption of this stockholder proposal for the following reasons:
    GM’s present system for the election of directors, like that of most other public companies, provides that each share of our Common Stock is entitled to one vote for each available Board seat. This system allows all stockholders to vote on the basis of their share ownership. Our present voting standard provides that every director is elected or re-elected only if the votes cast “for” his or her election exceed the votes cast “against” his or her election. The Board believes this approach is the fairest way to elect the Company’s directors in uncontested elections, as well as the method most likely to produce a Board that will effectively represent the interests of all GM’s stockholders.
     In contrast, cumulative voting, which would permit stockholders owning less than a majority of all shares to elect a director, could promote special interest representation on the Board. This proposal, if successful, could give a small stockholder group disproportionate impact on the election of directors, possibly leading to the election of one or more directors who advocate the positions of the groups that elected them, rather than working in the best interest of all stockholders. If cumulative voting leads directors to support the special interests of the constituencies that elected them, the resulting partisanship and divisiveness could impair the Board’s ability to operate effectively as a governing body, to the detriment of all stockholders. In addition, by focusing on the election of individual members instead of a slate of nominees presented by the Board, cumulative voting may also interfere with the Company’s efforts to develop and maintain a Board of Directors possessing the wide range of skills, characteristics and experience necessary to serve all stockholders’ interests.
    Under Delaware law, every member of the Board is obligated to represent all stockholders fairly and equally, and our current system of voting encourages each director’s sense of responsibility toward all our stockholders, without special commitments or loyalty to any one stockholder or group of stockholders. Even though the VEBA Trust has a contractual right to designate a candidate for election to the Board, as described on page 28, the Board retains responsibility for determining that the candidate's nomination will be in the best interest of all stockholders. The current Board is committed to continuing its strong oversight of management and progressive corporate governance practices, which include such safeguards as an annually elected Board, a substantial majority of independent directors, a highly effective independent Chairman, key Board committees composed exclusively of independent directors, and confidential voting. In addition, our stockholders have the ability to call a special meeting.
    For all the above reasons, the Board believes that the adoption of cumulative voting would not be in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders.
The Board of Directors recommends a vote AGAINST this stockholder proposal, Item No. 7.
Item No. 8
Stockholder Proposal Regarding Independent Board Chairman
    Mr. Joseph P. Barzotti, 605 Hidden Lane, Grosse Pointe Woods, MI 48236, owner of approximately 300 shares of Common Stock, has given notice that he intends to present for action at the annual meeting the following stockholder proposal:
“Resolved: Shareholders request that our boardBoard of directorsDirectors adopt a permanent or at least 10-year policy, that, whenever possible,and amend other governing documents as necessary to reflect this policy, to require the chairmanChair of our boardBoard of directors shallDirectors be an independent director. An independent director is a director who has not previously served as an executive officer of our Company. Company before, during or after bankruptcy.
This policy should be implementedindependence requirement shall apply prospectively so as not to violate any contractual obligations in effect whenobligation at the time this resolution is adopted. Compliance with this policy is waived if no independent director is available and willing to serve as Chair. The policy should also specify how to select a new independent chairman if a current chairman ceases to be independent between annual shareholder meetings. To foster flexibility, this proposal gives the option of being phased in and implemented when our next CEO is chosen.

When our CEO is our board chairman or is not an independent director, this arrangement can hinder our board’s ability to monitor our CEO’s performance. Many companies already have an independent Chairman. An independent Chairman is the prevailing practice in the United Kingdom and many

66
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




international markets. This proposal topic won 50%-plus support at three5 major U.S. companies in 20122013 including 55%73%-support at Sempra Energy.

This proposal shouldNetflix.

At present, our Company’s CEO can also serve as the chairman of our board, a conflict of interest that can result in excessive management influence on our board and weaken our board’s independent oversight of management. The consequences can include higher executive pay, lower shareholder returns, more aggressive risk-taking, and ultimately less sustainable corporate performance for the long-term.
According to a June 2012 study of 180 North American companies with market capitalization over $20 billion (“The Costs of a Combined Chair/CEO,” GMI Ratings), companies spend more in executive pay when there is a non-independent chair. The median total pay of a combined chair/CEO was $16.1 million— 73% higher than the $9.3 million paid in total to the positions of a CEO and an independent chairman.
Companies with a separate chair (independent or non-independent) and CEO also appear to perform better and to be evaluatedmore sustainable over the longer term, according to the GMI study. The 5-year total shareholder return was found to be 28% higher, and the GMI risk ratings lower, at these companies.
Board leadership structure in the context of our Company’s overall corporate governance as reported in 2012:

GMI/The Corporate Library,U.S. is trending towards an independent investment research firm, was concernedchair. Approximately 73% of directors on boards with an independent chair believe that GM had 4 directors involved with a bankruptcy. David Bonderman was involved withtheir companies benefited from the Magellan Health Services bankruptcysplit (Survey, 2008 Public US National Association of Corporate Directors) and was on our executive pay committee. Erroll Davis, Kathryn Marinello and Philip Laskawy were involved withmore than 88% of senior financial executives believe the General Motors bankruptcy and controlled 75% of our audit committee includingpositions should be separated (Grant Thornton, 2009 Survey).

Despite these strides, the chairmanship. With 14 members our board is large and 11 members might beU.S. lags the optimum size. A large board is less than optimal when one person controls the officesrest of the Chairmanworld in adopting this best practice. Companies with independent board chairs comprised 76% of the United Kingdom FTSE 100 index, 55% of the Toronto Stock Exchange 60, and CEO. Mr. Bonderman was our leader in getting negative votes. He showed that he could get 10-times as many negative votes as some of our other directors.

Theodore Solso joined our board in 2012 and brings experience from50% for the D-rated board (by GMI) of Ball Corporation which is aggressive in attemptingGerman DAX 30 index, according to avoid shareholder proposals seeking improvement. James Mulva also joined our board in 2012 and brings experience from the D-rated board of General Electric. Thomas Schoewe joined our board in 2011 and brings experience from the D-rated board of Northrop Grumman.

Deloitte (Board Leadership: A Global Perspective, 2011).

Please vote to protect shareholder value:”

The Board of Directors recommends a voteAGAINST the adoption of this stockholder proposal for the following reasons:

The Board of Directors recommends a vote AGAINST this stockholder proposal for the following reasons:

    Our Board believes that it is in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders for the Board to have flexibility in determining whether to separate or combine the roles of chairman and CEO based on the Company’s circumstances. Choosing who should serveAdopting a policy to restrict that discretion would deprive the Board of its ability to select the most qualified and appropriate individual to lead the Board as chairman should not be constrained by a requirement that the chairman may not previously have served as an executive officer.Chairman and/or CEO. The members of the Board

possess considerable experience and unique knowledge of the challenges and opportunities the Company faces, and are in the best position to evaluate the needs of the Company and how best to organize the capabilities of the directors and senior managers to meet those needs. In the past, the Company has had both combined and separated chairman and CEO positions, allowing, in each case, the Board to consider all eligible directors and not exclude any eligible candidate from consideration. In making leadership structure determinations, the Board considers many factors to determine what is in the best interests of the Company’s stockholders, including the qualifications of individual directors and the specific needs of the business. As described under “Board Leadership Structure” beginning on page 16, the Company has demonstrated its willingness to separate and to combine chairman and CEO positions at different points in the Company’s history, allowing, in each case, the Board to consider all eligible directors and not exclude any eligible candidate from consideration. In planning for Mr. Akerson to step down as Chairman and CEO in January 2014, our Board reconsidered its leadership structure and separated the chairman and CEO positions to assist with facilitating an orderly transition of leadership to a new CEO. Currently, Mr. Solso serves as our independent, non-executive Chairman, and Ms. Barra is CEO. Given the dynamic and competitive environment in which GM operates, our Board may reconsider its leadership structure from time to time based on changes in our circumstances and in the members of the Board.

    GM has been, and continues to be, a strong advocate of Board independence and has put into place measures to see that its directors provide independent oversight. While the Board may again in the future determine that the interests of the Company would be best served byhas no fixed policy with respect to combining or separating the roles of chairman and CEO, the Board believes that, on balance, a combined role works best at this time. Mr. Akerson, who currently holds both positions, possesses an in-depth knowledge of the Company’s operations and risk management practices enabling him to provide effective leadership to the Board, including keeping the Board informed and consulting them about important issues facing our Company. The Board believes that the current leadership structure promotes a clear, unified, strategic vision for GM that ensures alignment between the Board and management, provides focused leadership for the Company, and helps ensure accountability for the Company’s performance.

Furthermore, the Board believes the Company’s corporate governance structure, with its strong emphasis on Board independence, makes an independent chairman requirement unnecessary. Our Bylaws and Corporate Governance Guidelines require that at least two-thirds of the Board’s members must be independent. At present, 12 of our 14 director nominees (over 85 percent) are independent as defined by the NYSE listing standards, and each of the Audit, Compensation and Governance Committees is comprised solely of independent directors. This means that oversight of key matters, such as the integrity of GM’s financial statements, executive compensation, the nomination of directors and evaluation of the Board and its Committees, is entrusted exclusively to independent directors. In addition, the Board and its Committees periodically meet in executive session without the presence of management, and have complete access to management and the authority to retain independent advisors, as they deem appropriate.

Moreover, to further enhance the authority and independence of the Board, our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that if the Chairman is not an independent director, the independent directors will elect a Lead Director from among the independent directors serving on the Board. AsBoard, whose authority is described under “Board Leadership Structure,” beginning on page 1516. A fixed policy separating the roles of chairman and further under our Corporate Governance Guidelines,CEO is also unnecessary because of GM’s strong corporate governance practices, including: a declassified Board, a majority vote requirement in uncontested elections of directors, annual election of the Chairman by the Board, entrusts numerous responsibilities to the Lead Director, including:

Presiding at all meetingsa substantial majority of the Board at which the Chairman is not present, includingindependent directors, executive sessions without management present, key Board committees composed exclusively of


67
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




independent directors, and advising the Chairman of any actions taken;

Calling executive sessions of the non-managementdirectors’ unrestricted access to management and independent directors;

Developing agendas for executive sessions of the Board in consultation with the Chairman and other Board members;

Leading the non-management directors in the annual evaluation of the performance of the CEO and communicating that evaluation to him;

Approving Board meeting agendas and related materials recommended by the Chairman;

Approving Board meeting schedules to assure that there is sufficient time for discussion of all agenda items;

Serving as liaison between non-management directors and the Chairman, as necessary;

Being available, if requested by major stockholders, for consultation and communication; and

Assuring at least annually that the Board discusses succession planning for the CEO.

Indeed,advisors. Moreover, GM’s current policy regarding the separation of the offices of chairman and CEO is consistent with that of most large, publicly traded companies in the United States. According to a 20122013 survey of the 100 largest U.S. public, non-controlled companies listed on the NYSE or NASDAQ conducted by Shearman & Sterling LLP,

only nine percent have adopted an explicit policy of separating the offices of chairman and CEO, while more thannearly 80 percent have retained the flexibility to separate or combine the offices.

    In addition, the proponent provides no evidence demonstrating that separating the roles of chairman and CEO would, by itself, deliver additional benefit to stockholders. Given the small number of major corporations in the U.S. that are committed permanently to leadership by an independent chairman, the statistics cited by the proponent are far from conclusive. Indeed, we believe that stockholders benefit when the Board can select the best candidates to run the Company at a given time.
In summary, the Board believes this proposal would deprive the Board of the valuable flexibility to exercise its business judgment in selecting the individual best suited to serve as Chairman of the Board and is unnecessary since the Company’s corporate governance structure already provides effective independent oversight of management. Accordingly, the Board does not believe implementing the proposal would be in the best interests of the Company or its stockholders.

The Board recognizes that some stockholders may not agree with its position, believing that an independent chairman is desirable under any circumstances. Even those stockholders, however, should not support this proposal, because the definition of independence is extremely narrow, limited to former executive officers. Under this proposal, a chairman could be deemed “independent” even if he or she was married to the CEO or was the Company’s largest customer, for example. A stockholder that favors an independence requirement for the chairman should not vote for a proposal that will not provide protection against many conflicts of interest that an independence requirement is intended to eliminate.

The Board of Directors recommends a voteAGAINST this stockholder proposal, Item No. 4.

Item No. 5

Stockholder Proposal Regarding Executive Stock Retention

Mr. Joseph P. Barzotti, 605 Hidden Lane, Grosse Pointe Woods, MI 48236, owner of approximately 300 shares of Common Stock, has given notice that he intends to present for action at the annual meeting the following stockholder proposal:

“Resolved: Shareholders urge that our executive pay committee adopt a policy requiring senior executives to retain a significant percentage of shares acquired through equity pay programs until reaching normal retirement age and to report to shareholders regarding the policy before our Company’s next annual meeting. For the purpose of this policy, normal retirement age would be an age of at least 60 and determined by our executive pay committee. Shareholders recommend that the committee adopt a share retention percentage requirement of at least 25% of net after-tax shares.

This single unified policy shall prohibit hedging transactions for shares subject to this policy which are not sales but reduce the risk of loss to the executive. Otherwise our directors would be able to avoid the impact of this proposal. This policy shall supplement any other share ownership requirements that have been established for senior executives, and should be implemented so as not to violate our Company’s existing contractual obligations or the terms of any compensation or benefit plan currently in effect.

Requiring senior executives to hold a significant portion of stock obtained through executive pay plans would focus our executives on our company’s long-term success. A Conference Board Task Force report on executive pay stated that hold-to-retirement requirements give executives ‘an ever-growing incentive to focus on long-term stock price performance.’

Please vote to protect shareholder value:”

The Board of Directors recommends a voteAGAINST the adoption of this stockholder proposal for the following reasons:

As discussed in the CD&A, the Compensation Committee periodically reviews the NEO’s stock holdings and does not believe that implementing a stock ownership or stock retention requirement is appropriate at this time, based on the compensation structure in place for the NEOs since 2009 and the limited opportunity it provided to accumulate shares of stock in the Company. Under TARP regulations, the annual compensation

planned and delivered to our NEOs includes a substantial portion denominated in share units (i.e., SSU and RSU grants) and these share units derive their value directly from the performance of our Common Stock. In addition, several NEOs have also purchased shares of our Common Stock during and after the Company’s initial public offering.

The SSUs granted to NEOs quarterly are denominated in stock and delivered in cash over a three-year period beginning on the first anniversary date of the grant.

Our NEOs are not allowed to participate in other typical types of incentive plans, which usually include significant grants of Company equity, and we may grant only a limited number of RSUs (no more than one-third of total compensation) that are designed to comply with TARP regulations. Thus, the RSUs granted prior to 2012 are subject to a three-year vesting period and can only be delivered (paid) in accordance with applicable TARP guidelines regarding the repayment of TARP obligations.

Two-thirds of the RSUs granted in 2012 to the NEOs will become vested and non-forfeitable on the second anniversary date of the grant and one-third will become vested and non-forfeitable on the third anniversary of the grant date, provided that the executive remains continuously employed with GM through that date. However, these RSUs cannot be settled or paid when they become non-forfeitable until applicable TARP requirements are met.

We agree, however, that it is important to align the interests of senior executives with those of our stockholders, and the Compensation Committee will adopt robust ownership guidelines that will be implemented as we return to a competitive compensation structure, which will provide significant opportunities for executives to accumulate shares of our Common Stock and the requirements will be consistent with competitive market practices.

This incentive plan design will create a substantial alignment of NEO compensation with the interests of the stockholders. Because the Board recognizes the importance of this alignment of interests, our incentive compensation plans include not only long-term objectives with vesting periods over multiple years and share ownership requirements, but also a “clawback” feature designed to allow the Company to recoup incentive compensation if there is a financial restatement due to misconduct, including fraud.

In addition to these important plan design features, our corporate governance policies provide other mechanisms which complement our incentive plan design and, at the same time, discourage excessive risk-taking and the behavior the proposal seeks to control. As described in our CD&A on page 33, we do not allow hedging or pledging of our Common Stock, and no executive officer has engaged in any such activity.

Finally, the proposal as written, with a 25 percent net after-tax share retention requirement until retirement, is unduly onerous, not a competitive practice, and could become a significant hindrance to attracting and retaining leadership talent.

For the foregoing reasons, the Board believes that the new stock ownership guidelines and other compensation and governance policies effectively encourage significant stock ownership by GM executives and that establishing additional retention requirements would not be in the best interests of GM stockholders.

The Board of Directors recommends a voteAGAINST this stockholder proposal, Item No. 5.

address.

LOGO
 The Board of Directors recommends a vote AGAINST this stockholder proposal, Item No. 8.

68
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




EXHIBIT A
GENERAL MOTORS COMPANY
2014 SHORT-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN
Section 1.Purpose. The purpose of the General Motors Company 2014 Short-Term Incentive Plan (as amended from time to time, the “Plan”) is to provide to certain employees of General Motors Company (the “Company”) and its Subsidiaries incentive compensation based upon the achievement of financial, business and other performance goals. This Plan is intended to permit the payment of bonuses that may qualify as performance-based compensation under Section 162(m) of the Code.

Section 2.Definitions. As used in the Plan, the following terms shall have the meanings set forth below:
(a)Award” means a cash incentive award opportunity granted to a Participant under the Plan with respect to a Performance Period in accordance with Section 5.
(b)Beneficiary” means a person designated by a Participant to receive payments that are available under the Plan in the event of the Participant’s death.
(c)Board” means the Board of Directors of the Company.
(d)Code” means the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended from time to time, and the rules, regulations and guidance thereunder. Any reference to a provision in the Code shall include any successor provision thereto.
(e)Committee” means the Executive Compensation Committee of the Board or such other committee as may be designated by the Board to perform the functions of the Executive Compensation Committee with respect to this Plan. If the Board does not designate the Committee, references herein to the “Committee” shall refer to the Board.
(f)Covered Employee” means an individual who is a “covered employee” or expected by the Committee to be a “covered employee,” in each case within the meaning of Section 162(m)(3) of the Code, for whom the Committee intends an Award to be “qualified performance-based compensation” under Section 162(m) of the Code.
(g)Disability” means, with respect to any Participant, such Participant’s inability upon a Termination of Service to engage in any gainful activity by reason of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment that can be expected to result in death or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than 12 months.
(h)Effective Date” means March 11, 2014.
(i)Final Award” means, with respect to a Performance Period, the amount of an Award that will become payable to a Participant, subject to any additional terms and conditions applicable to the Award, as determined by the Committee under Section 7.
(j)Achievement of “Full Career Status” means a Participant’s voluntary Termination of Service (i) at the age of 55 or older with ten or more years of continuous service or (ii) at the age of 62 or older. The chief human resources officer of the Company (or such individual holding comparable roles in the event of a restructuring of positions or re-designation of titles) shall have the binding authority to determine how many years of continuous service a Participant has at any given time.
(k)Participant” means any employee selected by the Committee to participate in the Plan for a Performance Period.
(l)Performance Measures” means any one or more of the following performance measures, applied to either the Company as a whole or to a business unit, Subsidiary or business segment and measured either on an absolute basis or relative to a pre-established target, to a previous period’s results or to a designated comparison group, in each case as specified by the Committee: asset turnover, cash flow, contribution margin, cost objectives, cost reduction, earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT), earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA), earnings per share, economic value added, free cash flow, increase in customer base, inventory turnover, liquidity, market share, net income, net income margin, operating cash flow, operating profit margin, pre-tax income, productivity, profit margin, quality (internal or external measures), return on assets, return on net assets, return on capital, return on invested capital, return on equity, revenue, revenue growth, stockholder value, stock price, total shareholder return, and/or warranty experience.
(m)Performance Period” means the Company’s fiscal year, or any other period as determined by the Committee.

A-1
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




(n)Subsidiary” means an entity of which the Company directly or indirectly holds all or a majority of the value of the outstanding equity interests of such entity or a majority of the voting power with respect to the voting securities of such entity. Whether employment by or service with a Subsidiary is included within the scope of this Plan shall be determined by the Committee.
(o)Target Award” means the amount that a Participant may earn under an Award if targeted performance levels are achieved (including corporate and individual performance). Target Awards may be denominated as a percentage of base salary or a dollar amount.
(p)Termination of Service” means, subject to Section 15, the cessation of a Participant’s employment relationship with the Company or a Subsidiary such that the Participant is no longer an employee of the Company or such Subsidiary, as applicable; provided, however, that, unless the Committee determines otherwise, such cessation of the Participant’s employment with the Company or a Subsidiary, but the continuation of the Participant’s employment for the Company at another Subsidiary shall not be deemed a cessation of employment or service that would constitute a Termination of Service; provided, further, that a Termination of Service shall be deemed to occur for a Participant employed by a Subsidiary when the Subsidiary ceases to be a Subsidiary unless such Participant’s employment continues with the Company or another Subsidiary. The chief human resources officer of the Company (or such individual holding comparable roles in the event of a restructuring of positions or re-designation of titles) shall have the binding authority to determine whether a Participant has had a cessation of his or her employment with the Company or a Subsidiary.

Section 3.Eligibility. Any person who is employed by the Company or any Subsidiary may be designated by the Committee as a Participant from time to time.

Section 4.Administration.
(a)The Plan shall be administered by the Committee. All decisions of the Committee shall be final, conclusive and binding upon all parties, including the Company, its stockholders and Participants and any Beneficiaries thereof. The Committee may issue rules and regulations for administration of the Plan. It shall meet at such times and places as it may determine.
(b)To the extent necessary or desirable to comply with applicable regulatory regimes, any action by the Committee shall require the approval of Committee members who are (i) independent, within the meaning of and to the extent required by applicable rulings and interpretations of the applicable stock market or exchange on which any equity securities issued by the Company are quoted or traded and (ii) outside directors pursuant to Section 162(m) of the Code. To the extent permitted by applicable law, the Committee may delegate to one or more members of the Committee or officers of the Company the authority to establish the terms of Awards, determine Final Awards or take any other actions permitted under the Plan, within any limits established by the Committee, except that such delegation to an officer of the Company shall not apply with respect to any Award for any Participant who is a Covered Employee.
(c)Subject to applicable law, the terms of the Plan and such orders or resolutions as may be adopted by the Board from time to time that are not inconsistent with the terms of the Plan, the Committee (or its delegate) shall have full power, discretion and authority to: (i) subject to Section 3, designate eligible individuals who will be Participants; (ii) determine the terms and conditions of any Award; (iii) determine whether, to what extent and under what circumstances amounts payable with respect to an Award under the Plan shall be deferred either automatically or at the election of the Participant or of the Committee; (iv) interpret and administer the Plan and any instrument or agreement relating to, or Award made under, the Plan; (v) establish, amend, suspend or waive such rules and regulations as it shall deem appropriate for the proper administration of the Plan and due compliance with applicable law or accounting or tax rules and regulations; (vi) make any other determination and take any other action that the Committee in its sole discretion deems necessary or desirable for the administration of the Plan and due compliance with applicable law or accounting or tax rules and regulations and (vii) to construe, interpret and apply the provisions of this Plan.
(d)Notwithstanding any other provision in the Plan to the contrary, in any instance where a determination is to be made under the Plan at the discretion of the Company’s Chief Executive Officer or chief human resources officer (or such individuals holding a comparable role in the event of a restructuring of positions or re-designation of titles), the Company’s Chief Executive Officer shall make such determination in respect of the Company’s chief human resources officer, and the Committee shall make such determination in respect of the Company’s Chief Executive Officer (or, in each case, such individuals holding the comparable roles in the event of a restructuring of positions or re-designation of titles).

A-2
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT





Section 5.Establishment of Award Terms. Subject to the limitations described in Section 8, the Committee shall establish the terms of each Award, including the Performance Period; the positions or names of the employees who will be Participants for the Performance Period; the Target Award for each Participant or group of Participants (including any minimum or maximum amount); the applicable Performance Measures and any other additional goals, formulas or performance-based measures relating to the Company, any business unit, Subsidiary or business segment of the Company, or to an individual Participant; targeted achievement levels (including any minimum or maximum achievement levels) relating to such Performance Measures or other goals; the formula or methodology that will be applied to determine the extent to which Awards have been earned and any other terms that will be applicable to the Awards, including the payment date, payment conditions and any vesting schedule applicable to any Final Award.

Section 6.Adjustments to Performance Measures, Goals and Formulas. To the extent permitted under Section 162(m) of the Code, the Committee may adjust, in whole or in part, any Performance Measures or any other applicable goals, formulas or performance-based measures, the targeted achievement levels (including any minimum or maximum achievement levels) relating to such Performance Measures, goals, formulas or performance-based measures, and the formula or methodology to be applied against the Performance Measures goals, formulas or performance-based measures, as the Committee may deem appropriate and equitable to account for any of the following events that occur during a Performance Period: (a) the effects of currency fluctuations, (b) any or all items that are excluded from the calculation of non-GAAP earnings as reflected in any Company press release or Form 8-K filing relating to an earnings announcement, (c) asset write-downs, (d) litigation or claim judgments or settlements, (e) the effect of changes in tax law, accounting principles or other such laws or provisions affecting reported results, (f) reorganization and restructuring programs or capital return strategies, (g) significant volume changes in any market or region, (h) significant impacts or limitations to production capacity (i) macro-economic or political assumption changes, (j) extraordinary and non-recurring accounting items and (k) any other extraordinary or non-operational items.

Section 7.Determination of Final Awards.
(a)As soon as practicable after the end of each Performance Period, the Committee shall determine the extent to which the targeted achievement levels of the applicable Performance Measures and any other goals, formulas or performance-based measures applicable to each Award have been satisfied.
(b)The Committee may, in its sole discretion, adjust (upward or downward) the Award of any Participant or group of Participants; provided,that the Committee shall not adjust the Award of any Covered Employee above the maximum payout determined in accordance with Section 8(b).
(c) The Committee shall determine the Final Award for each Participant or group of Participants after applying any adjustments described in Section 7(b) and subject to the limitations described in Section 8.

Section 8.Awards for Covered Employees. Notwithstanding any other provision of the Plan, the following procedures and limitations shall apply with respect to any Award to a Covered Employee.
(a)On or before the earlier of (i) the date that is 90 days after commencement of the Performance Period or (ii) the expiration of 25 percent of the Performance Period, the Committee shall establish and approve in writing one or more Performance Measures applicable to the Covered Employee’s Award, the targeted achievement levels (including any minimum or maximum achievement levels) relating to such Performance Measures, and an objective formula or methodology that will be applied against the Performance Measures to determine the maximum amount payable under the Award.
(b)After the end of each Performance Period, the Committee shall determine and shall certify in writing the extent to which the targeted achievement levels with respect to the applicable Performance Measures have been satisfied and shall apply the pre-established objective formula or methodology to determine the maximum amount payable under the Covered Employee’s Award.
(c)For the avoidance of doubt, subject to the limitations set forth in this Section 8, the Committee may adjust the maximum payout level downward by applying any other applicable Performance Measures or other goals, formulas or performance-based measures pursuant to Section 7(a) and by making any other adjustments pursuant to Section 7(c).

A-3
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




(d)The Final Award for a Covered Employee shall in no instance exceed $7,500,000 for any fiscal year of the Company.

Section 9.Payment of Awards.
(a)Payment of the Final Awards for a Performance Period shall be made in cash on or as soon as administratively practicable after the Committee’s determination of the Final Awards (or if later, any vesting date or dates applicable to the Final Award), but no later than March 15 of the year following the end of the applicable Performance Period (or the applicable vesting date or dates); provided that at the time of grant, subject to Section 15, the Committee may determine that an Award will be paid at a later date.
(b)Notwithstanding Section 9(a), the Company may, in its sole discretion, permit or require the deferral of payment of any Final Award in accordance with the terms of any deferred compensation plan or arrangement established or maintained by the Company or its Subsidiaries from time to time.

Section 10.Conditions Precedent to Final Awards. As a condition precedent to the payment of all or any portion of the Final Award, each Participant shall: (a) refrain from engaging in any activity which will cause damage to the Company or is in any manner inimical or in any way contrary to the best interests of the Company, as determined in the sole discretion of the Company’s Chief Executive Officer or chief human resources officer (or such individuals holding a comparable role in the event of a restructuring of positions or re-designation of titles), (b) not for a period of 12 months following any voluntary termination of employment, directly or indirectly, knowingly induce any employee of the Company or any Subsidiary to leave his or her employment for participation, directly or indirectly, with any existing or future business venture associated with such Participant, and (c) furnish to the Company such information with respect to the satisfaction of the foregoing conditions precedent as the Committee may reasonably request. In addition, the Committee may require a Participant to enter into such agreements as the Committee considers appropriate. The failure by any Participant to satisfy any of the foregoing conditions precedent shall result in the immediate cancellation of any unpaid portion of his or her Award, and such Participant will not be entitled to receive any consideration with respect to such cancellation.

Section 11.Effect of Termination of Employment. Subject to Section 9(b) and Section 10, and unless otherwise provided by the Committee at the time of the grant of the Award, or as the Committee may determine in any individual case, the following shall apply with respect to a Participant’s outstanding Awards upon such Participant’s Termination of Service.
(a)Except as set forth below, in the event of the Participant’s Termination of Service for any reason, any unpaid portion of any Award shall be forfeited.
(b)In the event of a Participant’s Termination of Service due to death or Disability, in either instance before or after the end of a Performance Period but before payment of his or her Final Award, the Participant’s Final Award will be determined (if not already determined) after the end of the Performance Period in accordance with Section 7, and the Final Award shall be paid to the Participant’s Beneficiary or Participant as soon as administratively practicable after the determination of the Final Award, but no later than March 15 of the year following the end of the applicable Performance Period. Any service-based vesting conditions applicable to such Final Award shall be waived.
(c)In the event of a Participant’s voluntary Termination of Service after achieving Full Career Status before or after the end of a Performance Period but before payment of his or her Final Award, the Participant’s Final Award will be determined (if not already determined) after the end of the Performance Period in accordance with Section 7; provided that the Final Award will be prorated based on the number of months during the applicable Performance Period prior to the Participant’s Termination of Service. The Final Award shall be paid to the Participant as soon as administratively practicable after the determination of the Final Award, but no later than March 15 of the year following the end of the applicable Performance Period. Any service-based vesting conditions applicable to such Final Award shall be waived.
(d)Notwithstanding the above provisions, in the event of a Participant's Termination of Service pursuant to an approved separation agreement or program, such Participant will not be entitled to retain any portion of an Award.

Section 12.General Provisions Applicable to Awards.
(a)Except pursuant to Section 12(b) or the laws of descent, no Award and no right under any Award may be voluntarily or involuntarily assigned, alienated, sold or transferred, including as between

A-4
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




spouses or pursuant to a domestic relations order in connection with dissolution of marriage, or by operation of law other than the laws of descent.
(b)A Participant may designate a Beneficiary or change a previous Beneficiary designation at such times prescribed by the Committee by using forms and following procedures approved or accepted by the Committee for that purpose.
(c)The entire expense of offering and administering the Plan shall be borne by the Company and its Subsidiaries.
(d)Any Awards granted under the Plan (including any amounts or benefits arising from such Awards) shall be subject to any clawback or recoupment policies the Company has in place from time to time.
(e)Notwithstanding any other provision of the Plan (including Sections Section 9, Section 11 and Section 15), the Committee may determine at any time and in its sole discretion, to accelerate or to delay any amounts payable with respect to any Award, or grant Awards subject to accelerated or delayed payment terms.
(f)Subject to Section 15, if the Company or any Subsidiary has any unpaid claim against a Participant arising out of or in connection with the Participant’s employment with any Subsidiary, prior to payment of a Final Award, such claim may be offset against any Award under this Plan (up to $5,000 per year) and at the time of payment of any Award, such claim may be offset in total. Such claims may include, but are not limited to, unpaid taxes or corporate business credit card charges.
(g)No employee, Participant or other person shall have any claim to be granted any Award under the Plan, and there is no obligation for uniformity of treatment of employees, Participants or Beneficiaries under the Plan. The terms and conditions of Awards need not be the same with respect to each recipient. Any Award granted under the Plan shall be a one-time Award that does not constitute a promise of future grants.
(h)The grant of an Award shall not be construed as giving a Participant the right to be retained in the employ of, or to continue to provide services to, the Company or any Subsidiary. Further, the Company or the applicable Subsidiary may at any time dismiss a Participant, free from any liability, or any claim under the Plan, unless otherwise expressly provided in the Plan or in any other agreement binding the parties.
(i)Nothing contained in the Plan shall prevent the Committee or the Company from adopting other non-stockholder approved plans, policies and arrangements for granting incentives and other compensation to employees of the Company and its Subsidiaries or adopting or continuing in effect other or additional compensation arrangements, and such arrangements may be either generally applicable or applicable only in specific cases.
(j)The Company (or any Subsidiary) shall be authorized to withhold from any payment due with respect to any Final Award the amount of applicable withholding taxes due in respect of an Award as may be necessary in the opinion of the Company (or the Subsidiary) to satisfy all obligations for the payment of such taxes.
(k)If any provision of the Plan is or becomes or is deemed to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any jurisdiction, or as to any person or Award, or would disqualify the Plan or any Award under any law deemed applicable by the Committee, such provision shall be construed or deemed amended to conform to applicable laws, or if it cannot be so construed or deemed amended without, in the determination of the Committee, materially altering the intent of the Plan, such provision shall be stricken as to such jurisdiction, person or Award, and the remainder of the Plan shall remain in full force and effect.
(l)This Plan is unfunded and unsecured; nothing in this Plan shall be construed to create a trust or to establish or evidence any Participant’s claim of any right to payment of an Award other than as an unsecured general creditor with respect to any payment to which he or she may be entitled.

Section 13.Effective Date of the Plan. The Plan shall be effective as of the Effective Date, subject to stockholder approval.

Section 14.Amendment, Modification, Suspension and Termination of the Plan; Rescissions and Corrections. Except to the extent prohibited by applicable law, the Board may amend, alter, suspend, discontinue or terminate the Plan or any portion thereof at any time; provided, however, that no such amendment, alteration, suspension, discontinuation or termination shall be made without stockholder approval if such approval is required by applicable law, including Section 162(m) of the Code except (a) to the extent any such amendment, alteration, suspension, discontinuance or termination is made to cause the

A-5
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




Plan to comply with applicable law or accounting or tax rules and regulations, (b) to impose any clawback or recoupment provisions with respect to any Awards (including any amounts or benefits arising from such Awards) in accordance with Section 12(d) of the Plan or (c) as the Board determines in good faith to be in the best interests of the Participants affected thereby. The Committee may correct any defect, supply any omission or reconcile any inconsistency in the Plan or any Award in the manner and to the extent it shall deem desirable to carry the Plan into effect.

Section 15.Section 409A of the Code. With respect to any Award subject to Section 409A of the Code, the Plan is intended to comply with the requirements of Section 409A of the Code, and the provisions of the Plan shall be interpreted in a manner that satisfies the requirements of Section 409A of the Code, and the Plan shall be operated accordingly. If any provision of the Plan or any term or condition of any Award would otherwise frustrate or conflict with this intent, the provision, term or condition will be interpreted and, to the extent necessary, deemed amended so as to avoid this conflict. If an amount payable under an Award as a result of the Participant’s Termination of Service (other than due to death) occurring while the Participant is a “specified employee” under Section 409A of the Code constitutes a deferral of compensation subject to Section 409A of the Code, then payment of such amount shall not occur until six months and one day after the date of the Participant’s Termination of Service, except as permitted under Section 409A of the Code. To the extent any amount that is “nonqualified deferred compensation” for purposes of Section 409A of the Code becomes payable upon a Termination of Service, such Termination of Service shall not be deemed to have occurred any earlier than a “separation from service” would occur under Section 409A of the Code, and related regulations and guidance thereunder. Notwithstanding any of the foregoing, the Company makes no representations or warranty and shall have no liability to the Participant or any other person if any provisions or payments, compensation or other benefits under the Plan are determined to constitute nonqualified deferred compensation subject to Section 409A of the Code but do not satisfy the provisions thereof.

Section 16.Governing Law. The Plan shall be governed by the laws of the State of Delaware, without application of the conflicts of law principles thereof.

A-6
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




EXHIBIT B
GENERAL MOTORS COMPANY
2014 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN

Section 1.     Purpose. The purpose of the General Motors Company 2014 Long-Term Incentive Plan (as amended from time to time, the “Plan”) is to incentivize selected employees, consultants, advisors and non-employee directors of General Motors Company (the “Company”) and its Subsidiaries and to align their interests with those of the Company’s stockholders. However, nothing in this Plan or any Award granted pursuant to this Plan shall be interpreted to create or establish an employment relationship between the Company and any Participant.

Section 2.Definitions. As used in the Plan, the following terms shall have the meanings set forth below:
(a)Award” means any Option, SAR, Restricted Stock, RSU, Performance Award or Other Stock-Based Award granted under the Plan.
(b)Award Document” means any appropriately authorized agreement, contract or other instrument or document evidencing any Award granted under the Plan, which must be duly executed or acknowledged by a Participant (unless otherwise specifically provided by the Company).
(c)Beneficiary” means a person designated by a Participant to receive payments or other benefits or exercise rights that are available under the Plan in the event of the Participant’s death.
(d)Board” means the Board of Directors of the Company.
(e)Cause” means, with respect to any Participant, any of the following unless explicitly excluded by such Participant’s applicable Award Document, and any additional grounds as may be set forth in such Award Document:
(i)the Participant’s commission of, or plea of guilty or no contest to, a felony;
(ii)the Participant’s gross negligence or willful misconduct that is materially injurious to the Company or any of its Subsidiaries; or
(iii)the Participant’s material violation of state or federal securities laws.
(f)Change in Control” means the occurrence of any one or more of the following events:
(i)any Person or any two or more persons deemed to be one “Person” (as used in Sections 13(d)(3) and 14(d)(2) of the Exchange Act) other than an Excluded Person, directly or indirectly, becomes the “beneficial owner” (within the meaning of Rule 13d-3 under the Exchange Act) of securities of the Company constituting more than 40 percent of the total combined voting power of the Company’s Voting Securities outstanding; provided that if such Person becomes the beneficial owner of 40 percent of the total combined voting power of the Company’s outstanding Voting Securities as a result of a sale of such securities to such Person by the Company or a repurchase of securities by the Company, such sale or purchase by the Company shall not result in a Change in Control; provided further, that if such Person subsequently acquires beneficial ownership of additional Voting Securities of the Company (other than from the Company), such subsequent acquisition shall result in a Change in Control to the extent that such Person’s beneficial ownership of Company Voting Securities immediately following such acquisition exceeds 40 percent of the total combined voting power of the Company’s outstanding Voting Securities;
(ii)at any time during a period of 24consecutive months, individuals who at the beginning of such period constituted the Board and any new member of the Board whose election or nomination for election was approved by a vote of at leasta majority of the directors then still in office who either were directors at the beginning of such period or whose election or nomination for election was so approved, cease for any reason to constitute a majority of members of the Board;
(iii)the consummation of a reorganization, merger or consolidation of the Company or any of its Subsidiaries with any other corporation or entity, in each case, unless, immediately following such reorganization, merger or consolidation, more than 60 percent of the combined voting power and total fair market value of the then outstanding Voting Securities of the resulting corporation from such reorganization, merger or consolidation is then beneficially owned, directly or indirectly, by all or substantially all of the individuals and entities who were the beneficial owners of the outstanding Voting Securities of the Company immediately prior to such reorganization, merger or consolidation in

B-1
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




substantially the same proportion as their beneficial ownership of the Voting Securities of the Company immediately prior to such reorganization, merger or consolidation; or
(iv)the consummation ofany sale, lease, exchange or other transfer to any Person (other than a Subsidiary or affiliate of the Company) of assets of the Company and/or any of its Subsidiaries, in one transaction or a series of related transactions within a 12-month period, having an aggregate fair market value of more than 50 percent of the fair market value of the Company and its Subsidiaries immediately prior to such transaction(s).

Notwithstanding the foregoing, in no event shall a “Change in Control” be deemed to have occurred (A) as a result of the formation of a Holding Company, (B) with respect to any Participant, if the Participant is part of a “group” within the meaning of Section 13(d)(3) of the Exchange Act as in effect on the date hereof, which consummates the Change in Control transaction or (C) if the transaction does not constitute a “change in ownership,” “change in effective control,” or “change in the ownership of a substantial portion of the assets” of the Company for purposes of Section 409A of the Code.
(g)Code” means the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended from time to time, and the rules, regulations and guidance thereunder. Any reference to a provision in the Code shall include any successor provision thereto.
(h)Committee” means the Executive Compensation Committee of the Board or such other committee as may be designated by the Board to perform any functions of the Executive Compensation Committee with respect to this Plan; provided, however, that the Board may, at any time, expressly retain for itself any of the Committee's authority hereunder, and to the extent that the Board retains any such authority, references to the Committee shall be deemed references to the Board. If the Board does not designate the Committee, references herein to the “Committee” shall refer to the Board.
(i)Covered Employee” means an individual who is a “covered employee” or expected by the Committee to be a “covered employee,” in each case within the meaning of Section 162(m)(3) of the Code.
(j)Disability” means, with respect to any Participant, such Participant’s inability upon a Termination of Service to engage in any gainful activity by reason of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment that can be expected to result in death or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than 12 months.
(k)Effective Date” means March 11, 2014.
(l)Exchange Act” means the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended from time to time, and the rules, regulations and guidance thereunder. Any reference to a provision in the Exchange Act shall include any successor provision thereto.
(m)Excluded Person” means (i) the Company, (ii) any of the Company’s Subsidiaries, (iii) any Holding Company, (iv) any employee benefit plan of the Company, any of its Subsidiaries or a Holding Company, or (v) any Person organized, appointed or established by the Company, any of its Subsidiaries or a Holding Company for or pursuant to the terms of any plan described in clause (iv).
(n)Fair Market Value” means with respect to Shares, the closing price of a Share on the date in question (or, if there is no reported sale on such date, on the last preceding date on which any reported sale occurred) on the principal stock market or exchange on which the Shares are quoted or traded, or if Shares are not so quoted or traded, fair market value as determined by the Committee, and with respect to any property other than Shares, the fair market value of such property determined by such methods or procedures as shall be established from time to time by the Committee.
(o)Achievement of “Full Career Status” means a Participant’s voluntary Termination of Service (i) at the age of 55 or older with ten or more years of continuous service or (ii) at the age of 62 or older. The chief human resources officer of the Company (or such individual holding a comparable role in the event of a restructuring of positions or re-designation of titles) shall have the binding authority to determine how many years of continuous service a Participant has at any given time.
(p)Good Reason” means, with respect to any Participant, the occurrence of any of the following acts by the Company, or failure by the Company to act, following or in connection with the occurrence of a Change in Control, unless explicitly excluded in such Participant’s applicable Award Document and any additional grounds, as may be set forth in such Award Document:
(i)a material reduction of such Participant’s base salary and target incentive compensation;
(ii)an involuntary relocation of the geographic location of such Participant’s principal place of employment (or for consultants or advisors, service) by more than 100 miles; or

B-2
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




(iii)only for Participants who are executive officers of the Company covered by Section16 of the Exchange Act, a material diminution of the Participant’s authority, duties, or responsibilities. In each case, if such Participant desires to terminate his or her employment or service with the Company or such Subsidiary for Good Reason, he or she must first give written notice within 90 days of the initial existence of the facts and circumstances providing the basis for Good Reason to the Company or such Subsidiary, and allow the Company or such Subsidiary 60 days from the date of such notice to rectify the situation giving rise to Good Reason, and in the absence of any such rectification, such Participant must terminate his or her employment or service for such Good Reason within 120 days after delivery of such written notice.
(q)Holding Company” means an entity that becomes a holding company for the Company or its businesses as part of any reorganization, merger, consolidation or other transaction, provided that the outstanding shares of common stock of such entity and the combined voting power of the then outstanding Voting Securities of such entity are, immediately after such reorganization, merger, consolidation or other transaction, beneficially owned, directly or indirectly, by all or substantially all of the individuals and entities who were the beneficial owners, respectively, of the Voting Securities of the Company outstanding immediately prior to such reorganization, merger, consolidation or other transaction in substantially the same proportions as their ownership, immediately prior to such reorganization, merger, consolidation or other transaction, of such outstanding Voting Securities of the Company.
(r)Incentive Stock Option” means an option representing the right to purchase Shares from the Company, granted pursuant to Section 6, that meets the requirements of Section 422 of the Code.
(s)Non-Qualified Stock Option” means an option representing the right to purchase Shares from the Company, granted pursuant to Section 6, that is not an Incentive Stock Option.
(t)Option” means an Incentive Stock Option or a Non-Qualified Stock Option granted pursuant to Section 6.
(u)Other Stock-Based Award” means an Award granted pursuant to Section 10.
(v)Participant” means the recipient of an Award granted under the Plan.
(w)Performance Award” means an Award granted pursuant to Section 9.
(x)Performance Period” means any period of not less than one year established by the Committee during which any performance goals specified by the Committee with respect to a Performance Award are measured.
(y)Restricted Stock” means any Share granted pursuant to Section 8.
(z)"Restricted Stock Unit" or “RSU” means a contractual right granted pursuant to Section 8 that is denominated in Shares. Each RSU represents a right to receive the value of one Share (or a percentage of such value) in cash, Shares or a combination thereof. Awards of RSUs may include the right to receive dividend equivalents.
(aa)Section 162(m) Compensation” means “qualified performance-based compensation” under Section 162(m) of the Code.
(bb)     “Shares” means shares of the Company’s common stock, $0.01 par value.
(cc)     “Stock Appreciation Right” or “SAR” means a right granted pursuant to Section 7, denominated in Shares, that entitles the Participant within the exercise period to receive a payment (or a number of Shares with a value) equal to the increase in value between the exercise price and the Fair Market Value of the underlying Shares at the date of exercise.
(dd)     “Subsidiary” means an entity of which the Company directly or indirectly holds all or a majority of the value of the outstanding equity interests of such entity or a majority of the voting power with respect to the Voting Securities of such entity. Whether employment by or service with a Subsidiary is included within the scope of this Plan shall be determined by the Committee.
(ee)     “Termination of Service” means, subject to Section 19, the cessation of a Participant’s employment or service relationship with the Company or a Subsidiary such that the Participant is no longer an employee, consultant or non-employee director of the Company or such Subsidiary, as applicable; provided, however, that, unless the Committee determines otherwise, such cessation of the Participant’s employment or service relationship with the Company or a Subsidiary, but the continuation of the Participant’s employment or services for the Company at another Subsidiary, or as a member of the Board, shall not be deemed a cessation of employment or service that would constitute a Termination of Service; provided, further, that a Termination of Service shall be deemed to occur for a Participant employed by or providing services to a Subsidiary when the Subsidiary ceases to be a Subsidiary unless such Participant’s employment or service continues with the Company or another Subsidiary. The chief human resources officer of the Company (or such

B-3
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




individual holding comparable roles in the event of a restructuring of positions or re-designation of titles) shall have the binding authority to determine whether a Participant has had a cessation of his or her employment or service relationship with the Company or a Subsidiary.
(ff)     “Voting Securities” means securities of a Person entitling the holder thereof to vote in the election of the members of the board of directors of such person or such governing body of such Person performing a similar principal governing function with respect to such Person.

Section 3.     Eligibility. The following individuals may be designated by the Committee as a Participant from time to time: (a) a person who serves or is employed as an officer or other employee of the Company or any Subsidiary; (b) a consultant or advisor who provides services to the Company or a Subsidiary; and (c) a non-employee director of the Company.
Section 4.     Administration.
(a)     The Plan shall be administered by the Committee. All decisions of the Committee shall be final, conclusive and binding upon all parties, including the Company, its stockholders and Participants and any Beneficiaries thereof. The Committee may issue rules and regulations for administration of the Plan. It shall meet at such times and places as it may determine.
(b)     To the extent necessary or desirable to comply with applicable regulatory regimes, any action by the Committee shall require the approval of Committee members who are (i) independent, within the meaning of and to the extent required by applicable rulings and interpretations of the applicable stock market or exchange on which the Shares are quoted or traded; (ii) non-employee directors within the meaning of Rule 16b-3 under the Exchange Act; and (iii) outside directors pursuant to Section 162(m) of the Code. The Board may designate one or more members of the Board as alternate members of the Committee who may replace any absent or disqualified member at any meeting of the Committee. To the extent permitted by applicable law, the Committee may delegate to one or more members of the Committee or officers of the Company the authority to grant Awards or take any other actions permitted under the Plan, except that such delegation to an officer of the Company shall not be applicable with respect to any Award fora person then covered by Section 16 of the Exchange Act.
(c)     Subject to applicable law, the terms of the Plan and such orders or resolutions not inconsistent with the terms of the Plan as may from time to time be adopted by the Board, the Committee (or its delegate) shall have full power, discretion and authority to: (i) subject to Section 3, designate eligible individuals who will be Participants; (ii) determine the type or types of Awards to be granted to each Participant under the Plan; (iii) determine the number of Shares to be covered by (or with respect to which payments, rights or other matters are to be calculated in connection with) Awards; (iv) determine the terms and conditions of any Award; (v) determine whether, to what extent and under what circumstances Awards may be settled or exercised in cash, Shares, other Awards, other property, net settlement, or any combination thereof, or cancelled, forfeited or suspended, and the method or methods by which Awards may be settled, exercised, cancelled, forfeited or suspended; (vi) determine whether, to what extent and under what circumstances cash, Shares, other Awards, other property and other amounts payable with respect to an Award under the Plan shall be deferred either automatically or at the election of the holder thereof or of the Committee; (vii) interpret and administer the Plan and any instrument or agreement relating to, or Award made under, the Plan; (viii) prescribe the form of each Award Document, which need not be identical for each Participant; (ix) establish, amend, suspend or waive such rules and regulations and appoint such agents, trustees, brokers, depositories and advisors and determine such terms of their engagement as it shall deem appropriate for the proper administration of the Plan and due compliance with applicable law, stock market or exchange rules and regulations or accounting or tax rules and regulations; (x) make any other determination and take any other action that the Committee in its sole discretion deems necessary or desirable for the administration of the Plan and due compliance with applicable law, stock market or exchange rules and regulations or accounting or tax rules and regulations; and (xi) to construe, interpret and apply the provisions of this Plan.
(d)     In addition to the conditions imposed by Section 11, the Committee may impose restrictions on any Award at the time of grant in the applicable Award Document or by other Committee action with respect to non-competition, confidentiality and other restrictive covenants as it deems necessary or appropriate.
(e)     Notwithstanding any other provision in the Plan to the contrary, in any instance where a determination is to be made under the Plan at the discretion of the Company’s Chief Executive Officer or chief human resources officer (or such individuals holding a comparable role in the event of a restructuring of positions or re-designation of titles), the Company’s Chief Executive Officer shall make such determination

B-4
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




in respect of the Company’s chief human resources officer, and the Committee shall make such determination in respect of the Company’s Chief Executive Officer (or, in each case, such individuals holding the comparable roles in the event of a restructuring of positions or re-designation of titles).
Section 5.    Shares Available for Awards.
(a)     Subject to adjustment as provided in Section 5(c), (i) the maximum number of Shares available for issuance under the Plan shall not exceed 60,000,000 Shares, with each Share subject to (or deliverable with respect to) an Option, SAR, RSU or any other Award reducing the number of Shares available for issuance under the Plan by one Share and (ii) no Participant may receive under the Plan in any calendar year (A) Options and SARs that relate to more than 1,000,000 Shares or (B) Awards other than Options or SARs which could result in delivery to the Participant of more than 1,000,000 Shares under the operation of the applicable performance goal formula, if and to the extent that any such Awards are intended to constitute Section 162(m) Compensation and denominated in Shares. The maximum number of Shares available for issuance under Incentive Stock Options shall be 60,000,000.
(b)     Any Shares subject to an Award that expires, is cancelled, forfeited or otherwise terminates without the delivery of such Shares, including any Shares subject to an Award to the extent that Award is settled without the issuance of Shares, shall again be, or shall become, available for issuance under the Plan; provided, however, that (i) any Shares surrendered or withheld in payment of any grant, purchase, exercise price of an Award or taxes related to an Award and (ii) any Shares covered by a SAR that is exercised and settled in Shares, shall not again be available for issuance under the Plan.
(c)     In the event that the Committee determines that, as a result of any dividend or other distribution (whether in the form of cash, Shares or other securities), recapitalization, stock split, reverse stock split, reorganization, merger, consolidation, split-up, spin-off, combination, repurchase or exchange of Shares or other securities of the Company, issuance of warrants or other rights to purchase Shares or other securities of the Company, issuance of Shares pursuant to the anti-dilution provisions of securities of the Company, or other similar corporate transaction or event affecting the Shares, or of changes in applicable laws, regulations or accounting principles, an adjustment is appropriate in order to prevent dilution or enlargement of the benefits or potential benefits intended to be made available under the Plan, then the Committee shall adjust equitably any or all of:
(i)the number and type of Shares (or other securities) which thereafter may be made the subject of Awards, including the aggregate and individual limits specified in Section 5(a);
(ii)the number and type of Shares (or other securities) subject to outstanding Awards; and
(iii)the grant, purchase or exercise price with respect to any Award or, if deemed appropriate, make provision for a cash payment to the holder of an outstanding Award; provided, however, that the number of Shares subject to any Award denominated in Shares shall always be a whole number.
(d)     Any Shares delivered pursuant to an Award may consist, in whole or in part, of authorized and newly issued Shares or Shares acquired by the Company.

Section 6.     Options. The Committee is authorized to grant Options to Participants with the following terms and conditions and with such additional terms and conditions, in either case not inconsistent with the provisions of the Plan, as the Committee shall determine.
(a)     The exercise price per Share under an Option shall be determined by the Committee; provided, however, that such exercise price shall not be less than the Fair Market Value of a Share on the date of grant of such Option.
(b)     The term of each Option shall be fixed by the Committee but shall not exceed 10 years from the date of grant of such Option in the form of an Incentive Stock Option and 10 years plus two days from the date of grant of such Option in the form of a Non-Qualified Stock Option.
(c)     The Committee shall determine the time or times at which an Option may be exercised in whole or in part.
(d)     The Committee shall determine the method or methods by which, and the form or forms, including cash, Shares, other Awards, other property, net settlement, broker assisted cashless exercise or any combination thereof, having a Fair Market Value on the exercise date equal to the relevant exercise price, in which payment of the exercise price with respect thereto may be made or deemed to have been made.

B-5
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




(e)     Any Option intended to be treated as an Incentive Stock Option shall be designated as such under the terms of the applicable Award Document. The terms of any such Incentive Stock Option shall comply in all respects with the provisions of Section 422 of the Code.
(f)     Subject to Section 12 and Section 13, in general, no portion of an Award of Options is intended to vest prior to the first anniversary of the vesting commencement date set forth in the Award Document; however, the Committee may provide for shorter vesting if appropriate under the circumstances as determined by the Committee. Unless otherwise determined by the Committee, no dividends or dividend equivalents will be earned or paid on the Shares underlying any Options granted and outstanding under the Plan.

Section 7.     Stock Appreciation Rights. The Committee is authorized to grant SARs to Participants with the following terms and conditions and with such additional terms and conditions, in either case not inconsistent with the provisions of the Plan, as the Committee shall determine.
(a)     SARs may be granted under the Plan to Participants either alone (“freestanding”) or in addition to other Awards granted under the Plan (“tandem”) and may, but need not, relate to a specific Option granted under Section 6.
(b)     The exercise price per Share under a SAR shall be determined by the Committee; provided, however, that such exercise price shall not be less than the Fair Market Value of a Share on the date of grant of such SAR.
(c)     The term of each SAR shall be fixed by the Committee but shall not exceed 10 years from the date of grant of such SAR.
(d)     The Committee shall determine the time or times at which a SAR may be exercised or settled in whole or in part.
(e)     Subject to Section 12 and Section 13, in general, no portion of an Award of SARs is intended to vest prior to the first anniversary of the vesting commencement date set forth in the Award Document; however, the Committee may provide for shorter vesting if appropriate under the circumstances as determined by the Committee. Unless otherwise determined by the Committee, no dividends or dividend equivalents will be earned or paid on the Shares underlying any SARs granted and outstanding under the Plan.

Section 8.     Restricted Stock and RSUs. The Committee is authorized to grant Awards of Restricted Stock and RSUs to Participants with the following terms and conditions and with such additional terms and conditions, in either case not inconsistent with the provisions of the Plan, as the Committee shall determine.
(a)     Shares of Restricted Stock and RSUs shall be subject to such restrictions as the Committee may impose (including any limitation on the right to receive any dividend, dividend equivalent or other right), which restrictions may lapse separately or in combination at such time or times, in such installments or otherwise, as the Committee may deem appropriate; provided that, subject to Section 12 and Section 13, in general, each Award of Restricted Stock and RSUs (other than Performance Awards) is intended to vest in whole or in part (including in installments) over a period of not less than three years from the vesting commencement date set forth in the Award Document; however, the Committee may provide for shorter vesting if appropriate under the circumstances as determined by the Committee.
(b)     With respect to Shares of Restricted Stock, a Participant generally shall have the rights and privileges of a stockholder with respect thereto, including the right to vote such Shares of Restricted Stock and the right to receive dividends or dividend equivalents. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, if the Award relates to Shares on which dividends are declared during the period that the Award is outstanding, such dividends or dividend equivalents shall be paid in cash on the vesting date of the Restricted Stock Award, subject to satisfaction of the vesting and other conditions of the underlying Award of Restricted Stock, unless otherwise determined by the Committee. Any share of Restricted Stock may be evidenced in such manner as the Committee may deem appropriate, including book-entry registration. For the avoidance of doubt, unless otherwise determined by the Committee, no dividends or dividend equivalent rights shall be provided with respect to any Shares of Restricted Stock that do not vest pursuant to their terms.

(c)     With respect to an RSU Award, each RSU covered by such Award shall represent a right to receive the value of one Share in cash, Shares or a combination thereof. An RSU shall not convey to the Participant the rights and privileges of a stockholder with respect to the Share subject to the RSU, such as the right to vote or the right to receive dividends, unless and until a Share is issued to the Participant to settle the RSU. Notwithstanding the foregoing, unless otherwise determined by the Committee in its sole discretion, RSU

B-6
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




Awards shall convey the right to receive dividend equivalents on the Shares underlying the RSU Award with respect to any dividends declared during the period that the RSU Award is outstanding. Such dividend equivalent rights shall accumulate and shall be paid in cash on the settlement date of the underlying RSU Award, subject to the satisfaction of the vesting and other conditions of the underlying RSU Award, unless otherwise determined by the Committee. Shares delivered upon the vesting and settlement of an RSU Award may be evidenced in such manner as the Committee may deem appropriate, including book-entry registration. For the avoidance of doubt, unless otherwise determined by the Committee, no dividend equivalent rights shall be provided with respect to any Shares subject to RSUs that do not vest or settle pursuant to their terms.

(d)     If the Committee intends that an Award granted under this Section 8 shall constitute or provide for Section 162(m) Compensation, such Award shall be structured in accordance with the requirements of Section 9, including the performance criteria and the Award limitation set forth therein, and any such Award shall be considered a Performance Award for purposes of the Plan.

Section 9.     Performance Awards. The Committee is authorized to grant Performance Awards with the following terms and conditions and with such additional terms and conditions, in either case not inconsistent with the provisions of the Plan, as the Committee shall determine:
(a)     Performance Awards may be denominated as a cash amount, number of Shares or units or a combination thereof and are Awards which may be earned upon achievement or satisfaction of performance conditions specified by the Committee. In addition, the Committee may specify that any other Award shall constitute a Performance Award by conditioning the grant or the right to exercise the Award or have it settled, and the timing thereof, upon achievement or satisfaction of such performance conditions as may be specified by the Committee. The Committee may use such business criteria and other measures of performance as it may deem appropriate in establishing any performance conditions. Subject to the terms of the Plan, the performance goals to be achieved during any Performance Period, the length of any Performance Period, the amount of any Performance Award granted and the amount of any payment or transfer to be made pursuant to any Performance Award shall be determined by the Committee.

(b)     If the Committee intends that a Performance Award should constitute Section 162(m) Compensation, such Performance Award shall be subject to a pre-established formula, such that payment, retention or vesting of the Award is subject to the achievement during a Performance Period or Performance Periods, as determined by the Committee, of a level or levels of, or increases in, in each case as determined by the Committee, one or more of the following performance measures with respect to the Company: asset turnover, cash flow, contribution margin, cost objectives, cost reduction, earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT), earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA), earnings per share, economic value added, free cash flow, increase in customer base, inventory turnover, liquidity, market share, net income, net income margin, operating cash flow, operating profit margin, pre-tax income, productivity, profit margin, quality (internal or external measures), return on assets, return on net assets, return on capital, return on invested capital, return on equity, revenue, revenue growth, stockholder value, stock price, total shareholder return, and/or warranty experience. The Committee shall have the power to impose such other restrictions on Awards subject to this Section 9(b) as it may deem necessary or appropriate to ensure that such Awards satisfy all requirements for Section 162(m) Compensation. In order to ensure that any Performance Award that is intended to qualify as Section 162(m) Compensation so qualifies, no Participant may be granted in any calendar year Performance Awards denominated in cash that, taken collectively in the aggregate, could result in a future payout at maximum performance in excess of $20,000,000.

(c)     Each performance criterion may be measured on an absolute (e.g., plan or budget) or relative basis. Relative performance may be measured against a group of peer companies, a financial market index or other acceptable objective and quantifiable indices which the Committee selects. The Committee may modify those performance objectives or the related minimum acceptable level of achievement, in whole or in part, as the Committee deems appropriate and equitable to account for any of the following events that occurs during the applicable Performance Period: (i) the effects of currency fluctuations, (ii) any or all items that are excluded from the calculation of non-GAAP earnings as reflected in any Company press release or Form 8-K filing relating to an earnings announcement, (iii) asset write-downs, (iv) litigation or claim judgments or settlements, (v) the effect of changes in tax law, accounting principles or other such laws or provisions affecting reported results, (vi) reorganization and restructuring programs or capital return strategies, (vii) significant volume changes in any market or region, (viii) significant impacts or limitations to production capacity (ix)

B-7
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




macro-economic or political assumption changes, (x) extraordinary and non-recurring accounting items and (xi) any other extraordinary or non-operational items; provided, however, that in the case of a Performance Award intended to qualify as Section 162(m) Compensation, such modifications shall be made only to the extent that they would not disqualify such Performance Award as Section 162(m) Compensation. Performance measures may vary from Performance Award to Performance Award, respectively, and from Participant to Participant, and may be established on a stand-alone basis, in tandem or in the alternative.
(d)     Settlement of Performance Awards shall be in cash, Shares, other Awards, or any combination thereof, in the sole discretion of the Committee. The Committee may increase or reduce the amount of a settlement otherwise to be made in connection with a Performance Award but may not exercise discretion to increase any amount payable to a Covered Employee in respect of a Performance Award intended to qualify as Section 162(m) Compensation in a manner that would prevent the Performance Award from qualifying as Section 162(m) Compensation. Any settlement that changes the form of payment from that originally specified shall be implemented in a manner such that the Performance Award and other related Awards do not, solely for that reason, fail to qualify as Section 162(m) Compensation, if such Performance Award is intended by the Committee to so qualify.
(e)    A Performance Award shall not convey to the Participant the rights and privileges of a stockholder with respect to the Shares subject to the Performance Award, such as the right to vote (except as relates to Restricted Stock) or the right to receive dividends, unless and until Shares are earned pursuant to the Performance Award and are issued to the Participant. Notwithstanding the foregoing, unless otherwise determined by the Committee in its sole discretion, each Performance Award shall convey the right to receive dividend equivalents with respect to any dividends declared during the period that the Performance Award is outstanding, but solely with respect to those Shares underlying the Performance Awards that are earned. Such dividend equivalents rights shall accumulate and shall be paid in cash on the settlement date of the underlying Performance Award, subject to the satisfaction of the performance, vesting and other conditions of the underlying Performance Award, unless otherwise determined by the Committee. For the avoidance of doubt, unless otherwise determined by the Committee, no dividend equivalent rights shall be provided with respect to any Shares subject to a Performance Award that are not earned or do not vest pursuant to the terms of the Performance Award.

Section 10.     Other Stock-Based Awards. The Committee is authorized, subject to limitations under applicable law, to grant to Participants such other Awards that may be denominated or payable in, valued in whole or in part by reference to, or otherwise based on, or related to, Shares or factors that may influence the value of Shares, including convertible or exchangeable debt securities, other rights convertible or exchangeable into Shares, purchase rights for Shares, Awards with value and payment contingent upon performance of the Company or business units thereof or any other factors designated by the Committee.

Section 11.     Conditions Precedent to Awards. As a condition precedent to the vesting, exercise, payment or settlement of any portion of any Award at any time prior to a Change in Control, each Participant shall: (a) refrain from engaging in any activity which will cause damage to the Company or is in any manner inimical or in any way contrary to the best interests of the Company, as determined in the sole discretion of the Company’s Chief Executive Officer or chief human resources officer (or such individuals holding a comparable role in the event of a restructuring of positions or re-designation of titles), (b) not for a period of 12 months following any voluntary termination of employment or service, directly or indirectly, knowingly induce any employee of the Company or any Subsidiary to leave his or her employment for participation, directly or indirectly, with any existing or future business venture associated with such Participant, and (c) furnish to the Company such information with respect to the satisfaction of the foregoing conditions precedent as the Committee may reasonably request. In addition, the Committee may require a Participant to enter into such agreements as the Committee considers appropriate. The failure by any Participant to satisfy any of the foregoing conditions precedent shall result in the immediate cancellation of the unvested portion of any Award and any portion of any vested Award that has not yet been exercised, paid or settled and such Participant will not be entitled to receive any consideration with respect to such cancellation.
Section 12.     Effect of Termination of Service on Awards. Subject to Sections 11 and Section 13, and unless otherwise provided by the Committee in any Award Document, or as the Committee may determine in any individual case, the following shall apply with respect to a Participant’s outstanding Awards upon such Participant’s Termination of Service.
(a)     Death. In the event of a Participant’s Termination of Service due to death:

B-8
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




(i) Each Option and SAR held by the Participant shall immediately vest (to the extent not vested) and become exercisable and shall remain exercisable until the third anniversary of the date of death or, if earlier, the expiration date of such Option or SAR.
(ii) Each Restricted Stock and RSU Award held by the Participant shall immediately vest. Any RSU that vests pursuant to the preceding sentence shall be settled within 90 days following the Participant’s death.
(iii) Each outstanding Performance Award held by the Participant (A) shall have any service-based vesting requirements waived, (B) shall be earned based upon the achievement of the performance conditions applicable to such Award, and (C) shall be paid or settled on the scheduled settlement date or dates as provided under the terms of the applicable Award Document.
(b)     Disability. In the event of a Participant’s Termination of Service due to Disability:
(i) Each Option and SAR held by the Participant shall continue to vest and become exercisable in accordance with its existing vesting schedule and shall remain exercisable until the expiration date of such Option or SAR.
(ii) Each Restricted Stock and RSU Award held by the Participant shall continue to vest in accordance with its existing vesting schedule. Each RSU that vests pursuant to the preceding sentence shall be settled on the scheduled settlement date or dates as provided under the terms of the applicable Award Document.
(iii) Each outstanding Performance Award held by the Participant (A) shall have any service-based vesting requirements waived, (B) shall be earned based upon the achievement of the performance conditions applicable to such Award and (C) shall be paid or settled on the scheduled settlement date or dates as provided under the terms of the applicable Award Document.
(c)     Full Career Status Termination. In the event of a Participant’s Termination of Service after achieving Full Career Status:
(i) Each outstanding Option and SAR held by the Participant shall immediately vest (to the extent not vested) and become exercisable and shall remain exercisable until the expiration date of such Option or SAR.
(ii) With respect to each outstanding Restricted Stock or RSU Award held by the Participant:
(A)If such Termination of Service occurs on or prior to the one-year anniversary of the grant date of the Award (or if earlier, the one-year anniversary of the vesting commencement date as set forth in the Award Document), such Award shall be prorated (as set forth in the Award Document) and the pro-rata portion of the Award that is retained shall continue to vest in accordance with its existing vesting schedule, with the remaining portion of the Award being forfeited. RSUs that vest pursuant to this Section 12(c)(ii)(A) shall be settled on the scheduled settlement date or dates as provided under the terms of the applicable Award Document.
        (B)    If such Termination of Service occurs after the one-year anniversary of the grant date of such Award (or if earlier, the one-year anniversary of the vesting commencement date as set forth in the Award Document), such Award shall continue to vest in accordance with its existing vesting schedule. RSUs that vest pursuant to this Section 12(c)(ii)(B) shall be settled on the scheduled settlement date or dates as provided under the terms of the applicable Award Document.
(iii) With respect to each outstanding Performance Award held by the Participant:
(A)     If such Termination of Service occurs within the first year of the Performance Period, (x) the Performance Award shall be prorated (as set forth in the Award Document) and the pro-rata portion of the Performance Award that is retained shall have any service-based vesting requirements waived, (y) the pro-rata portion of the Performance Award that is retained shall be earned based upon the achievement of the performance conditions applicable to such Award, and (z) the Performance Award shall be paid or settled on the scheduled settlement date or dates as provided under the terms of the applicable Award Document.
(B)     If such Termination of Service occurs after the first year of the Performance Period, the Performance Award (x) shall have any service-based vesting requirements waived, (y) shall be earned based upon the achievement of the performance conditions applicable to such Award, and (z) shall be paid or settled on the scheduled settlement date or dates as provided under the terms of the applicable Award Document.
(d) Other Terminations. In the event of a Participant’s Termination of Service for any reason not specified in this Section 12, the Participant shall not be entitled to retain any portion of an Award; provided that any Option or SAR that is vested on the date of the Termination of Service shall remain outstanding and

B-9
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




exercisable until the earlier of (i) the applicable expiration date of such Option or SAR or (ii) 90 days after the Termination of Service.
(e) Termination Pursuant to Approved Separation Agreement or Program. Notwithstanding the above provisions, in the event of a Participant's Termination of Service pursuant to an approved separation agreement or program, such Participant will not be entitled to retain any portion of an Award.
(f) Alternative Treatment. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Committee may provide for any alternative treatment of outstanding Awards, and the circumstances in which, and the extent to which, any such Awards may be exercised, settled, vested, paid or forfeited in the event of a Participant’s Termination of Service prior to the end of a Performance Period or the exercise, vesting or settlement of such Award, either in an Award Document or, subject to Section 15, by Committee action after the grant of an Award. Unless otherwise provided in an Award Document or otherwise determined by the Committee, a qualifying leave of absence shall not constitute a Termination of Service. A Participant’s absence or leave shall be deemed to be a qualifying leave of absence if so provided under the Company’s employee policies or if approved by the Company’s chief human resources officer (or such individual holding a comparable role in the event of a restructuring of positions or redesignation of titles).

Section 13.     Effect of a Change in Control on Awards.
(a) In the event of a Change in Control, unless otherwise provided in an Award Document, outstanding Options and SARs shall be treated as described in subsection (i) below, outstanding Restricted Stock and RSUs shall be treated as described in subsection (ii) below and outstanding Performance Awards shall be treated as described in subsection (iii) below.
(i) (A) If in connection with the Change in Control, any outstanding Option or SAR is continued in effect or converted into an option to purchase or right with respect to stock of the successor or surviving corporation (or a parent or subsidiary thereof) which conversion shall comply with Sections 424 (to the extent applicable) and 409A of the Code, then upon the occurrence of a Termination of Service of a Participant by the Company without Cause or a Termination of Service by such Participant for Good Reason within 24 months following the Change in Control, such Option(s) or SAR(s) held by such Participant shall vest and become exercisable and shall remain exercisable until the earlier of the expiration of its full specified term or the first anniversary of such Termination of Service.
(B) If outstanding Options or SARs are not continued or converted as described in subsection (i)(A) above, such Options or SARs shall vest and become fully exercisable effective immediately prior to the Change in Control (in a manner facilitating full exercise, including cashless exercise by Participants subject to the Change in Control) and any Options or SARs not exercised prior to the Change in Control shall be cancelled without consideration effective as of the Change in Control.
(ii) (A) If in connection with the Change in Control, any outstanding Restricted Stock or RSU is continued in effect or converted into a restricted stock or unit representing an interest in stock of the successor or surviving corporation (or a parent or subsidiary thereof) on a basis substantially equivalent to the consideration received by stockholders of the Company in connection with the Change in Control, then upon the occurrence of an involuntary Termination of Service of a Participant by the Company without Cause or a Termination of Service by such Participant for Good Reason within 24 months following the Change in Control, such restricted stock or unit(s) held by such Participant shall vest and, in the case of units, be immediately due and payable.
(B) If outstanding Restricted Stock or RSUs are not continued or converted as described in subsection (ii)(A) above, such Restricted Stock or RSUs shall vest and, in the case of RSUs, be due and payable effective immediately prior to the Change in Control.
(iii) With respect to each outstanding Performance Award, (A) the Performance Period shall end as of the date immediately prior to such Change in Control and the Committee shall determine the extent to which the performance criteria applicable to such Performance Award have been satisfied at such time, (B) the portion of such Performance Award that is deemed to have been earned pursuant to clause (A) above shall be converted into a time-vesting Award of equivalent value to which any service vesting requirements applicable to the predecessor Performance Award shall continue to apply and (C) the converted time-vesting Award shall be paid or settled on the settlement date or dates as provided under the terms of the predecessor Performance Award that would have applied had a Change in Control not occurred; provided that upon the occurrence of a Termination of Service of a Participant by the Company without Cause or a Termination of Service by such Participant

B-10
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




for Good Reason within 24 months following the Change in Control, any service vesting requirements applicable to any such converted Award shall be deemed to have been met and such converted Award shall be immediately paid or settled upon such Termination of Service.

For purposes of subsections (i) and (ii) above, no Option, SAR, Restricted Stock or RSU (including Performance Awards denominated in any of the foregoing forms) shall be treated as “continued or converted” on a basis consistent with the requirements of subsection (i)(A) or (ii)(A), as applicable, unless the stock underlying such award after such continuation or conversion consists of securities of a class that is widely held and publicly traded on a U.S. national securities exchange.
(b) In addition, in the event of a Change in Control and to the extent not less favorable to a Participant than the provisions of Section 13(a) above or the applicable Award Document, the Committee, and on such terms and conditions as it deems appropriate, either by the terms of the Award or by action taken prior to the occurrence of such Change in Control, may take any one or more of the following actions whenever the Committee determines that such action is appropriate or desirable in order to prevent the dilution or enlargement of the benefits intended to be made available under the Plan or to facilitate the Change in Control transaction:
(i) to terminate or cancel any outstanding Award in exchange for a cash payment (and, for the avoidance of doubt, if as of the date of the Change in Control, the Committee determines that no amount would have been realized upon the exercise of the Award or other realization of the Participant’s rights, then the Award may be cancelled by the Company without payment of consideration);
(ii) to provide for the assumption, substitution, replacement or continuation of any Award by the successor or surviving corporation (or a parent or subsidiary thereof) with cash, securities, rights or other property to be paid or issued, as the case may be, by the successor or surviving corporation (or a parent or subsidiary thereof), and to provide for appropriate adjustments with respect to the number and type of securities (or other consideration) of the successor or surviving corporation (or a parent or subsidiary thereof), subject to any replacement awards, the terms and conditions of the replacement awards (including, without limitation, any applicable performance targets or criteria with respect thereto) and the grant, exercise or purchase price per share for the replacement awards;
(iii) to make any other adjustments in the number and type of securities (or other consideration) subject to outstanding Awards and in the terms and conditions of outstanding Awards (including the grant or exercise price and performance criteria with respect thereto) and Awards that may be granted in the future; and
(iv)to provide that any Award shall be accelerated and become exercisable, payable and/or fully vested with respect to all Shares covered thereby, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Plan or the applicable Award Document.

Section 14.     General Provisions Applicable to Awards.
(a) Awards shall be granted for no cash consideration or for such minimal cash consideration as may be required by applicable law.
(b) Awards may, in the discretion of the Committee, be granted either alone or in addition to or in tandem with any other Award or any award granted under any other plan of the Company. Awards granted in addition to or in tandem with other Awards, or in addition to or in tandem with awards granted under any other plan of the Company, may be granted either at the same time as or at a different time from the grant of such other Awards or awards.
(c) Subject to the terms of the Plan, payments or transfers to be made by the Company upon the grant, exercise or settlement of an Award may be made in the form of cash, Shares, other Awards, other property, net settlement, or any combination thereof, as determined by the Committee in its discretion at the time of grant, and may be made in a single payment or transfer, in installments or on a deferred basis, in each case in accordance with rules and procedures established by the Committee. Such rules and procedures may include provisions for the payment or crediting of reasonable interest on installment or deferred payments or the grant or crediting of dividend equivalents in respect of installment or deferred payments.
(d) Except pursuant to Section 14(e) or the laws of descent, no Award and no right under any Award may be voluntarily or involuntarily assigned, alienated, sold or transferred, including as between spouses or pursuant to a domestic relations order in connection with dissolution of marriage, or by operation of law other than the laws of descent. An Award, and any rights under an Award, shall be exercisable only by the

B-11
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




Participant during the Participant’s lifetime unless a court of competent jurisdiction determines that the Participant lacks the capacity to handle his or her own affairs, in which case an Award or any rights under an Award may be exercised by the person to whom such court has expressly granted authority to exercise such Award or the rights under such Award on the Participant’s behalf. After the Participant’s lifetime, an Award and any rights under an Award shall be exercisable only by the designated Beneficiary, by the person who obtains an interest pursuant to laws of descent or by the Participant’s estate. In the event a person who so obtains an interest in an Award is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to lack the capacity to handle his or her own affairs, an Award or any rights under an Award may be exercised by the person to whom such court has expressly granted authority to exercise such Award or the rights under such Award on the person’s behalf. The Plan shall not recognize any grant of authority to exercise an Award or any rights under an Award except as set forth in this Section 14(d). The provisions of this Section 14(d) shall not apply to any Award that has been fully exercised or settled, as the case may be, and shall not preclude forfeiture of an Award in accordance with the terms thereof or of the Plan.
(e) A Participant may designate a Beneficiary or change a previous Beneficiary designation at such times prescribed by the Committee by using forms and following procedures approved or accepted by the Committee for that purpose.
(f)     Any Awards granted under the Plan (including any amounts or benefits arising from such Awards) shall be subject to any clawback or recoupment policies the Company has in place from time to time.
(g)     Subject to the requirements of Section 409A of the Code, if the Company or any Subsidiary has any unpaid claim against a Participant arising out of or in connection with the Participant’s employment or service with any Subsidiary, prior to settlement of an Award, such claim may be offset against Awards under this Plan (up to $5,000 per year) and at the time of vesting or settlement of any Award, such claim may be offset in total. Such claims may include, but are not limited to, unpaid taxes or corporate business credit card charges.
Section 15.    Amendments and Termination.
(a)     Except to the extent prohibited by applicable law and unless otherwise expressly provided in an Award Document or in the Plan, the Board may amend, alter, suspend, discontinue or terminate the Plan or any portion thereof at any time; provided, however, that no such amendment, alteration, suspension, discontinuation or termination shall be made without (i) stockholder approval if such approval is required by applicable law or the rules of the stock market or exchange, if any, on which the Shares are principally quoted or traded or (ii) the consent of the affected Participant, if such action would materially adversely affect the rights of such Participant under any outstanding Award, except (A) to the extent any such amendment, alteration, suspension, discontinuance or termination is made to cause the Plan to comply with applicable law, stock market or exchange rules and regulations or accounting or tax rules and regulations, (B) to impose any clawback or recoupment provisions with respect to any Awards (including any amounts or benefits arising from such Awards) adopted by the Company from time to time, or (C) as the Board determines in good faith to be in the best interests of the Participants affected thereby; provided further, that the Committee’s authority under this Section 15(a) is limited in the case of Awards subject to Section 9(b), as provided in Section 9(b). Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Plan, the Committee may amend the Plan, or create sub-plans, in such manner as may be necessary to enable the Plan to achieve its stated purposes in any jurisdiction in a tax‑efficient manner and in compliance with local rules and regulations. The Committee may correct any defect, supply any omission or reconcile any inconsistency in the Plan or any Award in the manner and to the extent it shall deem desirable to carry the Plan into effect.
(b)     The Committee may waive any conditions or rights under, amend any terms of, or amend, alter, suspend, discontinue or terminate any provision of the Plan or any Award theretofore granted, prospectively or retroactively, without the consent of any relevant Participant or holder or Beneficiary of an Award; provided, however, that no such action shall materially adversely affect the rights of any affected Participant or holder or Beneficiary under any Award theretofore granted under the Plan, except (i) to the extent any such action is made to cause the Plan to comply with applicable law, stock market or exchange rules and regulations or accounting or tax rules and regulations, (ii) to impose any clawback or recoupment provisions with respect to any Awards (including any amounts or benefits arising from such Awards) adopted by the Company from time to time, or (iii) as the Committee determines in good faith to be in the best interests of the Participants affected thereby; and provided further, that the Committee’s authority under this Section 15(b) is limited in the case of Awards subject to Section 9(b), as provided in Section 9(b).

B-12
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




(c)     The Committee may specify in an Award Document that the Participant’s rights, payments and benefits with respect to an Award shall be subject to reduction, cancellation, forfeiture or recoupment upon the occurrence of certain specified events, in addition to the conditions set forth in Section 11 and any otherwise applicable vesting or performance conditions of an Award. Such events may include (without limitation) a Termination of Service with or without Cause (and, in the case of any Cause that is resulting from an indictment or other non-final determination, the Committee may provide for such Award to be held in escrow or abeyance until a final resolution of the matters related to such event occurs, at which time the Award shall either be reduced, cancelled or forfeited (as provided in such Award Document) or remain in effect, depending on the outcome), violation of material policies, breach of noncompetition, confidentiality or other restrictive covenants that may apply to the Participant, or other conduct by the Participant that is determined in the sole discretion of the Committee to be detrimental to the business or reputation of the Company and/or its Subsidiaries.
(d)     Notwithstanding the foregoing, except as provided in Section 5(c), without approval of the Company’s stockholders, (i) no action shall directly or indirectly, through cancellation and regrant or any other method, reduce, or have the effect of reducing, the exercise price of any Option or SAR established at the time of grant thereof and (ii) no Option or SAR may be cancelled in exchange for cash or other securities at any time when the exercise price for such Option or SAR is greater than the Fair Market Value of the Shares underlying such Option or SAR.

Section 16.     Miscellaneous.
(a)     No employee, consultant, advisor, Participant or other person shall have any claim to be granted any Award under the Plan, and there is no obligation for uniformity of treatment of employees, consultants, advisors, Participants or holders or Beneficiaries of Awards under the Plan. The terms and conditions of Awards need not be the same with respect to each recipient. Any Award granted under the Plan shall be a one-time Award that does not constitute a promise of future grants. The Committee maintains the right to make available future grants under the Plan.
(b) The grant of an Award shall not be construed as giving a Participant the right to be retained in the employ of, or to continue to provide services to, the Company or any Subsidiary. Further, the Company or the applicable Subsidiary may at any time dismiss a Participant, free from any liability, or any claim under the Plan, unless otherwise expressly provided in the Plan or in any Award Document or in any other agreement binding the parties. The receipt of any Award under the Plan is not intended to confer any rights on the receiving Participant except as set forth in the applicable Award Document.
(c)     Nothing contained in the Plan shall prevent the Committee or the Company from adopting or continuing in effect other or additional compensation arrangements (including Share-based arrangements), and such arrangements may be either generally applicable or applicable only in specific cases.
(d)     The Company (or any Subsidiary) shall be authorized to withhold from any Award granted or any payment due or transfer made under any Award or under the Plan or from any compensation or other amount owing to a Participant the amount (in cash, Shares, other Awards, other property, net settlement, or any combination thereof) of applicable withholding taxes due in respect of an Award, its exercise or settlement or any payment or transfer under such Award or under the Plan and to take such other action (including providing for elective payment of such amounts in cash or Shares by the Participant) as may be necessary in the opinion of the Company (or the Subsidiary) to satisfy all obligations for the payment of such taxes.
(e)     If any provision of the Plan or any Award Document is or becomes or is deemed to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any jurisdiction, or as to any person or Award, or would disqualify the Plan or any Award under any law deemed applicable by the Committee, such provision shall be construed or deemed amended to conform to applicable laws, or if it cannot be so construed or deemed amended without, in the determination of the Committee, materially altering the intent of the Plan or the Award Document, such provision shall be stricken as to such jurisdiction, person or Award, and the remainder of the Plan and any such Award Document shall remain in full force and effect.
(f)     Neither the Plan nor any Award shall create or be construed to create a trust or separate fund of any kind or a fiduciary relationship between the Company and a Participant or any other person. To the extent that any person acquires a right to receive payments from the Company pursuant to an Award, such right shall be no greater than the right of any unsecured general creditor of the Company.
(g)     No fractional Shares shall be issued or delivered pursuant to the Plan or any Award, and the Committee shall determine whether cash or other securities shall be paid or transferred in lieu of any fractional Shares, or whether such fractional Shares or any rights thereto shall be cancelled, terminated or otherwise eliminated.

B-13
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




(h)     Awards may be granted to Participants who are non-United States nationals or employed or providing services outside the United States, or both, on such terms and conditions different from those applicable to Awards to Participants who are employed or providing services in the United States as may, in the judgment of the Committee, be necessary or desirable to recognize differences in local law, tax policy or custom. The Committee also may impose conditions on the exercise or vesting of Awards in order to minimize the Company’s obligation with respect to tax equalization for Participants on assignments outside their home country.
Section 17.     Effective Date of the Plan. The Plan shall be effective as of the Effective Date, subject to stockholder approval.
Section 18.     Term of the Plan. No Award shall be granted under the Plan after the earliest to occur of (a) the tenth year anniversary of the Effective Date, (b) the maximum number of Shares available for issuance under the Plan have been issued or (c) the Board terminates the Plan in accordance with Section 15(a). However, unless otherwise expressly provided in the Plan or in an applicable Award Document, any Award theretofore granted may extend beyond such date, and the authority of the Committee to amend, alter, adjust, suspend, discontinue or terminate any such Award, or to waive any conditions or rights under any such Award, and the authority of the Board to amend the Plan, shall extend beyond such date.
Section 19.     Section 409A of the Code. With respect to Awards subject to Section 409A of the Code, the Plan is intended to comply with the requirements of Section 409A of the Code, and the provisions of the Plan and any Award Document shall be interpreted in a manner that satisfies the requirements of Section 409A of the Code, and the Plan shall be operated accordingly. If any provision of the Plan or any term or condition of any Award would otherwise frustrate or conflict with this intent, the provision, term or condition will be interpreted and, to the extent necessary, deemed amended so as to avoid this conflict. If an amount payable under an Award as a result of the Participant’s Termination of Service (other than due to death) occurring while the Participant is a “specified employee” under Section 409A of the Code constitutes a deferral of compensation subject to Section 409A of the Code, then payment of such amount shall not occur until six months and one day after the date of the Participant’s Termination of Service, except as permitted under Section 409A of the Code. To the extent any amount that is “nonqualified deferred compensation” for purposes of Section 409A of the Code becomes payable upon a Termination of Service, such Termination of Service shall not be deemed to have occurred any earlier than a “separation from service” would occur under Section 409A of the Code, and related regulations and guidance thereunder. Notwithstanding any of the foregoing, the Company makes no representations or warranty and shall have no liability to the Participant or any other person if any provisions or payments, compensation or other benefits under the Plan are determined to constitute nonqualified deferred compensation subject to Section 409A of the Code but do not satisfy the provisions thereof.
Section 20.     Data Protection. By participating in the Plan, the Participant consents to the holding and processing of personal information provided by the Participant to the Company or any Subsidiary, trustee or third party service provider, for all purposes relating to the operation of the Plan. These include, but are not limited to:
(a) administering and maintaining Participant records;
(b) providing information to the Company, Subsidiaries, trustees of any employee benefit trust, registrars, brokers or third party administrators of the Plan;
(c) providing information to future purchasers or merger partners of the Company or any Subsidiary, or the business in which the Participant works; and
(d) transferring information about the Participant to any country or territory that may not provide the same protection for the information as the Participant’s home country.

Section 21.     Governing Law. The Plan and each Award Document shall be governed by the laws of the State of Delaware, without application of the conflicts of law principles thereof.


B-14
  2014 PROXY STATEMENT




 20132014 ANNUAL MEETING  
 

General Motors Company

  
 General Motors Global Headquarters  
 300 Renaissance Center  
 Detroit, Michigan 48243  

General Directions

From EastFrom North
Take I-94 West to I-75 South. Keep left to I-375 South via Exit 51C toward Civic Center. I-375 South becomes Jefferson Avenue West. Proceed west for approximately one block. The GM Renaissance Center is on the left.

Take I-75 South and keep left to I-375 South via Exit 51C toward Civic Center. I-375 South becomes Jefferson Avenue West. Proceed west for approximately one block. The GM Renaissance Center is on the left.

From WestFrom South

Take I-94 East to I-75 South to I-375 South via Exit 51C toward Civic Center. I-375 South becomes Jefferson Avenue West. Proceed west for approximately one block. The GM Renaissance Center is on the left.

OR

Take I-96 East to I-696 East toward Port Huron, then to M-10 South via Exit #8, toward the US-24 Telegraph exit. Merge onto M-10 South. In approximately 20 miles M-10 becomes Jefferson Avenue West. Proceed east for approximately one quarter mile. The GM Renaissance Center is on the right.

From Canada:

Via Detroit-Windsor Tunnel, turn right at Jefferson Avenue. The GM Renaissance Center is approximately one block east on the right.

Via Ambassador Bridge, take I-75 North to I-375 South via Exit 51C toward Civic Center. I-375 South becomes Jefferson Avenue West. Proceed west for approximately one block. The GM Renaissance Center is on the left.

Stockholders and their guests are responsible for their parking. Parking is available on a first-come, first-served basis at Port Atwater, Beaubien Place, and Miller parking decks.

An admission ticket will be required to enter the meeting. Please follow the instructions on page 57 of this proxy statement for important information on attending the annual meeting.

Your Vote is Important

Please vote via the Internet, by telephone, or by signing, dating, and returning the enclosed proxy card or voting instruction form.

Results of the Annual Meeting

Final certified results of voting at the annual meeting will be available at www.gm.com/proxymaterials.

LOGOLOGO

proxymaterials



LOGO

GENERAL MOTORS COMPANY

GENERAL MOTORS GLOBAL HEADQUARTERS

MAIL CODE 482-C25-A36

300 RENAISSANCE CENTER

P.O. BOX 300

DETROIT, MI 48265-3000

LOGO

VOTE BY INTERNET - www.proxyvote.com or scan the QR code above

Use the Internet to transmit your voting instructions up until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, June 5, 2013. Have this proxy card available when you access the website and follow the instructions to obtain your records and to create an electronic voting instruction form.

VOTE BY PHONE - 1-800-690-6903

Use any touch-tone phone to transmit your voting instructions up until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, June 5, 2013. Have this proxy card available when you call and then follow the instructions.

If you vote by Internet or phone, do not mail this proxy card.

VOTE BY MAIL

Mark, sign, and date this proxy card and promptly return it in the enclosed postage-paid envelope or return it to: Vote Processing, c/o Broadridge, 51 Mercedes Way, Edgewood, NY 11717.

ELECTRONIC DELIVERY OF FUTURE STOCKHOLDER COMMUNICATIONS

To reduce our future postage and printing expenses, you can consent to receiving all future proxy statements, proxy cards, and annual reports electronically via e-mail or the Internet. To enroll for electronic delivery, please follow the instructions above to vote using the Internet and, when prompted, indicate that you agree to receive or access stockholder communications electronically in the future.

TO VOTE BY MAIL, MARK BLOCKS BELOW IN BLUE OR BLACK INK AS FOLLOWS:

M58654-P38276KEEP THIS PORTION FOR YOUR RECORDS

— — — — — — — — — — —  — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —  — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —  — — — — —

DETACH AND RETURN THIS PORTION ONLY

THIS PROXY CARD IS VALID ONLY WHEN SIGNED AND DATED.

GENERAL MOTORS COMPANY

GM Proposals – The Board of Directors recommends a

voteFOR Items 1-3:

1.    Election of Directors

        Nominees:

ForAgainstAbstain

        1a.    Daniel F. Akerson

¨¨¨

        1b.    David Bonderman

¨¨¨ForAgainstAbstain

        1c.    Erroll B. Davis, Jr.

¨¨¨

          1l.     Theodore M. Solso

¨¨¨

        1d.    Stephen J. Girsky

¨¨¨

          1m.   Carol M. Stephenson

¨¨¨

        1e.    E. Neville Isdell

¨¨¨

          1n.    Cynthia A. Telles

¨¨¨

        1f.     Robert D. Krebs

¨¨¨

2.       Ratification of the Selection of Deloitte & Touche LLP as GM’s Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for 2013

¨¨¨

        1g.    Kathryn V. Marinello

¨¨¨

3.       Advisory Vote to Approve Executive Compensation

¨¨¨

        1h.    Michael G. Mullen

¨¨¨

Stockholder Proposals – The Board of Directors recommends a voteAGAINST Items 4-5.

        1i.     James J. Mulva

¨¨¨

4.     Independent Board Chairman

¨¨¨

        1j.     Patricia F. Russo

¨¨¨

5.     Executive Stock Retention

¨¨¨

        1k.    Thomas M. Schoewe

¨¨¨

NOTE:Please sign exactly as your name(s) appear(s) hereon. When shares are held jointly, each holder should sign. When signing as attorney, executor, administrator, guardian, trustee, custodian, or in any other representative capacity, give full title as such. Corporations should provide the full name of corporation and name and title of the authorized officer signing the proxy card.

Signature [PLEASE SIGN WITHIN BOX]

Date

Signature (Joint Owners)

Date


General Motors Company

2013 Annual Meeting




                                    



Table of Proxy Materials for the Annual Meeting:

The Proxy Statement and Annual Report to Stockholders are available at www.gm.com/proxymaterials.

 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

M58655-P38276            

LOGO

THIS PROXY IS SOLICITED ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

The undersigned authorizes Daniel F. Akerson, Stephen J. Girsky, and Daniel Ammann, and each of them as the Proxy Committee, to vote theCommon Stock of the undersigned upon the nominees for directors; upon the other Items shown on the reverse side, which are described on the pages identified in the Table of Contents of the Proxy Statement; and upon all other matters which may come before the 2013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders of General Motors Company, or any adjournment thereof.

You are encouraged to specify your choices by marking the appropriate boxes on the reverse side, but you need not mark any boxes if you wish to vote in accordance with the Board of Directors’ recommendations; just sign, date, and return this proxy in the enclosed envelope.

Please see the reverse side for Internet and telephone voting instructions.

(Continued and to be marked, signed, and dated on the reverse side)

Contents