UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
SCHEDULE 14A
Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Amendment No.       )
Filed by the Registrant ☒
Filed by a Party other than the Registrant ☐
Check the appropriate box:

Preliminary Proxy Statement

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

Definitive Proxy Statement

Definitive Additional Materials

Soliciting Material under §240.14a-12
Piper Sandler Companies
(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)
(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if other than the Registrant)
Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):

No fee required.

Fee paid previously with preliminary materials.

Fee computed on table in exhibit required by Item 25(b) per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(1) and 0-11.

PRELIMINARY COPY—SUBJECT TO COMPLETION
2023 Proxy Statement
Piper Sandler Companies
[MISSING IMAGE: lg_pipersandlerreal-pn.jpg]
 

[MISSING IMAGE: lg_pipersandler-pn.jpg]
Letter from our Chairman and CEO
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_chadabrahamnew-bw.jpg]
April [  ], 2023
Fellow Shareholders:
You are invited to join us for our 2023 annual meeting of shareholders which will take place on Wednesday, May 17, 2023 at 2:00 p.m. Central Time. The meeting will be held virtually via webcast. The Notice of Annual Meeting of Shareholders and the proxy statement that follow describe the business to be conducted at the meeting.
Over the last five years, we have executed a strategy of broadening our areas of industry expertise, building scale and operating leverage across the firm, and expanding our product capabilities. As a result, we believe that we have elevated the earnings capacity of our business and built a stronger and more durable “all-weather” platform capable of driving long-term shareholder returns across market cycles.
Despite a challenging market backdrop, 2022 was our company’s second strongest year on record, which we believe demonstrates the soundness of that strategy. Although the historic levels of market volatility and economic uncertainty in 2022 reduced U.S. middle market advisory activity by approximately 25% from record 2021 levels, and resulted in U.S. equity capital markets remaining largely shut throughout most of the year, we were still able to achieve adjusted net revenues of $1.4 billion, adjusted net income of $201.3 million, and adjusted earnings per share of $11.26, each of which is a non-GAAP financial measure. We were also able to return $295 million to shareholders through share repurchases and dividends during 2022. In addition, we demonstrated during the year that we will continue to pursue our long-term growth objectives, with our acquisitions of Cornerstone Macro, Stamford Partners, and DBO Partners all complementing our strategy of adding top-tier talent to grow our platform, expand our market leadership, and deliver greater value to our clients.
We are also proud to have issued our first environmental, social and governance (ESG) report in 2022. The report details the results of a comprehensive firm-wide ESG issues assessment, describes our key ESG-related priorities, and highlights the contributions that our firm and our outstanding employees make to the communities in which we live and work. We are excited to have commenced our ESG journey, and look forward to sharing our progress with you over the coming years.
We are furnishing our proxy materials to you over the Internet, which will reduce our costs and the environmental impact of our annual meeting. Accordingly, we mailed a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials to you, which contains instructions on how to access our proxy statement and annual report and vote online. The Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials also contains instructions on how to request a printed set of proxy materials.
 

Whether or not you plan to attend the meeting, your vote is important and we encourage you to vote your shares promptly. You may vote your shares using a toll-free telephone number or the Internet. If you received a paper copy of the proxy card by mail, you may sign, date and mail the proxy card in the envelope provided.
We are thankful that you have chosen to be our shareholders, and we look forward to continuing to serve our clients and provide long-term returns to our shareholders.
Sincerely,
[MISSING IMAGE: sg_chadabraham-bw.jpg]
Chad R. Abraham
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
 

Notice of Annual Meeting
of Shareholders
May 17, 2023, at 2:00 p.m., Central Time
Virtually at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/PIPR2023
To the Shareholders of Piper Sandler Companies:
The 2023 annual meeting of shareholders of Piper Sandler Companies will be held virtually on Wednesday, May 17, 2023 at 2:00 p.m., Central Time, for the following purposes:
1.
The election of ten directors, each for a one-year term.
2.
Ratification of the selection of Ernst & Young LLP as the independent auditor of Piper Sandler Companies for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2023.
3.
An advisory (non-binding) vote to approve the compensation of the officers disclosed in the attached proxy statement, or say-on-pay vote.
4.
An advisory (non-binding) vote to recommend the frequency of future say-on-pay votes.
5.
Approval of an amendment to the Piper Sandler Companies Amended and Restated 2003 Annual and Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “Incentive Plan”).
6.
Approval of an amendment to the Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Piper Sandler Companies.
7.
Any other business that may properly be considered at the meeting or any adjournment or postponement of the meeting.
We believe that a virtual annual meeting of shareholders provides greater access to those who may want to attend and, therefore, have chosen this over an in-person meeting for 2023. In order to vote on the matters brought before the meeting, you may submit your proxy vote by telephone or online, as described in the Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials and the following proxy statement, by no later than 11:59 p.m., Eastern Time on Tuesday, May 16, 2023 for any shares you hold directly, and by no later than 11:59 p.m., Eastern Time on Friday, May 12, 2023 for any shares you hold in a retirement plan. If you received a paper copy of the proxy card by mail, you may sign, date and mail the proxy card in the envelope provided. The envelope is addressed to our vote tabulator, Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc., and no postage is required if mailed in the United States. Holders of record of shares of our common stock at the close of business on March 20, 2023 are entitled to notice of, and to vote at, the meeting.
Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials
for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held on May 17, 2023
Our proxy statement and 2022 annual report are available at
www.pipersandler.com/proxymaterials.
By Order of the Board of Directors
[MISSING IMAGE: sg_johnwgeelan-bw.jpg]
John W. Geelan
Secretary
April [  ], 2023
 

PROXY STATEMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1
1
7
13
13
13
14
14
14
15
16
19
19
20
20
21
22
23
23
46
47
49
50
51
Nonqualified Deferred Compensation
51
53
56
56
57
57
57
59
60
60
60
60
62
62
62
 

63
64
65
67
68
92
95
100
100
101
A-1
B-1
C-1
 

PROXY STATEMENT
2023 ANNUAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS
TO BE HELD MAY 17, 2023
INTRODUCTION
The Board of Directors of Piper Sandler Companies is soliciting proxies for use at the annual meeting of shareholders to be held virtually on May 17, 2023, and at any adjournment or postponement of the meeting. The notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials, which contains instructions on how to access this proxy statement and our annual report online, is first being mailed to shareholders on or about April [  ], 2023.
Executive Summary
This summary highlights information contained elsewhere in this proxy statement. This summary does not contain all of the information that you should consider, and you should read the entire proxy statement carefully before voting.
Annual Meeting of Shareholders
Date and Time:
Wednesday, May 17, 2023, at 2:00 p.m., Central Time
Website:
www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/PIPR2023
Record Date:
March 20, 2023
Virtual Annual Meeting
The 2023 annual meeting of shareholders will be a completely virtual meeting conducted via webcast. We have determined that this is the best method to ensure that our shareholders can participate in the annual meeting. All shareholders as of the close of business on the record date, or their duly appointed proxies, may attend the virtual annual meeting as well as vote and submit questions during the webcast of the meeting by visiting www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/PIPR2023.
To participate in the annual meeting, you will need to provide the 16-digit control number included on your proxy card.
If you wish to participate in the annual meeting, please log on to the link included above at least 15 minutes prior to the start of the annual meeting to provide time to register, download the required software, if necessary, and test your internet connectivity. If you access the annual meeting but do not enter your control number, you will be able to listen to the proceedings, but you will not be able to vote or otherwise participate. We believe that a virtual meeting provides greater access to those who may want to attend our annual meeting of shareholders and, therefore, have chosen this over an in-person meeting.
We ensure that at our virtual meeting, all attendees are afforded the same rights and opportunities to participate as they would at an in-person meeting. These procedures include the ability for shareholders to ask questions during the course of the meeting, post appropriate questions received during the meeting for review by other participants, review our corresponding answers to such questions on our Investor Relations section of our website at www.pipersandler.com as soon as practicable after the annual meeting, and access technical support staff during the meeting in the event of difficulties arising from the use of the virtual meeting platform.
We evaluate annually the method of holding our annual meeting of shareholders, taking into consideration the above factors as well as the proposed agenda items.
 
1

Executive Summary
Voting Matters
The Board of Directors recommends you vote FOR each Director Nominee listed in Proposal 1, FOR each of Proposal 2, Proposal 3, Proposal 5, and Proposal 6, and ONE YEAR for Proposal 4:
Proposal
Page Reference
1. Election of Directors
7
The Board of Directors believes the ten director nominees as a group have the experience and skills that are necessary to effectively oversee our company.
2. Ratification of Selection of Independent Auditor
64
The Audit Committee of our Board of Directors has selected Ernst & Young LLP to serve as our independent auditor for the year ending December 31, 2023.
3. Advisory (Non-Binding) Vote on Executive Compensation
65
The Board of Directors is asking shareholders to provide advisory approval of the compensation of the officers disclosed in this proxy statement, or a say-on-pay vote.
4. Advisory (Non-Binding) Vote on to Recommend the Frequency of Future Say-on-Pay Votes
67
The Board of Directors is asking shareholders to provide an advisory
vote concerning the frequency of future say-on-pay votes.
5. Approval of an Amendment to our Incentive Plan
68
The Board of Directors is asking shareholders to approve an amendment to our Amended and Restated 2003 Annual and Long-term Incentive Plan to increase the number of shares authorized for issuance thereunder by 1,500,000.
6. Approval of an amendment to the Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation
92
The Board of Directors is asking shareholders to approve an amendment to the Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Piper Sandler Companies to include new Delaware law provisions regarding officer exculpation.
 
2

Executive Summary
How to Participate in the Virtual Meeting
[MISSING IMAGE: ic_internet-pn.jpg]
[MISSING IMAGE: ic_vote-pn.jpg]
[MISSING IMAGE: ic_quest-pn.jpg]
Participate via the Internet
Voting during the meeting
Submitting Questions
To attend the virtual meeting, visit www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/PIPR2023
To vote your shares during the meeting, click on the vote button provided on the screen and follow the instructions provided
Questions may be submitted live during the meeting by typing them in the dialog box provided on the bottom corner of the screen
For technical assistance on the day of the Annual Meeting, call the support line at 844-986-0822 (Toll Free)
or 303-562-9302 (International Toll).
Other Ways to Vote Your Shares
[MISSING IMAGE: ic_internet-pn.jpg]
[MISSING IMAGE: ic_telephn-pn.jpg]
[MISSING IMAGE: ic_mail-pn.jpg]
Internet
Telephone
Mail
Go to www.proxyvote.com and follow the instructions (have the proxy card or internet notice in hand when you access the website)
Dial 1-800-690-6903 and follow the instructions (have the proxy card in hand when you call)
If you received paper copies of our proxy materials, mark your selection on the enclosed proxy card, date and sign your name, and promptly mail the proxy card in the postage-paid envelope provided
YOUR VOTE IS IMPORTANT!
IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING THE AVAILABILITY OF PROXY MATERIALS FOR THE 2023 ANNUAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS TO BE HELD VIRTUALLY ON MAY 17, 2023
Our Proxy Statement for the 2023 Annual Meeting of Shareholders and our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022 are available at www.pipersandler.com/proxymaterials
 
3

Executive Summary
2022 Performance Highlights*
In 2022, we believe that our results reflected the durability of our diversified and scaled business in the face of a challenging market backdrop, with our second highest adjusted net revenues, adjusted net income, and adjusted earnings per share in firm history. Our 2022 performance highlights include:
$1.43B
Adjusted Net
Revenues
We generated adjusted net revenues of $1.43 billion.
$201.3M
Adjusted
Net Income
We achieved adjusted net income of $201.3 million.
$11.26
Adjusted
Earnings Per Share
We achieved adjusted earnings per diluted common share (referred to in this proxy statement as “adjusted earnings per share”) of $11.26.
*
Adjusted net revenues, adjusted net income, and adjusted earnings per share (which are used throughout this proxy statement) are non-GAAP financial measures and are further defined and reconciled to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measure in Appendix A to this proxy statement. Such non-GAAP financial measures should be considered in addition to, not as a substitute for, measures of financial performance prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP.
 
4

Executive Summary
Board Nominees
Our Board of Directors (the “Board”) has nominated ten directors for election at the 2023 annual meeting of shareholders: our chairman and chief executive officer, our head of financial services group, and eight other currently serving directors. Seven of these ten directors are independent under New York Stock Exchange Rules. The Board has determined that our chairman and chief executive officer, Mr. Abraham, our head of financial services group, Mr. Doyle, and Mr. Sterling are not independent. Each nominee was elected by the shareholders at the 2022 annual meeting. Each director was evaluated by the Nominating and Governance Committee in advance of its recommendation of their respective service as a director. Mr. Abraham was elected to serve as chairman of the Board beginning in May 2019. Mr. Soran has served as our lead director since February 2018.
The following table provides summary information on each director nominee. For more detail, please see pages 8 through 12 of this proxy statement.
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_chadabrahamnew-bw.jpg]
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_jondoyle-bw.jpg]
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_williamfitzgerald-bw.jpg]
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_holtvictoria-bw.jpg]
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_mitchellrobbin-bw.jpg]
Chad R. Abraham Jonathan J. Doyle
William R. Fitzgerald
Victoria M. Holt Robbin Mitchell
Chairman and CEO of Piper Sandler Companies
Vice Chairman and Head of Financial Services Group of Piper Sandler Companies
Former Chairman and CEO of Ascent Capital Group Former President and CEO of Proto Labs, Inc. Senior Advisor for Boston Consulting Group
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_schreiertomnew-bw.jpg]
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_sherrysmithnew-bw.jpg]
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_philipsoran1-bw.jpg]
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_briansterling-bw.jpg]
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_scotttaylor-bw.jpg]
Thomas S. Schreier Sherry M. Smith Philip E. Soran Brian R. Sterling Scott C. Taylor
Former Chairman of Nuveen Asset Management
Former Executive VP and CFO of SUPERVALU, INC.
Chair Audit
Former President, CEO and Director of Compellent Technologies
Chair Governance;
Lead Director
Former Managing Director of Piper Sandler Companies, former Co-Head of Investment Banking at Sandler O’Neill & Partners, L.P.
Former Executive VP and General Counsel of NortonLifeLock Inc.
Chair Compensation
 
5

Executive Summary
Summary of Our Board Composition
[MISSING IMAGE: pc_summary-pn.jpg]
Skills and qualifications represented by the director nominees
[MISSING IMAGE: tb_skill-pn.jpg]
 
6

Proposal One: Election of Directors
[MISSING IMAGE: hd_proposalone-pn.jpg] 
PROPOSAL ONE—ELECTION OF DIRECTORS
2023 Nominees for Director
Upon the recommendation of the Nominating and Governance Committee, the Board has nominated ten current members of the Board for election at the 2023 annual meeting. These individuals are Chad R. Abraham, Jonathan J. Doyle, William R. Fitzgerald, Victoria M. Holt, Robbin Mitchell, Thomas S. Schreier, Sherry M. Smith, Philip E. Soran, Brian R. Sterling, and Scott C. Taylor. Each nominee was elected by the shareholders at the 2022 annual meeting.
Each of the nominees was evaluated by the Nominating and Governance Committee in advance of its recommendation of their respective service as a director. Mr. Abraham was elected to serve as chairman of the Board beginning in May 2019. Mr. Soran has served as our lead director since February 2018.
Each of the nominees has agreed to serve as a director if elected. Under our majority voting standard and director resignation policy, each nominee will be elected by a majority of the votes cast with respect to that director’s election. Any nominee failing to receive a majority will tender his or her resignation to the Board, which shall decide whether to accept or reject the resignation. For more information on our majority voting standard and director resignation policy, please see the section titled “Information Regarding the Board of Directors and Corporate Governance—Majority Voting Standard and Director Resignation Policy” below. Proxies may not be voted for more than ten directors. If, for any reason, any nominee becomes unable to serve before the annual meeting occurs, the persons named as proxies may vote your shares for a substitute nominee selected by the Board.
The Board of Directors recommends a vote FOR the election of the ten director nominees. Proxies will be voted FOR the election of the ten nominees unless otherwise specified.
The biographies of each of the nominees below includes information regarding the person’s service as a director, work experience, and the experiences, qualifications, attributes or skills that led the Nominating and Governance Committee and the Board to determine that the person should serve as a director. Each nominee brings unique capabilities to the Board. The Board believes the nominees as a group have the experience and skills in areas such as senior level management, corporate governance, leadership development, investment banking, capital markets, finance, and risk management that are necessary to effectively oversee our company. In addition, the Board believes that each of our director nominees possesses high standards of ethics, integrity and professionalism, sound judgment, community leadership, and a commitment to representing the long-term interests of our shareholders.
 
7

Proposal One: Election of Directors
Chad R. Abraham, Chairman
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_chadabrahamnew-bw.jpg]
Chad R. Abraham
Age 54
Director since 2018
Principal Occupation: Mr. Abraham has been our chief executive officer since 2018 and chairman of the Board since May 2019. Prior to being appointed chief executive officer, Mr. Abraham previously served as our global co-head of investment banking and capital markets since 2010. He was head of capital markets from 2005 to 2010, and managing director and head of our technology investment banking group from 1999 to 2005. Mr. Abraham began his career at Piper Sandler in 1991 as an investment banking analyst.
Qualifications: Mr. Abraham has more than 30 years of experience in the investment banking and capital markets industry with Piper Sandler, including as our global co-head of investment banking and capital markets from 2010 to 2017. The Board believes he has the knowledge of our company and its business that is necessary to help formulate and execute our business plans and growth strategies.
Highlighted Skills: Chief executive experience; investment banking or financial services industry experience; focus sector experience; corporate governance; financial, accounting, and risk management
Other Current Directorships:

Columbus McKinnon Corporation
Jonathan J. Doyle
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_jondoyle-bw.jpg]
Jonathan J. Doyle
Age 58
Director since 2020
Principal Occupation: Mr. Doyle has been a vice chairman, senior managing principal, and head of our financial services group since January 2020. Mr. Doyle joined our company at the time of our acquisition of Sandler O’Neill & Partners, L.P. (“Sandler”), where he had served as a senior managing principal since January 2012, and partner since January 1995. Mr. Doyle began his career at Marine Midland Bank.
Qualifications: Mr. Doyle has more than 25 years of experience in the investment banking and capital markets industry, including as senior managing principal of Sandler for over eight years, where his responsibilities included management of the firm’s business operations and long-term growth strategy. The Board believes that Mr. Doyle’s extensive industry experience and his knowledge of financial services investment banking provides important perspective and insight to the Board.
Highlighted Skills: Investment banking or financial services industry experience; focus sector experience; corporate governance; financial, accounting, and risk management
Other Current Directorships:

nCino, Inc.
 
8

Proposal One: Election of Directors
William R. Fitzgerald
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_williamfitzgerald-bw.jpg]
William R. Fitzgerald
Age 65
Director since 2014
Piper Sandler
Board Committees:

Audit

Compensation
Principal Occupation: Mr. Fitzgerald was chairman of Ascent Capital Group, Inc. from 2000 to 2019, and was its chief executive officer from 2000 to 2018. Ascent Capital Group (formerly known as Ascent Media Group) was a publicly traded holding company which was ultimately merged with its wholly owned operating subsidiary, Monitronics International, Inc., which offers security alarm monitoring services. In addition, Mr. Fitzgerald previously served as senior vice president of Liberty Media Corporation from 2000 to 2012. Mr. Fitzgerald served as executive vice president and chief operating officer for AT&T Broadband (formerly known as Tele-Communications, Inc.) from 1998 to 2000, and as executive vice president, corporate development of TCI Communications, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Tele-Communications, from 1996 to 1998. Mr. Fitzgerald was previously an investment banking partner with Daniels and Associates (now RBC Capital Markets), and he began his career as a commercial banker at The First National Bank of Chicago.
Qualifications: Mr. Fitzgerald brings to the Board significant management experience from his more than 30 years in the media and telecommunications industries, including as CEO of a publicly traded company. In addition, Mr. Fitzgerald’s experience as a partner at a middle-market investment bank provides valuable experience to our management and to the Board.
Highlighted Skills: Chief executive experience; investment banking or financial services industry experience; focus sector experience; corporate governance; financial, accounting, and risk management
Other Previous Directorships Held within the Last Five Years:

Ascent Capital Group, Inc. (2000 to 2019)
Victoria M. Holt
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_holtvictoria-bw.jpg]
Victoria M. Holt
Age 65
Director since 2019
Piper Sandler
Board Committees:

Audit

Compensation
Principal Occupation: Ms. Holt was president and chief executive officer of Proto Labs, Inc., a publicly traded custom prototype and low-volume production manufacturing company, from February 2014 through her retirement in March 2021. From 2010 through 2013, Ms. Holt was president and chief executive officer of Spartech Corporation, a producer of plastic sheet, compounds, and packaging products, until its sale to PolyOne in 2013. From 2005 to 2010, Ms. Holt was senior vice president of PPG Industries’ glass and fiberglass division.
Qualifications: Ms. Holt’s extensive management experience as a former chief executive officer of a growth-oriented, publicly traded company provides valuable perspective to the Board and management. In addition, Ms. Holt’s experience in the industrials sector is valuable to the company as it is a focus area for our investment banking business.
Other Current Directorships:

A.O. Smith Corporation

Waste Management, Inc.
Highlighted Skills: Chief executive experience; focus sector experience; corporate governance; financial, accounting, and risk management
Other Previous Directorships Held within the Last Five Years:

Proto Labs, Inc. (2014 to 2021)
 
9

Proposal One: Election of Directors
Robbin Mitchell
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_mitchellrobbin-bw.jpg]
Robbin Mitchell
Age 59
Director since 2021
Piper Sandler
Board Committees:

Governance
Principal Occupation: Ms. Mitchell is a senior advisor for the Boston Consulting Group (“BCG”), where she had previously held the position of partner and managing director from June 2016 to August 2021. From 2011 to 2015, she served as chief operating officer of Club Monaco, a subsidiary of Ralph Lauren Corporation. Prior to that, Ms. Mitchell held several executive management positions at Ralph Lauren for ten years. Before joining Ralph Lauren, Ms. Mitchell held various senior executive roles in strategy and operations at Tommy Hilfiger and GFT USA, a designer apparel manufacturer and distributor. Earlier in her career, Ms. Mitchell spent nine years working in the consulting and investment banking industries at McKinsey & Company, BCG and Lehman Brothers, specializing in the retail and apparel sectors.
Qualifications: Ms. Mitchell has extensive senior executive experience in the consumer industry, a focus area for our investment banking business, as well as in the consulting and investment banking industries, which contributes significant value and perspective to the Board.
Highlighted Skills: Investment banking or financial services industry experience; focus sector experience; corporate governance; financial, accounting, and risk management
Other Current Directorships:

Kohl’s Corporation
Thomas S. Schreier
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_schreiertomnew-bw.jpg]
Thomas S. Schreier
Age 60
Director since 2018
Piper Sandler
Board Committees:

Compensation

Governance
Principal Occupation: Mr. Schreier was the vice chairman of Nuveen Investments, Inc., and chairman of its largest investment adviser, Nuveen Asset Management, from 2011 to 2014, and, following Nuveen’s acquisition by TIAA, from 2014 to 2016. Prior to that, Mr. Schreier was the chief executive officer of FAF Advisors from 2001 to 2010, when it was acquired by Nuveen. Earlier in his career, Mr. Schreier was a senior managing director and head of equity research at Piper Sandler from 1999 to 2001.
Qualifications: Mr. Schreier has extensive leadership experience in the financial services sector, including as a senior leader of significant asset management companies. This leadership experience in human capital-based businesses such as ours, as well as his investment banking industry experience, provide significant value to the Board.
Highlighted Skills: Investment banking or financial services industry experience; corporate governance; financial, accounting, and risk management
 
10

Proposal One: Election of Directors
Sherry M. Smith
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_sherrysmithnew-bw.jpg]
Sherry M. Smith
Age 61
Director since 2016
Piper Sandler
Board Committees:

Audit (Chair)
Principal Occupation: Ms. Smith served as executive vice president and chief financial officer of SUPERVALU INC., a grocery wholesaler and retailer, from 2010 to 2013. Prior to that, she held the role of senior vice president of finance from 2005 to 2010, and senior vice president of finance and treasurer from 2002 to 2005.
Qualifications: As a result of her roles at SUPERVALU and the public company boards on which she has served, Ms. Smith has extensive public company financial, accounting, and risk management experience, which provides valuable insight and skills for a director of a publicly traded securities firm such as our company.
Other Current Directorships:

Deere & Company

Anywhere Real Estate Inc.
Highlighted Skills: Focus sector experience; corporate governance; financial, accounting, and risk management
Other Previous Directorships Held within the Last Five Years:

Tuesday Morning Corporation (2014 to 2022)
Philip E. Soran
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_philipsoran1-bw.jpg]
Philip E. Soran
Age 66
Director since 2013
Piper Sandler
Board Committees:

Governance (Chair)
Principal Occupation: Mr. Soran served as president, chief executive officer and a director of Compellent Technologies, Inc., a Minnesota-based publicly traded company which he co-founded in March 2002, until its acquisition by Dell Inc. in February 2011. Following the acquisition, he served as the president of Dell Compellent from February 2011 to March 2012. From July 1995 to August 2001, Mr. Soran served as president, chief executive officer and a member of the board of directors of Xiotech, which Mr. Soran co-founded in July 1995. Xiotech was acquired by Seagate in January 2000.
Qualifications: Mr. Soran’s experience founding and building technology companies provides strategic guidance to the Board and management, and his experience in the technology industry is valuable to the company as it is a focus area for our investment banking business. He also has extensive management experience as a former chief executive officer of a publicly traded company, and Mr. Soran’s perspective as a board member of another publicly traded company provides valuable insight to the Board.
Lead Director: Mr. Soran has been our lead director since 2018.
Highlighted Skills: Chief executive experience; focus sector experience; corporate governance; financial, accounting, and risk management
Other Current Directorships:

SPS Commerce, Inc.
 
11

Proposal One: Election of Directors
Brian R. Sterling
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_briansterling-bw.jpg]
Brian R. Sterling
Age 62
Director since 2021
Principal Occupation: Mr. Sterling is a former managing director in the financial services group at Piper Sandler. Mr. Sterling joined Piper Sandler in 2020 in connection with our acquisition of Sandler, where Mr. Sterling had been a principal and co-head of investment banking. Prior to joining Sandler in 2002, Mr. Sterling was a managing director at Merrill Lynch & Co. from 1996 through 2001.
Qualifications: Mr. Sterling has more than 30 years of experience in the investment banking and capital markets industry, including 17 years as co-head of investment banking of Sandler, where his responsibilities included management of the group’s employees, business operations, and long-term growth strategy. The Board believes that Mr. Sterling’s extensive industry experience and his knowledge of financial services investment banking provides important perspective and insight to the Board.
Highlighted Skills: Investment banking or financial services industry experience; focus sector experience; financial, accounting, and risk management
Scott C. Taylor
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_scotttaylor-bw.jpg]
Scott C. Taylor
Age 58
Director since 2014
Piper Sandler
Board Committees:

Audit

Compensation (Chair)
Principal Occupation: Mr. Taylor served as executive vice president, general counsel, and secretary for NortonLifeLock Inc. (formerly Symantec Corp.), a publicly traded computer security software provider, from August 2008 through January 2020. Mr. Taylor’s prior experience includes positions as chief administrative officer, senior vice president and general counsel of Phoenix Technologies Ltd. Prior to that, he was vice president and general counsel of Narus, Inc. Mr. Taylor began his legal career as a corporate attorney at Pillsbury Madison and Sutro LLP (now Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP).
Qualifications: Mr. Taylor brings to the Board significant public company legal and governance expertise developed through his experience as general counsel of two publicly traded companies. In addition, his significant executive experience at leading technology companies provides Mr. Taylor with strong knowledge of the technology industry, which is an area of focus for our investment banking business.
Highlighted Skills: Focus sector experience; corporate governance; financial, accounting, and risk management
Other Current Directorships:

Ziff Davis, Inc.

1Life Healthcare, Inc.
 
12

[MISSING IMAGE: hd_boardofdir-pn.jpg]
INFORMATION REGARDING THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
The Board conducts its business through meetings of the members of the Board and the following standing committees: Audit, Compensation, and Nominating and Governance. Each of the standing committees has adopted and operates under a written charter, and, annually in November, each committee reviews its charter, performs a self-evaluation and establishes a plan for committee activity for the upcoming year. The committee charters are all available on the Investor Relations page of our website at www.pipersandler.com, under the heading “Corporate Governance,” and following the “Charters & Policies” link, together with our Corporate Governance Principles, Director Independence Standards, Director Nominee Selection Policy, procedures for contacting the Board of Directors, Codes of Ethics and Business Conduct, and Complaint Procedures Regarding Accounting and Auditing Matters.
Codes of Ethics and Business Conduct
We have adopted a Code of Ethics and Business Conduct applicable to our employees, including our executive officers, and a separate Code of Ethics and Business Conduct applicable to our directors. Directors who also serve as officers of Piper Sandler must comply with both codes. Both codes are available on the Investor Relations page of our website at www.pipersandler.com, under the heading “Corporate Governance” and following the “Charters & Policies” link. We will post on our website at www.pipersandler.com any amendment to, or waiver from, a provision of either of our Codes of Ethics and Business Conduct within four business days following the date of such amendment or waiver.
Director Independence
Under applicable rules of the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”), a majority of the members of our Board must be independent, and no director qualifies as independent unless the Board affirmatively determines that the director has no material relationship with Piper Sandler. To assist the Board with these determinations, the Board has adopted Director Independence Standards, which are available on the Investor Relations page of our website at www.pipersandler.com, under the heading “Corporate Governance” and the following “Charters & Policies” link.
The Board has affirmatively determined, in accordance with our Director Independence Standards that, other than Mr. Sterling, none of our non-employee directors has a material relationship with Piper Sandler and that each of them is independent. Every transaction and relationship involving our directors in 2022 was deemed immaterial under the NYSE listing standards as well as our Director Independence Standards. These transactions and relationships included: (i) with respect to Ms. Smith, a relationship arising solely from her position as a director of another company that was provided services by Piper Sandler; and (ii) with respect to Mr. Soran and Mses. Holt and Mitchell, immaterial grants of less than $120,000 from Piper Sandler to charitable foundations or other non-profit organizations with which each of those directors is associated.
None of Messrs. Abraham, Doyle, or Sterling can be considered an independent director under NYSE corporate governance rules because Messrs. Abraham and Doyle are current employees of Piper Sandler, and because Mr. Sterling was an employee of Piper Sandler within the past three years.
 
13

Board of Directors and Corporate Governance
Board Leadership Structure and Lead Director
The Board has no policy with respect to the separation of the offices of chairman and chief executive officer, and it believes the determination of whether to combine the roles of chairman and chief executive officer is a part of the succession planning process, which the Board oversees. Following Mr. Abraham’s transition to the role as our chief executive officer in January 2018, the Board elected Mr. Abraham as our chairman in May 2019. The Board believes that the combination of the roles under Mr. Abraham provides unified leadership for the Board and the company, with one cohesive vision for our organization. As chairman and chief executive officer, Mr. Abraham helps shape the strategy ultimately set by the entire Board and leverages his operational experience to help balance growth and risk management. We believe that the oversight provided by the Board’s independent directors, the work of the Board’s committees described below, and the coordination between the chief executive officer and the independent directors facilitated by the lead director provides effective oversight of our company’s strategic plans and operations.
The Board has a lead director, a position which has been held by Mr. Soran since February 2018. Our lead director has the following duties and responsibilities, as further described in our Corporate Governance Principles:

presides at all meetings of the Board at which the chairman is not present, including executive sessions of the independent directors, and coordinates the agenda for and moderates these executive sessions;

serves formally as a liaison between the chief executive officer and the independent directors;

sets Board meeting schedules and agendas to ensure that appropriate matters are covered and that there is sufficient time for discussion of all agenda items;

monitors information sent to the Board and advises the chairman as to the quality, quantity and timeliness of the flow of information;

has authority to call meetings of the independent directors; and

if requested by major shareholders, makes himself available for consultation and direct communication.
Majority Voting Standard and Director Resignation Policy
Our amended and restated bylaws (the “bylaws”) provide for a majority voting standard in uncontested director elections. Each nominee in an uncontested election will be elected by the vote of a majority of the votes cast with respect to that director’s election. For these purposes, a majority of votes cast means that the number of votes cast “for” a director’s election exceeds the number of votes cast “against” that director’s election. “Abstentions” and “broker non-votes” will not be counted as votes cast either “for” or “against” a director’s election. Contested director elections will continue to be decided by a plurality vote. Our bylaws require any director nominee failing to receive a majority of the votes cast in an uncontested director election promptly tender his or her resignation to the Board. Within 90 days of certification of the election results, the Nominating and Governance Committee will make a recommendation to the Board as to whether to accept or reject the tendered resignation, or whether other action should be taken, and the Board will publicly disclose its decision regarding the tendered resignation and the rationale behind such decision. The director who tenders his or her resignation will not participate in the recommendation of the Nominating and Governance Committee or the decision of the Board with respect to his or her resignation. For additional information regarding the majority voting standard, see Article II, Section 2.3 of our bylaws.
Board Involvement in Risk Oversight
The company’s management is responsible for defining the various risks facing the company, formulating risk management policies and procedures, and managing the company’s risk exposures on a day-to-day
 
14

Board of Directors and Corporate Governance
basis. The Board’s responsibility is to monitor the company’s risk management processes by informing itself concerning the company’s material risks and evaluating whether management has reasonable controls in place to address the material risks. The Board is not responsible for defining or managing the company’s various risks. The Board has allocated responsibility for oversight of specific risks between itself and its committees as provided below. Management regularly reports to each committee and the Board concerning the specific risks it oversees. The Board believes this division of responsibilities provides an effective and efficient approach for addressing risk management.
Board of Directors
Oversees Major Risks
Corporate Strategy
Leadership & Organizational Structure
Culture and Ethics
   
   
   
Audit
Committee
Compensation
Committee
Governance and Nominating Committee
Information security
(with shared
Board oversight)
Market risk
Credit risk
Liquidity risk Operational risk
Legal and regulatory risk
Human capital risk
(fraud and misconduct)
Compensation risk
Succession risk
Board and committee
risk oversight structure
Meetings of the Non-Employee and Outside Directors
At both the Board and committee levels, our non-employee directors meet regularly in executive sessions in which Messrs. Abraham and Doyle and other members of management do not participate. Our independent directors meet regularly in executive session without any of Messrs. Abraham, Doyle, or Sterling, the non-independent directors under NYSE rules. Mr. Soran, our lead director, serves as the presiding director at executive sessions of the Board, and the chairperson of each committee serves as the presiding director at executive sessions of such committee.
 
15

Board of Directors and Corporate Governance
Committees of the Board
We have three standing committees of the Board: the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee and the Nominating and Governance Committee. The table below shows the current membership of these committees:
[MISSING IMAGE: tb_committe-bw.jpg]
Following the annual meeting of shareholders, Mr. Scheier will become chair of the Governance Committee, and Mr. Soran will continue to serve as a member of the Governance Committee. None of Messrs. Abraham, Doyle, or Sterling serve on any of the committees of the Board.
 
16

Board of Directors and Corporate Governance
Audit Committee
Members:
Sherry M. Smith (Chair)
William R. Fitzgerald
Victoria M. Holt
Scott C. Taylor
Number of Meetings
in 2022: 10
Functions: The Audit Committee’s purpose is to oversee the integrity of our financial statements, the independent auditor’s qualifications and independence, the performance of our internal audit function and independent auditor, and compliance with legal and regulatory requirements. To this end, the Audit Committee:

Oversees our public financial reporting, reviews the integrity of our accounting and financial reporting processes and audits of our financial statements, and prepares the Audit Committee Report included in our proxy statement for the annual meeting of shareholders;

Oversees and evaluates the performance of the independent auditor;

Oversees our risk assessment and management framework;

Provides an open avenue of communication among the independent auditor, financial and senior management, the internal auditors and the Board; and

Oversees our major risk exposures in the areas of market risk, credit risk, liquidity risk, legal and regulatory risks, operational risk (including cybersecurity), human capital risks related to misconduct and fraud, and legal and compliance matters.
In exercising its authority to oversee, retain, and terminate the independent auditor, the Audit Committee annually reviews the independent auditor’s performance and independence, taking into consideration the quality of the Audit Committee’s ongoing discussions with the independent auditor, management’s perceptions of the independent auditor’s expertise and past performance, the appropriateness of fees charged; and the independent auditor’s independence qualification, including the independent auditor’s provision of any permissible non-audit services and the related fees received for such services, as further described below in the section titled “Audit Committee Report and Payment of Fees to our Independent Auditor—Auditor Fees.”
The Audit Committee’s responsibilities are more fully described in its charter.
The Board has determined that all members of the Audit Committee are independent (as that term is defined in the applicable NYSE rules and in the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”)), that all members are financially literate and have the accounting or related financial expertise required by the NYSE rules, and that multiple members, including Ms. Smith, qualify as an “audit committee financial expert” as defined under the rules and regulations of the SEC.
 
17

Board of Directors and Corporate Governance
Compensation Committee
Members:
Scott C. Taylor (Chair)
William R. Fitzgerald
Victoria M. Holt
Thomas S. Schreier
Number of Meetings in 2022: 6
Functions: The Compensation Committee’s purpose is to oversee the compensation of the company’s executive officers as well as other broad-based employee compensation and benefits programs to ensure that our compensation and employee benefit programs are aligned with our compensation philosophy and adequately attract and retain the talent that we rely on as a human-capital business. To that end, the Compensation Committee:

Establishes performance goals for our CEO and oversees the performance goals set by our CEO for our other executive officers and annually evaluates their performance;

Determines the annual compensation of our CEO and other executive officers;

Oversees our executive compensation program, as well as other broad-based incentive, equity-based, retirement or other material employee benefit plans;

Reviews and discusses with management the disclosures regarding executive compensation to be included in our proxy statement for the annual meeting of shareholders, and recommends to the Board inclusion of the Compensation Discussion and Analysis in our proxy statement for the annual meeting of shareholders; and

Oversees major risk exposures relating to compensation and succession, and whether the company’s compensation arrangements are consistent with effective controls and sound risk management.
The Compensation Committee’s responsibilities are more fully described in its charter. For more information regarding the Committee’s process in setting compensation, please see “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—How Compensation Decisions are Made” below.
Management Support: The work of the Compensation Committee is supported by our human capital department, primarily through our chief human capital officer, our finance department, primarily through our chief financial officer, and by our legal department, primarily through our general counsel, who all prepare and present information and recommendations for review and consideration by the Compensation Committee. These personnel work closely with the Compensation Committee chair and, as appropriate, our chief executive officer. For more information, refer to the section below titled “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—How Compensation Decisions are Made—Involvement of Executive Officers.”
Use of Compensation Consultant: The Compensation Committee has sole authority to engage, retain, and terminate independent compensation consultants to provide strategic planning, market context, and general advice to the Compensation Committee with respect to executive compensation, as described below under “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—How Compensation Decisions are Made—Compensation Consultant.”
The Board has determined that all members of the Compensation Committee are independent (as that term is defined in applicable NYSE rules).
 
18

Board of Directors and Corporate Governance
Nominating and Governance Committee
Members:
Philip E. Soran (Chair)
Robbin Mitchell
Thomas S. Schreier
Number of Meetings
in 2022: 4
Functions: The purpose of the Nominating and Governance Committee (“Governance Committee”) is to oversee the make-up and succession of our Board to ensure that our Board continues to have the right mix of skills, qualifications, and diversity to effectively oversee our company. To that end, the Governance Committee:

Identifies and evaluates candidates for nomination as directors, responds to director nominations submitted by shareholders, evaluates the performance and independence of our Board members, and recommends the slate of director nominees for election at the annual meeting of shareholders and candidates to fill vacancies between annual meetings;

Oversees committee membership and structure, and recommends qualified members of the Board for membership on committees;

Reviews and assesses the adequacy of our Corporate Governance Principles, and recommends to the Board sound corporate governance principles and practices;

Oversees administration of our related person transaction policy and reviews the transactions submitted to it pursuant to such policy;

Oversees the annual evaluation process for the chief executive officer, the Board, and Board committees; and

Oversees the Board’s committee structures and functions as they relate to risk oversight.
The responsibilities of the Governance Committee are more fully described in its charter.
The Board has determined that all members of the Governance Committee are independent (as that term is defined in applicable NYSE rules).
Annual Board Evaluation Process
The Governance Committee oversees the Board’s annual evaluation process. In connection with this process, every year the Governance Committee chair interviews each director and members of management concerning the effectiveness of the Board and its committees, including in the areas of strategic prioritization, risk oversight, director engagement, and management accountability. The Governance Committee chair reviews information from these interviews with the Board. Each of our committees includes any feedback received concerning the committee in its annual self-evaluation, which is discussed at a regular committee meeting. The results of each committee’s self-evaluation are discussed with the full Board.
Meeting Attendance
Our Corporate Governance Principles provide that our directors are expected to attend meetings of the Board and of the committees on which they serve, as well as our annual meeting of shareholders. Our Board also encourages directors to observe meetings of committees on which they are not members. Our Board held seven meetings during 2022. Each of our current directors attended at least 75% of the meetings of the Board and the committees on which he or she served during 2022, with the directors collectively attending 99% of the aggregate number of the meetings held by the Board and the committees on which they served during the year. All of our current directors who were serving at the time of our 2022 annual meeting of shareholders attended such virtual meeting.
 
19

Board of Directors and Corporate Governance
Procedures for Contacting the Board of Directors
The Board has established a process for shareholders and other interested parties to send written communications to the Board or to individual directors. Such communications should be sent by U.S. mail to the attention of the Office of the Secretary, Piper Sandler Companies, 800 Nicollet Mall, Suite 900, Mail Stop J12NSH, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402. Communications regarding accounting and auditing matters will be handled in accordance with our Complaint Procedures Regarding Accounting and Auditing Matters. Other communications will be collected by the secretary of the company and delivered, in the form received, to the lead director or, if so addressed, to a specified director.
Procedures for Selecting and Nominating Director Candidates
The Governance Committee will consider director candidates recommended by shareholders and has adopted a policy that contemplates shareholders recommending and nominating director candidates. A shareholder who wishes to recommend a director candidate for nomination by the Board at the annual meeting of shareholders or for vacancies on the Board that arise between shareholder meetings must timely provide the Governance Committee with sufficient written documentation to permit a determination by the Board whether such candidate meets the required and desired director selection criteria set forth in our bylaws, our Corporate Governance Principles and our Director Nominee Selection Policy described below. Such documentation and the name of the director candidate must be sent by U.S. mail to the Chairperson, Nominating and Governance Committee, c/o the Office of the Secretary, Piper Sandler Companies, 800 Nicollet Mall, Suite 900, Mail Stop J12NSH, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402.
Alternatively, shareholders may directly nominate a person for election to our Board by complying with the procedures set forth in Article II, Section 2.4 of our bylaws, and with the rules and regulations of the SEC. Under our bylaws, only persons nominated in accordance with the procedures set forth in the bylaws will be eligible to serve as directors. In order to nominate a candidate for service as a director, you must be a shareholder at the time you give the Board notice of your nomination, and you must be entitled to vote for the election of directors at the meeting at which your nominee will be considered. In accordance with our bylaws, director nominations generally must be made pursuant to notice delivered to, or mailed and received at, our principal executive offices at the address above, not later than the 90th day, nor earlier than the 120th day, prior to the first anniversary of the prior year’s annual meeting of shareholders. As a result, any shareholder nominees for election to the Board pursuant to our bylaws must be received no earlier than January 18, 2024, and no later than February 20, 2024. Your notice must set forth all information relating to the nominee that is required to be disclosed in solicitations of proxies for the election of directors in an election contest, or is otherwise required, in each case pursuant to Regulation 14A under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) (including the nominee’s written consent to being named in the proxy statement as a nominee and to serving as a director if elected).
In addition to the requirements set forth above, shareholders who intend to solicit proxies in support of director nominees other than the company’s nominees must comply with the additional requirements of Rule 14a-19(b) under the Exchange Act.
As required by our Corporate Governance Principles and our Director Nominee Selection Policy, when evaluating the appropriate characteristics of candidates for service as a director, the Governance Committee takes into account many factors. At a minimum, director candidates must demonstrate high standards of ethics, integrity and professionalism, independence, sound judgment, community leadership and meaningful experience in business, law or finance or other appropriate endeavor. Candidates also must be committed to representing the long-term interests of our shareholders. In addition to these minimum qualifications, the Governance Committee considers other factors it deems appropriate based on the current needs and desires of the Board, including specific business and financial expertise, experience as a director of a public company, and diversity. The Board considers a number of factors in its evaluation of diversity, including geography, age, gender, and ethnicity. Based on these factors and the qualifications and background of each director, the Board believes that its current composition is
 
20

Board of Directors and Corporate Governance
diverse. As indicated above, diversity is one factor in the total mix of information the Board considers when evaluating director candidates. The Governance Committee will reassess the qualifications of a director, including the director’s attendance, involvement at Board and committee meetings and contribution to Board diversity, prior to recommending a director for re-election.
Compensation Program for Non-Employee Directors
Our non-employee directors participated in our non-employee director compensation program. Employees of Piper Sandler who also serve as directors receive compensation for their service as employees, but they do not receive any additional compensation for their service as directors. The compensation structure for non-employee directors will change for 2023. Our non-employee director compensation program provides for the annual payments described in the table below.
Annual Compensation for Non-Employee Directors for 2022 2023 Program Changes
Board Service

$80,000 cash retainer

$95,000 grant of shares of our common stock

Increased to $100,000

No change
Service on a Committee

Audit—$10,000 cash retainer

Compensation—$5,000 cash retainer

Governance—$5,000 cash retainer

Eliminated

Eliminated

Eliminated
Service as a Committee Chair

Audit—$25,000 cash retainer

Compensation—$15,000 cash retainer

Governance—$15,000 cash retainer

Decreased to $20,000

Decreased to $10,000

Decreased to $10,000
Additional Retainer

Service as Lead Director—$30,000 cash retainer

No change
A director that receives fees for service as a chairperson of a committee does not receive fees for membership on that committee. Non-employee directors who join the Board after the first month of a calendar year are paid a pro rata annual retainer based on the period they serve as a director during the year. The annual grant of $95,000 of vested shares of our common stock is made on the day of our annual meeting of shareholders to all directors whose service continues after that date. In addition, at the time of a director’s initial election to the Board, he or she is granted $60,000 of vested shares of our common stock. All equity awards granted to our non-employee directors are granted under the Piper Sandler Companies Amended and Restated 2003 Annual and Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “Incentive Plan”). With respect to Board service in 2023, as a reflection of market practices based on an analysis prepared by our Compensation Committee’s independent compensation consultant, the structure of the non-employee director compensation program was changed by eliminating the retainer for committee service and reducing retainers for service as a committee chair by $5,000. In response, the annual cash retainer for Board service was increased from $80,000 to $100,000.
Our non-employee directors may participate in the Piper Sandler Companies Deferred Compensation Plan for Non-Employee Directors, which was designed to facilitate increased equity ownership in the company. The plan permits our non-employee directors to defer all or a portion of the cash retainers payable to them and shares of common stock granted to them for service as a director of Piper Sandler for any calendar year. All cash amounts and share grants deferred by a participating director are credited to a recordkeeping account and deemed invested in phantom shares of our common stock as of the date the deferred fees otherwise would have been paid or the shares otherwise would have been issued to the director. Any dividends that we pay on shares of our common stock are also credited as additional phantom shares to the directors’ recordkeeping accounts based on the closing price per share of our common stock on the NYSE on the date the dividend is paid. No shares of common stock are reserved, repurchased or issued until the director’s service ceases. Following the last day of the year in which the director’s service ceases, the director will receive a share of our common stock for each phantom share in their recordkeeping account.
 
21

Board of Directors and Corporate Governance
Non-employee directors may participate in our non-profit gift matching program, pursuant to which we will match a director’s gifts to eligible organizations dollar for dollar from a minimum of $50 up to an aggregate maximum of $5,000 per year.
Non-Employee Director Compensation for 2022
The following table contains compensation information for our non-employee directors for the year ended December 31, 2022.
Fees Earned or
Paid in Cash
Director
Annual
Retainer
($)
Additional
Retainer and
Meeting Fees
($)
Stock
Awards
(1)(2)
($)
All Other
Compensation
($)
(4)
Total
($)
William R. Fitzgerald 80,000 10,000 95,067(3) 5,000 190,067
Victoria M. Holt 80,000 5,000 95,067(3) 6,028 186,095
Robbin Mitchell 80,000 10,000 95,067(3) 5,000 190,067
Thomas S. Schreier 80,000 15,000 95,067 6,538 196,605
Sherry M. Smith 80,000 30,000 95,067(3) 5,000 210,067
Philip E. Soran 80,000(3) 45,000(3) 95,067 5,808 225,875
Brian R. Sterling 80,000(3) 95,067 2,005,000 2,180,067(7)
Scott C. Taylor 80,000 25,000 95,067 8,598 208,665
(1)
Represents the aggregate grant date fair value calculated in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718.
(2)
Our non-employee directors hold no outstanding stock option awards.
(3)
These amounts were deferred pursuant to the Piper Sandler Companies Deferred Compensation Plan for Non-Employee Directors.
(4)
The amounts in the “All Other Compensation” column reflect $5,000 matching contributions made by the company to non-profits designated by the director and, as applicable, airfare for travel by director spouses to the annual strategic off-site Board meeting held at our New York City and Greenwich offices. Mr. Sterling’s amount includes a $2,000,000 payment made by the company in connection with the termination of the Transition Services Agreement and the completion of a transaction concerning which Mr. Sterling had been providing services. Please see the section below titled “Transactions with Related Persons” for more information.
 
22

[MISSING IMAGE: hd_execcompen-pn.jpg]
Compensation Discussion and Analysis
2022 Financial Performance
In 2022, despite a challenging market backdrop and significant decline in client activity from record 2021 levels, we achieved the second highest adjusted net revenues, adjusted net income, and adjusted earnings per share in firm history. We believe that our 2022 results reflect our solid execution on our long-term growth strategy and successful integration of our acquisitions, which have significantly increased our market relevance, expanded our client base, and added to our differentiated capabilities. We believe that the strength of our platform, combined with our emphasis on a capital-light model, positions us to provide solid financial performance throughout the business cycle, as evidenced by our strong profitability during 2022 with adjusted earnings per share of $11.26, and an adjusted ROE of 17.5%.
Importantly, our 2022 results reflect our focus on strengthening and expanding our advisory services business, as we generated over $776 million of advisory services revenues, which represents the second strongest year in our history, with a total of 230 mergers and acquisition advisory deals closed or announced and over $82 billion in aggregate transaction value. In addition, we continue to aggressively compete to gain market share, and we were ranked by Mergermarket as the number two advisor based on the number of announced U.S. mergers and acquisition advisory deals with a reported value under $1 billion for the year. Our 2022 results were positively impacted by a strong performance by our financial services group, which joined us through our acquisition of Sandler in 2020, and by a record performance by our energy and power team, which joined us through our acquisition of Simmons & Company International in 2016. These results demonstrate the success of our long-term strategy to expand the breadth and relevance of our investment banking platform by adding sector and product expertise, and serving as a destination of choice for market-leading firms and top-tier talent looking to build their businesses, deepen their client relationships, and expand their product offerings.
We continued to build on our momentum in 2022 with our acquisitions of DBO Partners LLC (“DBO Partners”), a technology investment banking firm, and Stamford Partners LLP (“Stamford Partners”), a specialist investment bank offering mergers and acquisition advisory services to European food and beverage companies. In addition, our acquisition of Cornerstone Macro LLC (“Cornerstone Macro”), a research firm focused on providing macro research and equity derivatives trading to institutional investors, closed in February 2022, and contributed to record revenues of $210 million by our equities institutional brokerage business during the year.
Although our 2022 performance was strong given the challenging market backdrop, the overall decline in our operating results from a record 2021 had a significant impact on our named executive officers’ 2022 incentive compensation, which was down 32% from 2021 in aggregate, consistent with our pay-for-performance philosophy.
 
23

Executive Compensation: Compensation Discussion and Analysis
The following were the key aspects of our 2022 financial performance considered by our Compensation Committee (referred to as the “Committee” in this Compensation Discussion and Analysis) when determining executive officer compensation for 2022:
Adjusted Net Revenues ($M)*
[MISSING IMAGE: bc_revenues-pn.jpg]
Adjusted ROE*
[MISSING IMAGE: bc_adiusted-pn.jpg]
Adjusted Earnings Per Share*
[MISSING IMAGE: bc_earnings-pn.jpg]
Total Shareholder Returns (“TSR”)
(as of 12/31/2022)
[MISSING IMAGE: bc_returns-pn.jpg]
*
From continuing operations only.
(1)
Adjusted net revenues, adjusted net income, adjusted earnings per share, adjusted pre-tax operating income, and adjusted ROE (which are used throughout this proxy statement) are non-GAAP financial measures and are further defined and reconciled to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measure in Appendix A to this proxy statement.

We generated adjusted net revenues of $1.43 billion, reflecting the scale and breadth of our platform, with significant contributions from our financial services, healthcare, and energy and power advisory teams and equities institutional brokerage business, which allowed us to deliver solid performance on a relative basis despite a market-wide downturn in activity from 2021.

We achieved adjusted net income of $201.3 million, adjusted earnings per share of $11.26, and an adjusted ROE of 17.5% despite the challenging market conditions, demonstrating the profitability of our scaled business and our disciplined focus on profitable growth, especially in our higher-margin advisory business.

At the end of 2022, our three- and five-year TSR ranked 4th among our peer group.
Named Executive Officers
Throughout this proxy statement, we refer to our chief executive officer (“CEO”), chief financial officer (“CFO”), and each of our three other most highly compensated executive officers for 2022, collectively as the “named executive officers.” In addition to Chad R. Abraham, our CEO, and Timothy L. Carter, our
 
24

Executive Compensation: Compensation Discussion and Analysis
CFO, this group includes James P. Baker and Michael R. Dillahunt, our global co-heads of investment banking and capital markets, and Jonathan J. Doyle, our head of financial services group.
Say-on-Pay Results and Shareholder Engagement
At our 2022 annual meeting of shareholders, our say-on-pay proposal received “for” votes that represented approximately 97.8% of the aggregate number of shares that voted “for” and “against” the proposal. We believe that this result reflects endorsement of the Committee’s handling of executive compensation matters. In fall 2022, we sought to engage with the majority of our 25 largest shareholders in order to give them an opportunity to provide input on our executive compensation program as well as any of their governance or other priorities.
 
25

Executive Compensation: Compensation Discussion and Analysis
Executive Compensation Program
In 2022, consistent with previous years, our named executive officers’ compensation consisted primarily of three elements: base salary, annual incentive compensation (including cash and restricted compensation), and long-term incentive awards in the form of long-term performance share units (“PSUs”).
Base Salary
Base salaries provide a market-competitive amount of cash compensation for each executive that is not variable.
   
Annual Incentive Compensation
Our annual incentive program directly aligns our named executive officers’ annual incentive pay with our firm-wide profitability and business line performance. Increasing our profitability is a key objective for us as we seek to maximize long-term value for our shareholders. Annual incentive compensation is paid in a mix of cash and time-vested restricted compensation in the form of shares of our common stock and shares of certain investment funds.
   
Long-Term PSU Awards
Our PSU awards are intended to directly align the interests of our named executive officers with those of our shareholders by directly tying the value of the award to certain long-term performance metrics. The PSU award will be earned only if over the 36-month performance period we achieve a certain (1) adjusted ROE or (2) relative TSR compared to a broad index of financial services companies. The amount of PSUs awarded to each named executive officer is based on the amount of annual incentive compensation paid to the named executive officer.
For compensation earned for individual performance in 2022 and paid or granted in February 2023, our named executive officers’ total incentive compensation was paid or granted as follows:
2022 Incentive Compensation Program (paid or granted in February 2023)
[MISSING IMAGE: tb_compensation-pn.jpg]
 
26

Executive Compensation: Compensation Discussion and Analysis
2022 Named Executive Officer Compensation Overview
The table below shows the base salary, annual incentive compensation, and fair value of the long-term incentive award PSU grants that were paid or awarded to each named executive officer in connection with the 2022 executive compensation program. Importantly, because the incentive awards are shown in relation to the year of performance, this Supplemental Compensation Table differs from the Summary Compensation Table and the Pay-Versus-Performance Table appearing later in this proxy statement.
For example, the “Restricted Compensation Incentive” column in the table below shows the restricted shares of our common stock that were earned as part of the annual incentive compensation program for 2022 performance, but were granted in February 2023. In contrast, the Summary Compensation Table appearing later in this proxy statement shows for 2022 the restricted shares of our common stock that were granted in February 2022, meaning that they were earned as part of the annual incentive compensation program for 2021 performance.
Similarly, the Supplemental Compensation Table below shows in the “Long-Term PSU Award” column the PSUs granted to our executive officers in February 2023. In contrast, the Summary Compensation Table appearing later in this proxy statement shows for 2022 the PSUs granted in February 2022, meaning that they were earned as part of the compensation program for 2021 performance.
This table is not a substitute for the information required by SEC rules, specifically the Summary Compensation Table, Pay-Versus-Performance Table, and the related tables appearing later in this proxy statement.
 
27

Executive Compensation: Compensation Discussion and Analysis
Supplemental Compensation Table
Incentive Compensation
Name
Base
Salary
Cash
Incentive
(1)
Restricted
Compensation
Incentive
(2)
Long-Term
PSU
Award
(3)
Incentive
Total
Total
Chad R. Abraham(4)
Chairman and CEO
2022 $ 650,000 $ 2,940,000 $ 2,205,000 $ 2,205,000 $ 7,350,000 $ 8,000,000
2021 $ 633,333 $ 3,250,000 $ 4,058,333 $ 4,058,333 $ 11,366,666 $ 12,000,000
Timothy L. Carter
CFO
2022 $ 425,000 $ 962,500 $ 481,250 $ 481,250 $ 1,925,000 $ 2,350,000
2021 $ 425,000 $ 1,337,500 $ 668,750 $ 668,750 $ 2,675,000 $ 3,100,000
James P. Baker
Global Co-Head of
Investment Banking and Capital Markets
2022 $ 425,000 $ 1,966,250 $ 804,375 $ 804,375 $ 3,575,000 $ 4,000,000
2021 $ 425,000 $ 2,791,250 $ 1,141,875 $ 1,141,875 $ 5,075,000 $ 5,500,000
Michael R. Dillahunt(5)
Global Co-Head of
Investment Banking and Capital Markets
2022 $ 425,000 $ 2,296,250 $ 939,375 $ 939,375 $ 4,175,000 $ 4,600,000
Jonathan J. Doyle
Vice Chairman, Head of Financial Services Group
2022 $ 500,000 $ 3,850,000 $ 1,575,000 $ 1,575,000 $ 7,000,000 $ 7,500,000
2021 $ 500,000 $ 6,150,000 $ 3,075,000 $ 1,025,000 $ 10,250,000 $ 10,750,000
(1)
2022 amounts reflect the cash compensation portion of amounts paid under the 2022 annual incentive compensation program in February 2023.
(2)
2022 amounts reflect the value of the time-vested restricted shares of our common stock and restricted investment fund shares granted in February 2023 as the restricted compensation portion of amounts paid under the 2022 annual incentive compensation program.
(3)
2022 amounts reflect the value of the PSU awards made in February 2023 as the long-term performance-based portion of amounts paid under the 2022 annual incentive compensation program.
(4)
On February 15, 2023, Mr. Abraham was awarded a special performance-based non-qualified stock option which vests over five years to purchase 75,000 shares of Common Stock with an exercise price of $170.77. Because the option grant was not related to Mr. Abraham’s 2022 performance, the value of the grant has not been included in this Supplemental Compensation Table or discussions in this Compensation & Discussion Analysis of his 2022 incentive compensation totals.
(5)
Mr. Dillahunt was not a named executive officer for 2021. Accordingly, the table above includes the compensation of Mr. Dillahunt only for 2022.
 
28

Executive Compensation: Compensation Discussion and Analysis
2022 Incentive Compensation Overview

Our annual incentive program directly ties our executive officers’ annual incentives to our adjusted pre-tax operating income. With respect to 2022 performance, each executive officer received annual incentive awards based on the adjusted pre-tax operating income of our company or the operating performance of their business line, as applicable, which the Committee had the discretion to further adjust based on individual and business line operating performance considerations. Annual incentives are delivered in a mix of cash and time-vested restricted compensation. Our named executive officers also were granted a long-term PSU award in an amount that is directly based on the amount of their annual incentives.

For 2022 performance, total incentive compensation paid to our named executive officers in annual incentives and long-term PSU awards decreased overall by 32% as compared to 2021, reflecting the 51% decline in our adjusted pre-tax operating income from 2021.
Adjusted Pre-Tax
Operating Income*
Named Executive Officers’
Annual Incentive Awards
(cash, time-vested restricted
compensation, and PSUs)**
[MISSING IMAGE: bc_operatingincome-pn.jpg]
[MISSING IMAGE: bc_executive-pn.jpg]
*Adjusted pre-tax operating income is a non-GAAP financial measure and is further defined and reconciled to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measure in Appendix A to this proxy statement.
**The year-over-year annual incentive comparisons includes Messrs. Abraham, Baker, Carter, and Doyle, and does not include Mr. Dillahunt, who was not a named executive officer in 2021. In addition, the annual incentive award total for Mr. Abraham does not include the value of his February 2023 non-qualified stock option grant.
 
29

Executive Compensation: Compensation Discussion and Analysis
2022 Pay Mix
As illustrated below, the pay mix for all 2022 elements of compensation received by our CEO and by our other named executive officers, as disclosed in the Supplemental Compensation Table above (including the value of the restricted stock, MFRS, and PSU awards granted in February 2023) was significantly weighted toward performance-based compensation:
[MISSING IMAGE: pc_ceoneopay-pn.jpg]
We believe the mix of base salary relative to performance-based compensation in the form of annual incentives and PSU awards illustrated above appropriately balances our goal of aligning pay for performance without encouraging undue risk-taking that can arise from compensation excessively weighted toward performance-based elements. This mix is designed to provide an appropriate and competitive amount of incentives for strong annual performance, while leaving a sufficient level of compensation tied to our long-term performance to retain executives and encourage them to focus on long-term value creation. The balance of these interests is determined by the Committee at its discretion, considering factors including reference to pay practices at our peer group.
 
30

Executive Compensation: Compensation Discussion and Analysis
Our Compensation Practices Demonstrate Sound Governance
Our compensation practices demonstrate sound corporate governance. We continually review our executive compensation program to ensure it reflects good governance practices and the best interests of shareholders. Our executive compensation program currently includes:
What we do:
What we do NOT do:
Annual incentives directly tied to our adjusted pre-tax operating income or business line operating performance, each of which are related to our profitability;
X
No stand-alone change-in-control agreements;
Long-term PSU awards directly tied to (1) adjusted ROE, a key operating performance metric, and (2) returns generated for our shareholders as measured by relative TSR;
X
No repricing of underwater stock options;
Stock ownership guidelines for executive officers and directors, supplemented with an anti-hedging policy;
X
No excessive perquisites;
“Double trigger” change-in-control provision for all equity awards;
X
No hedging transactions, short sales, or pledging of our common stock permitted for any employee, including executive officers;
Clawback policy to recover incentive compensation in certain circumstances;
X
No tax gross-ups on perquisites, severance, or change in control payments;
On-going shareholder outreach by our Committee and management to solicit feedback on compensation and governance;
X
No executive pensions or additional benefit accruals under nonqualified executive retirement programs; and
Independent compensation consultant provides input into the Committee’s compensation determinations; and
X
No dividends paid on unvested equity awards or unearned PSU awards.
Peer group reviews are conducted annually by our Committee to ensure the ongoing relevance of each peer.
 
31

Executive Compensation: Compensation Discussion and Analysis
Our Compensation Philosophy and Objectives
Our executive compensation program is designed to drive and reward corporate performance annually and over the long term, as measured by increasing shareholder value. Compensation also must be internally equitable and externally competitive and meet the following core objectives:
Core Compensation Principles and Objectives
Principle
Objectives
How We Achieved These Objectives
Pay for
Performance

Drive Profitability
Most of the total compensation paid to our named executive officers is based on our adjusted pre-tax operating income or business line performance. In addition, up to half of the PSU award is earned only if our adjusted ROE meets certain levels.

Drive Shareholder Returns
Our executive officers are granted a PSU award which vests if we achieve certain levels of (1) adjusted ROE, and (2) relative TSR over a three-year performance period from the date of grant. Vesting is based on meeting one or both metric’s respective threshold level of performance at the end of the three-year performance period; if the threshold is not met, the portion of the PSU relating to that metric is forfeited.

Demonstrate Leadership
Our named executive officers’ performance is also measured against defined objectives in areas such as strategic initiatives, business performance, leadership effectiveness, and internal talent development, which impacts their annual incentive compensation amounts.
Sustain and
Strengthen
the Franchise

Attract Talent
Because our business is highly competitive and relies on the talents and efforts of our employees, our compensation program is designed to be competitive to allow us to attract the most talented people who are committed to the long-term success of our company.

Retain Talent
Our success drives the compensation realized by our executive officers, both in the form of increased incentive compensation paid and in appreciation of the company’s stock price, which makes up a significant portion of our executive officers’ annual incentive compensation in the form of time-vested restricted stock.
Align Risk
and Reward

Foster Balanced Risk-Taking
We use a mix of compensation components—base salary, annual incentives and long-term incentives—to create an environment that encourages increased profitability for the company without undue risk-taking. We also have an incentive compensation recovery policy that allows the Committee to recover incentive compensation under certain circumstances.
Align
Employees
with
Shareholders

Encourage Equity Ownership
We use equity ownership to directly align the interests of our executive officers with those of our shareholders in creating long-term shareholder value. A significant portion of annual incentives is paid in restricted shares of our common stock, and each executive officer is subject to our stock ownership guidelines that requires them to hold a specified multiple of their base salary in shares of our company stock while they are an executive officer.
 
32

Executive Compensation: Compensation Discussion and Analysis
Relationship between Performance and Total Incentive Pay
The design of our incentive program is intended to directly align pay with performance. Total incentive compensation paid to our executive officers includes compensation from our (1) annual incentive program and (2) long-term PSU award program.
Our annual incentive program is intended to directly align annual incentive pay with a measure of our profitability. Our long-term PSU award program is intended to directly align long-term incentive pay with our (1) adjusted ROE and (2) relative TSR. Each year, annual incentives are determined based on individual and business line operating performance as measured by our adjusted pre-tax operating income. Long-term PSU awards are then granted to our executive officers in amounts that are tied to the amount of annual incentives that each executive officer earned during that year. The executive officer must then earn the PSU award through long-term performance.
Our annual incentive program measures performance in terms of our adjusted pre-tax operating income. Executive officers receive increased annual incentives when the company (in the case of the CEO and CFO) or his or her business line (in the case of business line leaders) achieves increased annual profitability.
 
33

Executive Compensation: Compensation Discussion and Analysis
The Committee’s Use of Discretion in Setting Annual Incentive Compensation
Although annual incentive compensation is based on company and business line operating performance, the Committee exercises discretion that allows it to best align executive officer pay with performance during the year. The Committee believes that its ability to use discretion in setting annual incentive compensation is a critical feature of the company’s annual incentive compensation program for the following reasons:

We operate in a cyclical industry. The Committee’s use of discretion allows it to take into consideration other, less quantifiable factors that impacted company and business line operating performance, including relative performance against the company’s peers, and provides the flexibility to adjust annual incentive compensation for individual performance versus broader cyclical or market-driven factors that may have impacted results.

A formulaic annual incentive program based on predetermined metrics could fail to appropriately incentivize our executive officers from pursuing the strategic opportunities that unexpectedly arise in a human capital-based industry such as ours. For example, our executive officers may find opportunities during the year to hire personnel which may decrease short-term profitability but may be in the best long-term interests of their business. The Committee’s use of discretion removes disincentives to taking advantage of such opportunities, while allowing it to hold management accountable for realizing specific results from those opportunities in subsequent years.

Our annual incentive compensation program is designed to align long-term risk and reward, and the Committee’s use of discretion helps to achieve that goal.
2022 Compensation Determinations and Relevant Factors
After the Committee reviewed our adjusted pre-tax operating income and business line performance and followed the processes and considered the factors described above under “—How Compensation Decisions are Made,” the following were the material factors that influenced the Committee’s determination of 2022 total incentive compensation for each of the named executive officers:
 
34

Executive Compensation: Compensation Discussion and Analysis
Chad R. Abraham
Chairman and CEO
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_chadabrahamnew-bw.jpg]
As CEO, Mr. Abraham is responsible for overseeing our firm-wide financial performance, business strategy, and execution, as well as for managing our business operations. Mr. Abraham’s 2022 incentive compensation decreased approximately 35% from 2021, which reflects more challenging market conditions and reduced client activity in 2022 as compared to record 2021 levels. In determining Mr. Abraham’s 2022 total incentive compensation, the Committee took the following factors into account as well as other compensation considerations:
Pay for
Performance

Led us to full year 2022 adjusted net revenues of $1.43 billion, adjusted net income of $201.3 million, and adjusted earnings per share of $11.26, representing our second strongest year on record.

At the end of 2022, our three- and five-year TSR was 4th among our 13 peers.
Sustain and
Strengthen
the Franchise

Managed the successful integration of our three strategic acquisitions completed in 2022: DBO Partners, Cornerstone Macro, and Stamford Partners, each of which further diversified and expanded the capabilities of our platform.

Balanced growth and profitability across our firm, and focused our firm on continuing to find growth opportunities within a challenging market environment.
2022 Incentive Compensation Overview for Chad R. Abraham
[MISSING IMAGE: tb_compensationchad-pn.jpg]
On February 15, 2023, the Committee granted a special performance-based non-qualified stock option to Mr. Abraham to purchase 75,000 shares of our Common Stock. The option was awarded with an exercise price of $170.77, which represented a 10% premium to the closing price of a share of our common stock on the grant date, and is intended to incentivize Mr. Abraham to further drive the company’s growth and performance. Mr. Abraham was last awarded a special option grant in connection with his promotion to CEO in February 2018, which fully vested in February 2023.
The grant date fair value of the option award was $3,503,250. The option vests in three equal parts on the third, fourth, and fifth anniversaries of the date of grant as long as Mr. Abraham remains an employee of the company. The option must be exercised within ten years of the date of grant. Because the option grant was unrelated to Mr. Abraham’s 2022 performance, the value of the grant has not been included in discussions in this Compensation & Discussion Analysis of 2022 incentive compensation totals.
 
35

Executive Compensation: Compensation Discussion and Analysis
Timothy L. Carter
CFO
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_timothylcarterv1-bw.jpg]
As CFO, Mr. Carter is responsible for overseeing our overall financial plan, capital and financial risk management, and our financial reporting. Mr. Carter’s 2022 annual incentive compensation decreased 28% as compared with 2021, which reflects more challenging market conditions and reduced client activity in 2022 as compared to record 2021 levels. In determining Mr. Carter’s 2022 total incentive compensation, the Committee took the following factors into account as well as other compensation considerations:
Pay for Performance

Led our 2022 strategic and financial plan, including compensation and expense management which helped maintain our strong profitability.

Managed capital management initiatives, including our dividend program, which resulted in a total dividend related to 2022 of $3.65 per share. An aggregate of $295 million of capital was returned to shareholders during 2022 through share repurchases and dividends paid.

At the end of 2022, our three- and five-year TSR was 4th among our 13 peers.
Sustain and Strengthen the Franchise

Led our capital and financial risk management, financial reporting, and investor relations and research coverage.

Managed our treasury, financial planning & analysis and regulatory reporting functions

Managed the successful accounting and financial reporting integration of our three strategic acquisitions completed in 2022: DBO Partners, Cornerstone Macro, and Stamford Partners.

Managed the continued high quality of our accounting and financial reporting functions.

Acts as Executive Sponsor of our Multicultural Network.
2022 Incentive Compensation Overview for Timothy L. Carter
[MISSING IMAGE: tb_compensationtim-pn.jpg]
 
36

Executive Compensation: Compensation Discussion and Analysis
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_bakerjames1-bw.jpg]
James P. Baker
Global Co-Head of Investment Banking and Capital Markets
Michael R. Dillahunt
Global Co-Head of Investment Banking and Capital Markets
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_michaeldillahunt-bw.jpg]
As Global Co-Heads of Investment Banking and Capital Markets, Messrs. Baker and Dillahunt are responsible for managing, developing, and executing on our business strategy for our investment banking and capital markets businesses. Mr. Baker’s 2022 annual incentive compensation decreased 30% as compared with 2021, which reflects the 35% decline in our corporate investment banking business’s revenues in 2022, which was in line with the overall decline in market activity in 2022 as compared to record 2021 levels. Mr. Dillahunt was not a named executive officer in 2021. In determining Messrs. Baker’s and Dillahunt’s 2022 total incentive compensation, the Committee took the following factors into account as well as other compensation considerations:
Pay for Performance

Led our advisory services business, which achieved its second highest ever revenues of $776 million, representing 54% of our total 2022 adjusted net revenues, despite challenging market conditions that resulted in a significant decline in client activity during the year.

Positioned our advisory services business for continued market share gains, which ranked second on announced U.S. M&A deals under $1 billion in 2022.
Sustain and Strengthen the Franchise

Led the acquisition and integration of Stamford Partners, bolstering our European consumer coverage.

Led the acquisition and integration of DBO Partners, which is an important component of our long-term strategy to grow technology investment banking and add a general partner advisory practice.

Led targeted talent growth efforts resulting in a total headcount of 159 corporate investment banking managing directors, which is the highest in our firm’s history.

Focused on mentoring and developing diverse investment banking talent.
 
37

Executive Compensation: Compensation Discussion and Analysis
2022 Incentive Compensation Overview for James P. Baker and
Michael R. Dillahunt
[MISSING IMAGE: tb_compensationjames-pn.jpg]
 
38

Executive Compensation: Compensation Discussion and Analysis
Jonathan J. Doyle
Vice Chairman and Head of Financial Services Group
[MISSING IMAGE: ph_jondoyle-bw.jpg]
As Vice Chairman and Head of Financial Services Group, Mr. Doyle is responsible for leading the overall business and growth strategy of the financial services group, and he plays an active role in many of firm’s key client relationships. In his responsibilities, Mr. Doyle manages and leads the employees within our financial services investment banking group that joined our firm in connection with the acquisition of Sandler. Mr. Doyle’s 2022 annual incentive compensation decreased 32% as compared with 2021, which was in line with the overall decline in market activity in 2022 as compared to record 2021 levels. In determining Mr. Doyle’s 2022 total incentive compensation, the Committee took the following factors into account as well as other compensation considerations:
Pay for Performance

Led our financial services group to a solid financial performance in 2022, with financial services advisory being one of our strongest performing sectors during the year and a significant contributor to our firm-wide financial results.

Led the financial services group advisory team, which ranked No. 1 by S&P Global Market Intelligence in U.S. bank and thrift M&A based on number of announced transactions in 2022, advised on 7 of the 10 largest bank mergers announced during the year, and advised on about 25% of the total number of announced bank deals during 2022, more than double the transactions reported by the next-closest advisor.

Led our financial services group to grow non-depository revenues, which accounted for nearly 50% of our total financial services investment banking revenues in 2022 (up from 32% for 2019 before the group joined our platform).

Personally advised clients on corporate transactions and was a significant revenue producer during 2022.
Sustain and Strengthen the Franchise

Continued to oversee and lead the integration of the financial services group into our broader platform, allowing us to utilize our combined platform to strengthen our respective client offerings.

Led the financial services group to increase their growth efforts across their verticals through focused hiring and development, which contributed to their continued growth beyond the depositories sector.
2022 Incentive Compensation Overview for Jonathan J. Doyle
[MISSING IMAGE: tb_compensationjonathan-pn.jpg]
 
39

Executive Compensation: Compensation Discussion and Analysis
Annual Incentives Paid in Restricted Compensation
With respect to our annual performance, the Committee determines a total incentive compensation amount that is based on the profitability of the company (with respect to the CEO and CFO) or operating performance of the applicable business line (with respect to business line leaders) and individual performance during the year. Of that total incentive compensation amount, generally between 40% and 55% is paid to each named executive officer in cash as an annual incentive. With respect to the remaining 45% to 60% of the total incentive amount, the Committee then splits this amount between (1) long-term PSU awards and (2) time-vested restricted compensation.
As a result, under our typical executive compensation program, even when our named executive officers have very strong business performance in one year, between 45% to 60% of their total incentive compensation has performance-based and time-based vesting conditions. More specifically, each named executive officer generally receives between 22.5% and 30% of his or her total incentive compensation amount in the form of long-term PSU awards.
The time-vested restricted compensation is allocated 50% in restricted shares of our common stock, and 50% in restricted investment fund shares pursuant to our MFRS Plan (as defined below). This restricted compensation vests in three equal annual installments from the date of grant. By paying a portion of annual incentives in time-vested restricted stock, our executive officers are incentivized to achieve long-term returns for our shareholders, as the value of the restricted stock that vests is tied to the performance of our stock price over time. The number of shares of restricted stock granted to each executive officer was determined by dividing the total dollar value designated to be paid out to the executive officer in restricted stock by the closing price per share of our common stock on the New York Stock Exchange on February 15, 2023.
Dividends are accrued on the unvested shares of restricted stock and are only paid out at the time that the underlying restricted shares vest.
Mutual Fund Restricted Share Plan
The Mutual Fund Restricted Share Plan (the “MFRS Plan”) provides that a portion of the restricted compensation granted for annual incentive compensation is paid in the form of restricted shares of selected investment funds. The MFRS Plan provides us another way of increasing retention of our executive officers by deferring a portion of their annual incentive compensation and requiring that they continue working for the company in order to receive it. In 2022, each named executive officer received 50% of their restricted compensation in investment fund shares. The MFRS awards have the same restrictions that would apply to restricted shares of our common stock and vest ratably over three years from the date of grant. We adopted the MFRS Plan to provide our executives an opportunity to diversify the restricted compensation they receive, and we believe the MFRS Plan will help us attract and retain top talent.
Long-Term PSU Awards
The Committee granted the 2022 PSU awards on February 15, 2022, with the amount based on 2021 performance, and 2023 PSU awards on February 15, 2023, with the amounts based on 2022 performance. The amount of each PSU award granted to each executive officer is determined in relation to their related annual incentives for the year (which were determined based on profitability and individual performance), resulting in each named executive officer receiving between 22.5% and 36% of his or her total incentive compensation in the form of a PSU award (Mr. Doyle received 10% of his 2021 incentive compensation (paid and/or granted in February 2022) in the form of a PSU award as provided in his employment agreement, but received 22.5% of his 2022 incentive (paid and/or granted in February 2023) in the form of a PSU award).
The grant date fair value of the February 2023 award is reflected in the Supplemental Compensation Table above for 2022 compensation. The grant date fair value of the February 2022 award is reflected in the Summary Compensation Table below for 2022 compensation earned as part of the executive compensation program for 2021 performance.
 
40

Executive Compensation: Compensation Discussion and Analysis
February 2022 and 2023 PSU Awards Overview

PSU awards vest only if certain (1) adjusted ROE, or (2) relative TSR metrics are met over a three-year period.

Our adjusted ROE targets for each annual PSU grant are determined by the Committee based on our recent and planned future operating performance to ensure that the award properly rewards performance.
Granted February 2022 (for 2021 Performance)
Piper Sandler Relative TSR Targets
Piper Sandler Adjusted ROE Targets
[MISSING IMAGE: pc_tsrperf01-pn.jpg]
[MISSING IMAGE: pc_roeperf01-pn.jpg]
Granted February 2023 (for 2022 Performance)
Piper Sandler Relative TSR Targets
Piper Sandler Adjusted ROE Targets
[MISSING IMAGE: pc_tsrperf02-pn.jpg]
[MISSING IMAGE: pc_roeperf02-pn.jpg]
Note: Each vesting metric provides for interpolation between points in the tables above on a straight-line basis (from threshold to target and from target to maximum).
With respect to the peer group used for relative TSR, our PSU grants use the list of companies within the Russell 3000 that have an investment banking GICS code as of the date of the grant. Occasionally, the Committee may determine to add an additional peer investment bank to the group if such peer is not otherwise captured by the above criteria and the Committee determines that its inclusion would increase the representativeness of the peer group. For the February 2022 PSU grant, this peer group was as follows: B. Riley Financial, Cowen Inc., Evercore Inc., The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc., Greenhill & Co., Houlihan Lokey, Lazard Ltd., Moelis & Company, Morgan Stanley, Oppenheimer Holdings, Inc., PJT Partners Inc., Raymond James Financial, Stifel Financial Corp., and StoneX Group Inc. This group is not identical with the compensation peer group disclosed below.
The PSU awards are intended to directly align the interests of our named executive officers with those of our shareholders by requiring that the company achieve certain levels of (1) adjusted ROE or (2) relative TSR in order to vest. The target level of the adjusted ROE metric is determined based upon a number of factors, including the company’s recent operating performance, assessed cost of capital, and long-term financial performance objectives. The Committee believes that the PSU award program incentivizes our executive officers to achieve strong financial performance as measured by adjusted ROE and shareholder returns.
 
41

Executive Compensation: Compensation Discussion and Analysis
The 36-month performance period is designed to provide management an incentive to focus on our strategic direction, sustained performance, and long-term value creation. The Committee established the vesting performance metrics with the intent that our executive officers will only receive additional long-term incentive compensation above the target amounts of the PSU awards if, over the performance period, we significantly outperform the peer group used for the relative TSR metric and/or achieve an adjusted ROE that exceeds the target ROE. In 2023, following a competitive benchmarking analysis of long-term performance-based awards at peer firms prepared by our independent compensation consultant, the Committee determined to add an additional performance threshold and vesting amount (200%) for each of the relative TSR and adjusted ROE metrics in order to better align the terms with peer practices and incentivize long-term outperformance.
For purposes of the awards, TSR is calculated based on the average closing price per share of our common stock on the New York Stock Exchange during the trailing 60 calendar days as of the beginning and the end of the performance period, and takes into account dividends paid during the performance period. Adjusted ROE under the PSU awards is a non-GAAP financial measure that is calculated based on our reported net income adjusted to eliminate certain expenses and losses that do not relate to our core business. See Appendix A to this proxy statement for a reconciliation of adjusted ROE to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measure.
The PSUs do not provide the recipient any rights as a shareholder, such as the right to vote, but do have dividend equivalent rights, which will result in dividends accruing on earned shares that are paid out when and only if those shares ultimately vest.
Other Compensation
Our executives receive only limited perquisites. Executive officers receive limited additional compensation in the form of reimbursement of certain insurance premiums, and they may receive limited personal use of aircraft under the company’s contractual arrangements. The cost of these perquisites is included in the “All Other Compensation” column of the Summary Compensation Table in this proxy statement.
How Compensation Decisions are Made
The Committee is responsible for approving the compensation paid to our executive officers and ensuring it meets our compensation objectives. With respect to our CEO, the Committee has sole responsibility for evaluating performance and determining his compensation. In doing so, the lead director solicits evaluation input from each member of the Board and also leads a discussion of the full Board reporting on the results of the annual evaluation and reviewing the CEO’s self-evaluation.
At the beginning of each year, the Committee approves the amount of incentive compensation to be paid to our executive officers in recognition of prior-year performance, approves their base salaries for the current year if there are changes, and establishes incentive compensation targets for the upcoming year based on benchmarking data and the company’s financial plan.
Involvement of Executive Officers
The work of the Committee is supported by our human capital department, our finance department, and our legal department. Our Chief Human Capital Officer, CFO, and General Counsel, with input from the CEO, prepare and present information and recommendations for review and consideration by the Committee, including:

The annual performance goals for each executive officer;

Financial information for the company and each business unit reviewed in connection with executive compensation decisions;

The firms considered in the compensation peer group and financial and compensation data for those firms (including TSR for those firms as compared to the company);

The performance evaluations and compensation recommendations for the executive officers;
 
42

Executive Compensation: Compensation Discussion and Analysis

Tally sheets specifying each element of compensation paid to the executive officers for the current and prior year and reflecting total proposed compensation and potential compensation under various scenarios; and

The evaluation and compensation process to be followed by the Committee.
Compensation Peer Group
The Committee and its independent compensation consultant, with input from management, annually identify a compensation peer group of firms with which we compete for executive talent. As a middle-market, full-service investment bank, there are a limited number of other companies that are directly comparable to Piper Sandler. Our peer group primarily consists of investment banks as well as similar human capital-based financial consulting businesses with revenues and market capitalizations similar to ours. Our 2022 peer group, which we use to benchmark our 2022 compensation against generally, consisted of the following companies:
2022 Peer Group
Canaccord Genuity Group Inc.
Cowen Group, Inc.
Evercore Partners Inc.
FTI Consulting, Inc.
Greenhill & Co.
Houlihan Lokey, Inc.
Jefferies Financial Group Inc.
Lazard Ltd.
Moelis & Co.
Oppenheimer Holdings Inc.
Perella Weinberg Partners
PJT Partners, Inc.
Stifel Financial Corp.
We also may use data from external market surveys to the extent that such surveys are available and provide representative data, and we may review publicly available data for similar companies that are not direct competitors to address issues we may encounter obtaining compensation information for executives holding positions comparable to our executive officers. The peer group market data is an important factor considered by the Committee when setting compensation, but it is only one of multiple factors considered by the Committee, and the amount paid to each executive may be more or less than the composite market median based on individual performance, firm performance, the roles and responsibilities of the executive, experience level of the individual, internal equity and other factors that the Committee deems important. As such, the Committee uses peer group and market survey information to put the total compensation proposed to be paid to each named executive officer in context of pay ranges for like positions at similar companies, and confirms that any variances from median pay levels and market norms are justified in light of the specific circumstances of our financial or business performance and our named executive officers.
The Committee and management use the peer group above for benchmarking compensation levels and firm performance; however, the PSU awards use a broader group of financial services firms for purposes of measuring the relative TSR metric of the PSU awards.
Compensation Consultant
Throughout 2022, the Committee received advice and recommendations concerning our executive compensation program from Semler Brossy Consulting Group (“Semler Brossy”) as its independent compensation consultant.
The Committee considered advice and recommendations received from Semler Brossy in making executive compensation decisions. Semler Brossy did not provide services to us other than the advice provided to the Committee. The Committee determined that Semler Brossy had no conflicts of interest in providing services to the Committee and is independent under the factors set forth in the NYSE rules for compensation committee advisors.
Limited Term Employment Agreement with Mr. Doyle
In connection with our acquisition of Sandler in 2020, Mr. Doyle became our vice chairman and head of financial services group, and we appointed him to the Board in January 2020. His leadership has helped
 
43

Executive Compensation: Compensation Discussion and Analysis
to ensure the success of the integration. Further, Mr. Doyle remains a key producer within the financial services group as he continues to advise clients.
As previously disclosed and discussed in the proxy statements that we prepared for our 2021 and 2022 annual shareholders’ meetings, in connection with the acquisition, we made the strategic decision to enter into a limted term employment agreement with Mr. Doyle that provides for minimum levels of incentive compensation from 2020 through 2024 while providing us with extensive restrictive covenants, including a five-year non-compete, designed to protect the value paid in the transaction. The employment agreement provides that Mr. Doyle’s annual incentive compensation will be no less than $5,000,000 through 2024. If Mr. Doyle is terminated by the company without cause, he will receive an annual bonus for the year in which he was terminated, but not for any additional years.
Compensation Policies
Executive Stock Ownership and Prohibition on Hedging and Pledging
We have adopted stock ownership guidelines to ensure that our executives maintain a meaningful equity stake in the company, which aligns management’s interests with those of our shareholders. The guidelines also help to drive long-term performance and strengthen retention. Our stock ownership guidelines generally require that our executive officers own a specific multiple of their annual base salary in shares of our common stock. The ownership multiple is eight times the base salary for our CEO, three times the base salary for each of our President, CFO, and business line heads, and one times the base salary for every other executive officer. Whether an executive officer meets the guidelines is determined at the beginning of each year by multiplying his or her share ownership (not including unvested stock awards) by the average daily closing price per share of our common stock on the New York Stock Exchange for the prior year. If an executive officer is not in compliance with the stock ownership guidelines, then he or she must retain at least 50% of the equity awarded to them as executive officers through the Incentive Plan, or acquired upon exercise of stock options, net of taxes and exercise costs. The guidelines apply upon becoming an executive officer and remain in effect while the individual serves as an executive officer. As of December 31, 2022, all of our executive officers are in compliance with this policy.
All of our employees, including our executive officers, as well as our non-employee directors are prohibited from hedging, or entering into any short positions or derivative transactions substantially equivalent to short positions (including protective puts), or pledging any shares of our common stock, even shares they can freely sell.
Termination and Change-in-Control Arrangements
We do not have any separate change-in-control agreements (often referred to as “golden parachute” arrangements) that would pay a certain multiple of an executive’s compensation (e.g., base salary) upon a change-in-control of the company. In certain instances, award agreements and plans may include provisions regarding the payment of compensation in the event of a termination of employment or a change-in-control of our company as follows:

All awards granted under the Incentive Plan contain a “double trigger” provision that provides that awards that are continued, assumed or replaced in connection with a change-in-control will vest, be deemed earned or have restrictions lapse only if the award recipient’s employment is terminated involuntarily (other than for “cause”) within 24 months of the change-in-control.

If a change-in-control occurs during the performance period for the PSUs, then each PSU will be converted into a share of restricted stock with time-based vesting, and, if the executive’s employment with us or one of our affiliates is terminated after the change-in-control and prior to the end of the performance period by us or one of our affiliates without cause, by the executive for good reason, or in connection with the executive’s death, disability or retirement, then all restrictions on such shares of restricted stock will lapse upon such termination.
 
44

Executive Compensation: Compensation Discussion and Analysis

Under the Incentive Plan, following a termination of employment (other than as a result of a change-in-control), our restricted stock awards granted as part of our annual incentive program will continue to vest so long as the termination was not for cause and the employee does not violate certain post-termination restrictions for the remaining vesting term of their awards.

Executive officers who are terminated during the year (other than as a result of a change-in-control) will receive cash and equity compensation for that year under our annual incentive program in the discretion of the Committee.
Clawback Policy
The Board has adopted a clawback policy that allows the Committee to recover incentive compensation from any current or former executive officer if that executive officer engages in intentional misconduct that caused or contributed to noncompliance with a financial reporting requirement under the federal securities laws which requires the company to file an accounting restatement with the SEC. If the Committee seeks to recover incentive compensation following an accounting restatement, the amount of incentive compensation subject to recovery would be the amount in excess of what the executive officer would have earned based on the restated financial results as determined by the Committee. In addition, regardless of whether there is an accounting restatement, the Committee may recover incentive compensation from a current or former executive officer if that executive officer engages in fraud, theft, misappropriation, embezzlement or dishonesty to the material detriment of the company’s financial results as filed with the SEC. The incentive compensation recoverable in this circumstance will be based on the Committee’s determination of the harm caused by the executive officer’s conduct and the incentive compensation awarded to the officer with a vesting or performance period during which the conduct took place. The Board continues to monitor regulatory developments and intends to further review and revise the policy as necessary to comply with NYSE listing standards implementing new Exchange Act Rule 10D-1.
Equity Grant Timing Policy
In 2006, we established a policy pursuant to which equity grants to employees will be made only once each quarter, on the 15th calendar day of the month following the public release of earnings for the preceding quarter (or, if the 15th calendar day falls on a weekend or holiday, on the first business day thereafter). This policy covers grants made by the Committee as well as grants made by our CEO to employees other than executive officers pursuant to authority delegated to him by the Committee. We established this policy to provide a regular, fixed schedule for equity grants that eliminates the exercise of discretion with respect to the grant date of employee equity awards.
Tax Considerations
Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”) limits the amount we may deduct for compensation paid in any year to our named executive officers to $1,000,000. This limit on the deductibility for federal tax purposes of compensation amounts paid in excess of $1,000,000 has not impacted the design of our executive compensation program as described in this Compensation Discussion and Analysis, as our Committee continues to emphasize performance-based compensation that aligns with its pay-for-performance compensation philosophy.
 
45

Executive Compensation: Compensation Discussion and Analysis
Compensation Committee Report
The Committee has reviewed and discussed the Compensation Discussion and Analysis with management and, based on the foregoing review and discussions, has recommended to the Board the inclusion of the Compensation Discussion and Analysis in the company’s 2022 year-end disclosure documents.
Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of Piper Sandler Companies
Scott C. Taylor, Chairperson
William R. Fitzgerald
Victoria M. Holt
Thomas S. Schreier
 
46

Executive Compensation
Summary Compensation Table
The following table contains compensation information for the fiscal years noted in the table for our named executive officers.
Name and Principal Position
Year
Salary
($)
Stock
Awards
(1)
($)
Option
Awards
(1)
($)
Non-Equity
Incentive Plan
Compensation
(2)
($)
All Other
Compensation
(3)
($)
Total
($)
Chad R. Abraham
CEO
2022 650,000 6,160,411 4,042,500 329,290 11,182,201
2021 633,333 3,085,233 5,279,167 140,481 9,138,214
2020 283,333 2,522,168 3,857,000 31,349 6,693,850
Timothy L. Carter
CFO
2022 425,000 1,015,368 1,203,125 65,363 2,708,855
2021 425,000 607,235 1,671,875 21,927 2,726,037
2020 241,667 479,989 1,351,000 10,466 2,083,122
James P. Baker
Global Co-Head of Investment
Banking and Capital Markets
2022 425,000 1,733,355 2,368,438 37,794 4,564,587
2021 425,000 936,890 3,362,188 16,678 4,740,756
2020 241,667 797,833 2,285,500 15,381 3,340,381
Michael R. Dillahunt
Global Co-Head of Investment
Banking and Capital Markets
(4)
2022 425,000 1,656,509 2,765,938 44,249 4,891,696
Jonathan J. Doyle
Vice Chairman and Head of Financial Services Group
2022 500,000 2,580,934 4,637,500 41,883 7,760,317
2021 500,000 2,062,269 7,687,500 32,685 10,282,454
2020 260,898 9,895,652 6,621,000 9,359 16,786,909
(1)
The entries in the “Stock Awards” and “Option Awards” columns reflect the aggregate grant date value of the restricted stock, PSUs, and stock option awards computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718. SEC rules do not permit inclusion in a given year of stock awards attributable to a particular year’s performance, as is the case for salary and non-equity incentive plan amounts. For example, the restricted stock and PSU grants disclosed in 2022 were made in February 2022, and were related to 2021 performance. See Note 19 to our consolidated financial statements included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022 for the assumptions used in the valuation of the awards granted during 2022 in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718. The grant date fair value of the restricted stock and PSUs granted during February 2022 if target performance and maximum performance is achieved are as follows:
Restricted
Stock Awards
(granted in
February 2022
for 2021
performance)
($)
PSUs
(granted in February 2022 for
2021 performance)
Name
Target
($)
Maximum
($)
Chad R. Abraham 2,029,219 4,131,192 6,196,788
Timothy L. Carter 334,515 680,852 1,021,278
James P. Baker 570,964 1,162,390 1,743,585
Michael R. Dillahunt 545,652 1,110,857 1,666,286
Jonathan J. Doyle 1,537,526 1,043,408 1,565,112
(2)
The amounts in this column include for the applicable year (i) the cash compensation earned under our annual incentive program and (ii) the portion of the annual incentive compensation earned during the year and paid in restricted compensation in the form of restricted investment fund shares under our MFRS Plan (which was 50% of the restricted compensation for 2022 annual incentive compensation). The following amounts earned for 2022 performance were paid to the named executive officers in the form of restricted investment fund shares in February 2023: Mr. Abraham: $1,102,500; Mr. Carter: $240,625; Mr. Baker: $402,188; Mr. Dillahunt: $469,688; and Mr. Doyle: $787,500. The MFRS vest in three equal annual installments from the date of grant.
 
47

Executive Compensation
(3)
All other compensation for 2022 includes the following payments of accrued cash dividends from vested restricted shares and PSUs: Mr. Abraham: $317,455; Mr. Carter: $55,286; Mr. Baker: $28,077; Mr. Dillahunt: $33,862; and Mr. Doyle: $25,493. The other amounts reported include 401(k) matching contributions, insurance premiums for life and long-term disability benefits, the cost of airfare for spouses to attend an off-site directors’ retreat we held during 2022, the incremental cost of a flight for Mr. Abraham’s spouse to accompany him to an industry event, and limited personal use of aircraft that our company has use of under a contract with FlexJet. Under this contract, the company pays certain hourly and monthly fees for its use of two different airplanes. The incremental cost to the company excludes monthly fees because such fees do not change based on usage. The value of personal use of aircraft under the FlexJet arrangement is imputed for federal income tax purposes as income based on Internal Revenue Service guidelines using Standard Industry Fare Level rates, which are determined by the U.S. Department of Transportation. We do not reimburse or otherwise gross-up any income tax owed for personal use of the aircraft.
(4)
Mr. Dillahunt was not a named executive officer for 2021 or 2020. Accordingly, the table above includes the compensation of Mr. Dillahunt only for 2022.
 
48

Executive Compensation
Grants of Plan-Based Awards
The following table provides information regarding the grants of plan-based awards made to the named executive officers during the year ended December 31, 2022.
Name
Grant Date
Compensation
Committee
Approval
Date
Estimated
Future
Payments
Under
Non-Equity
Incentive
Plan 
Awards($)
(1)
Estimated Future Payouts
Under Equity Incentive Plan
Awards(#)
(2)(3)
All Other
Stock
Awards:
Number of
Shares of
Stock or
Units
(#)
(4)
All Other
Option
Awards:
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Options
(#)
Exercise
Price of
Option
Awards
($/share)
Grant
Date Fair
Value of
Stock
and
Option
Awards
($)
(5)
Threshold
Target
Maximum
Chad R. Abraham
4,042,500
2/15/2022 2/8/2022 13,628 27,256 40,884 4,131,192
2/15/2022 2/8/2022 13,388 2,029,219
Timothy L. Carter
1,203,125
2/15/2022 2/8/2022 2,246 4,492 6,738 680,852
2/15/2022 2/8/2022 2,207 334,515
James P. Baker
2,368,438
2/15/2022 2/8/2022 3,835 7,669 11,504 1,162,390
2/15/2022 2/8/2022 3,767 570,964
Michael R. Dillahunt
2,765,938
2/15/2022 2/8/2022 3,665 7,329 10,994 1,110,857
2/15/2022 2/8/2022 3,600 545,652
Jonathan J. Doyle
4,637,500
2/15/2022 2/8/2022 3,442 6,884 10,326 1,043,408
2/15/2022 2/8/2022 10,144 1,537,526
(1)
The amounts in this column reflect the (i) cash compensation earned under our annual incentive program for 2022 performance and (ii) portion of the annual incentive compensation earned for 2022 performance and paid in restricted compensation in the form of restricted investment fund shares under our MFRS Plan (which was 50% of the restricted compensation for 2022 annual incentive compensation). These amounts correspond to the amounts disclosed under “Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” for 2022 in the Summary Compensation Table above.
(2)
The amounts in this column reflect the number of PSUs granted to the named executive officers on February 15, 2022, which will be earned and vest based on our adjusted ROE and our TSR as measured on a relative basis compared to other companies within the Russell 3000 that have an investment banking GICS code as of the date of the grant over a 36-month performance period. The number of PSUs granted to each named executive officer was determined by dividing a dollar value for the executive’s award by the fair market value of a PSU, rounded up to the nearest whole PSU. The fair market value of each PSU granted on February 15, 2022, was $148.90. The 50% portion of the award that vests based on relative TSR was determined to have a fair market value of $73.11 per PSU, and was determined by using a Monte Carlo simulation, which assumed a risk-free interest rate of 1.80%and expected stock price volatility of 43.8%. The remaining 50% of the award that vests based on adjusted ROE was determined to have a fair market value of $75.79 per PSU, and was determined based on the $151.57 closing price of a share of our common stock on the New York Stock Exchange on February 15, 2022. The number of PSUs reflected in the table above represents the threshold, target, and maximum number of shares of common stock that may be issued pursuant to the PSU awards depending on the performance metrics that are achieved. If the performance metrics that are achieved for the adjusted ROE and/or the relative TSR measures exceed the target amounts, then the maximum number of shares of common stock that can be earned under the PSU awards are 150% of the target number of shares.
(3)
The February 2022 PSUs do not provide any voting rights, but do provide the recipient with dividend equivalent rights, which will be paid out in cash at the end of the performance period only on those shares that are ultimately earned and vested under the award. For a more complete description of the PSUs, see “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Long-Term PSU Awards.”
(4)
The amounts in this column reflect restricted company common stock awards granted to the named executive officers in February 2022 based on their 2021 performance. The shares of restricted stock were granted to these officers on February 15, 2022. All of the restricted stock was granted under the Incentive Plan and will vest in three equal installments on February 16th of each of 2023, 2024, and 2025, assuming the award recipient complies with the terms and conditions of the applicable award agreement. The restricted stock awards are subject to forfeiture prior to vesting following certain terminations of employment or in the event the award recipient is terminated for cause, misappropriates confidential company information, participates in or is employed by a talent competitor of Piper Sandler, or solicits employees, customers or clients of Piper Sandler, all as set forth in more detail in the applicable award agreement. Recipients have the right to vote all shares of Piper Sandler restricted stock they hold, but do not receive accrued dividends until the shares vest. The number of shares of restricted stock awarded to each named executive officer for 2021 performance was determined by dividing specified dollar amounts representing a percentage of the individual’s total annual incentive compensation for 2021 by $151.57, the closing price of our common stock on the February 15, 2022 grant date.
(5)
The grant date fair value is generally the amount the company would expense in its financial statements over the award’s service period under FASB ASC Topic 718.
 
49

Executive Compensation
Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End
The following table sets forth certain information concerning equity awards held by the named executive officers that were outstanding as of December 31, 2022.
Name
Option Awards
Stock Awards
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
(#)
Exercisable
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
(#)
Unexercisable
(1)
Option
Exercise
Price
($)
Option
Expiration
Date
Number of
Shares of
Stock That
Have Not
Vested
(2)
(#)
Market Value
of Shares of
Stock That
Have Not
Vested
(3)
($)
Equity Incentive
Plan Awards:
Number of
Unearned
Shares,
Units or Other
Rights That Have
Not Vested
(#)
(4)
Equity Incentive
Plan Awards:
Market or Payout
Value of Unearned
Shares, Units or
Other Rights That
Have Not Vested
($)
(3)
Chad R. Abraham 32,666 16,334 99.00 2/15/2028 23,568 3,068,318 65,811 8,567,935
Timothy L. Carter 3,930 511,647 12,354 1,608,368
James P. Baker 6,589 857,822 20,167 2,625,542
Michael R. Dillahunt 6,841 890,630 7,329 954,163
Jonathan J. Doyle 141,930 18,477,867 15,258 1,986,440
(1)
The stock options fully vested on February 15, 2023.
(2)
The shares of restricted stock vest on the dates and in the amounts set forth in the table below, so long as the award recipient complies with the terms and conditions of the applicable award agreement.
Vesting Date
Chad R. Abraham
Timothy L. Carter
James P. Baker
Michael R. Dillahunt
Jonathan J. Doyle
January 17, 2023 41,428
February 16, 2023 11,166 1,904 3,181 3,247 7,131
January 17, 2024 41,429
February 16, 2024 7,939 1,290 2,152 2,394 7,131
January 17, 2025 41,429
February 16, 2025 4,463 736 1,256 1,200 3,382
(3)
The values in these columns are based on the $130.19 closing sale price of a share of our common stock on the New York Stock Exchange on December 30, 2022.
(4)
The numbers in this column reflect the number of PSUs awarded in February of 2020, 2021, and 2022 that will vest on February 28 of 2023, 2024, and 2025, respectively, to the extent earned in accordance with the performance metrics over the three-year performance period. These performance metrics are adjusted ROE and relative total shareholder return. The number of PSUs shown represents the target number of shares of common stock that may be issued pursuant to such award depending on the performance metrics that are achieved.
 
50

Executive Compensation
Option Exercises and Stock Vested
The following table sets forth certain information concerning stock options exercised and restricted stock and PSU awards vested during the year ended December 31, 2022.
Option Awards(1)
Stock Awards
Name
Number of Shares
Acquired on Exercise

(#)
Value
Realized on Exercise

($)
Number of Shares
Acquired on Vesting

(#)
Value
Realized on Vesting
(2)
($)
Chad R. Abraham
30,171
4,528,878
Timothy L. Carter
5,245
787,319
James P. Baker
3,068
470,539
Michael R. Dillahunt
3,659
561,181
Jonathan J. Doyle
3,749
557,476
(1)
There were no stock options exercised by our named executive officers during 2022.
(2)
The value realized upon vesting of the restricted stock awards is based on the $153.37 closing sale price of a share of our common stock on the New York Stock Exchange on February 16, 2022, the date on which the awards vested. In addition, 150% of the PSUs that were granted to our executive officers in February 2019 vested following the certification by our Committee that certain total shareholder return and ROE metrics were met, and each PSU that vested was settled in a share of our common stock. The value realized upon settlement of the PSUs is based on the $148.70 closing sale price of a share of our common stock on the New York Stock Exchange on February 25, 2022.
Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change-in-Control
The following table sets forth quantitative information with respect to potential payments to be made to each of the named executive officers or their beneficiaries upon termination in various circumstances, assuming termination on December 31, 2022. In the following table, unless indicated otherwise, all equity is listed at its dollar value as of December 31, 2022, using the closing sale price per share of $130.19.
Type of Termination
Name
Change-in-Control
Not Followed by
Employment
Termination

($)
Involuntary
Termination
Within 24 Months
Following a
Change-in-Control

($)
Voluntary
Termination

($)
Involuntary
Termination
Under
Severance
Plan

($)
Other
Involuntary
Termination
Not for
Cause

($)
Death or
Disability

($)
Involuntary
Termination for
Cause

($)
Chad R. Abraham
Severance(1)
325,000
Restricted Compensation(2)(3)
5,536,424
5,536,424
5,536,424
5,536,424
5,536,424
PSUs(4)
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
Stock Options(2)(5)
509,458
509,458
509,458
Timothy L. Carter
Severance(1)
212,500
Restricted Compensation(2)(3)
931,175
931,175
931,175
931,175
931,175
PSUs(4)
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
James P. Baker
Severance(1)
212,500
Restricted Compensation(2)(3)
1,662,266
1,662,266
1,662,266
1,662,266
1,662,266
PSUs(4)
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
Michael R. Dillahunt
Severance(1)
212,500
Restricted Compensation(2)(3)
1,808,983
1,808,983
1,808,983
1,808,983
1,808,983
PSUs(4)
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
 
51

Executive Compensation
Type of Termination
Name
Change-in-Control
Not Followed by
Employment
Termination

($)
Involuntary
Termination
Within 24 Months
Following a
Change-in-Control

($)
Voluntary
Termination

($)
Involuntary
Termination
Under
Severance
Plan

($)
Other
Involuntary
Termination
Not for
Cause

($)
Death or
Disability

($)
Involuntary
Termination for
Cause

($)
Jonathan J. Doyle
Severance(1)
250,000
Restricted Compensation(2)(3)
20,337,045
20,337,045
20,337,045
20,337,045
PSUs(4)
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
Indeterminable
(1)
Under our Severance Plan, employees may be eligible for severance payments in the event of employment termination by us due to a facility closure, permanent work-force reduction, organizational change that eliminates the employee’s position, or similar event as determined by the company. The named executive officers participate in the Severance Plan on the same basis as all other employees. The amount in the table reflects salary continuation payments calculated in accordance with the provisions of the plan. In addition, under this plan, the named executive officers would be entitled to continue to participate in our health and welfare benefits programs at employee rates during the severance period.
(2)
Under the Incentive Plan, in the event of a change-in-control of Piper Sandler, all awards that are continued, assumed or replaced in connection with a change-in-control will vest, be deemed earned or have restrictions lapse only if the recipient’s employment is terminated involuntarily (other than for cause) within 24 months of the change-in-control.
(3)
Under the applicable award agreements, all of the restricted stock and mutual fund restricted shares awards will continue to vest following a termination of employment only so long as the termination was not for cause and the employee does not violate certain post-termination restrictions; provided, however, that if Mr. Doyle voluntarily terminates his employment without good reason, the unvested portion of retention restricted stock award shall be forfeited. Vesting of all awards is also accelerated upon a company-determined severance event. The amounts in the table reflect these terms and conditions and assume compliance with any post-termination vesting requirements that are within the named executive officers’ control.
(4)
With respect to PSU awards, under the applicable award agreement, if the change-in-control occurs within the first 12-months of the performance period, each PSU automatically will become one share of restricted stock as if the performance under the award would have been achieved at the target level. If the change-in-control occurs within the second or third year of the performance period, each PSU automatically will become one share of restricted stock based on the actual performance achieved as if the date of the change-in-control were the last day of the performance period. If the named executive officer remains continuously employed by us after the closing of the change-in-control through the end of the 36-month performance period, all shares of restricted stock arising from the PSUs will vest on the last day of the performance period. If the named executive officer’s employment is terminated after the closing of the change-in-control and prior to the end of the performance period (i) by us without cause, (ii) by the named executive officer for good reason, (iii) in connection with the named executive officer’s death or disability or (iv) under such circumstances qualifying as a retirement, all unvested shares of restricted stock arising from the PSUs will vest on the date of termination of the named executive officer’s employment with us. Because the number of PSUs that would become shares of restricted stock in the event of a change-in-control depends on the date of the change-in-control, the total amounts are not determinable at this time. In the absence of a change in control, if the named executive officer’s employment with us terminates because of a company-determined severance event or the named executive officer’s death or disability, then the named executive officer will earn the same number of PSUs that would otherwise be earned pursuant to the award agreement (or in the case of a company-determined severance event, a pro rata portion of such number) but for the named executive officer’s termination. If the named executive officer experiences a voluntary termination under circumstances qualifying as a retirement or involuntary termination without cause, then the named executive officer will earn the same number of PSUs that would otherwise be earned pursuant to the award agreement but for the named executive officer’s termination, as long as the named executive officer does not violate certain post-termination
 
52

Executive Compensation
restrictions. The PSUs that might vest in connection with a named executive officer’s termination as a result of a company-determined severance event, his or her death or disability, voluntary termination under circumstances constituting retirement, or involuntary termination are not determinable at this time.
(5)
Under the applicable stock option award agreement, the stock options shall vest ratably on the third, fourth, and fifth anniversary of the date of grant, which was February 15, 2018. If Mr. Abraham is terminated by the company without cause following the second anniversary of the date of grant, then the portion of the stock option that was scheduled to vest on the next anniversary of the date of grant shall immediately vest in full and may be exercised until February 15, 2028.
Pay Versus Performance
The following table contains additional compensation and performance information for our CEO (our principal executive officer ) and other named executive officers (sometimes abbreviated in this section as “NEO”) for the fiscal years noted in the table. The disclosure included in this section is prescribed by SEC rules. For a discussion of how the company views its executive compensation program, including alignment with company performance, see the CD&A above.
Year
Summary
Compensation
Table Total for
CEO
($)
Compensation
Actually Paid
to CEO
(1)
($)
Average
Summary
Compensation
Table Total for
Non-CEO
NEOs
(2)
($)
Average
Compensation
Actually Paid
to Non-CEO
NEOs
(2)
($)
Value of Initial
Fixed $100
Investment
Based on:
GAAP
Net
Income
($)
Adjusted
Pre-Tax
Operating
Income
(4)
($)
TSR
($)
Peer
Group
TSR
(3)
($)
2022 11,182,201 4,446,107 4,981,196 2,227,357 184.02 134.26 101,180,000 269,153,000
2021 9,138,214 19,556,186 5,480,436 10,319,156 240.26 151.31 330,368,000 549,952,000
2020 6,693,850 9,327,590 6,794,365 8,212,364 129.64 111.36 49,356,000 250,288,000
(1)
A reconciliation of Total Compensation from the Summary Compensation Table to Compensation Actually Paid (sometimes abbreviated in this section as “CAP”) to our CEO and the average of our other NEOs is shown below:
Summary
Compensation
Table Total
($)
Exclusion of Stock
Awards
($)
Inclusion of
Equity Values*
($)
Compensation
Actually Paid
($)
Chad R. Abraham
2022
11,182,201 (6,160,412) (575,682) 4,446,107
2021
9,138,214 (3,085,233) 13,503,205 19,556,186
2020
6,693,850 (2,522,168) 5,155,908 9,327,590
Average of Non-CEO NEOs
2022
4,981,196 (1,746,541) (1,007,298) 2,227,357
2021
5,480,436 (1,175,465) 6,014,185 10,319,156
2020
6,794,365 (3,178,065) 4,596,064 8,212,364
*
The amounts in the Inclusion of Equity Values in the table above are derived from the amounts set forth in the following table:
 
53

Executive Compensation
Year-End
Fair Value of
Equity
Awards
Granted
During Year
That
Remained
Unvested as
of Last Day
of Year
($)
Change in
Fair Value
from Last
Day of Prior
Year to Last
Day of Year
of Unvested
Equity
Awards
($)
Vesting-Date
Fair Value of
Equity
Awards
Granted
During Year
that Vested
During Year
($)
Change in
Fair Value
from Last
Day of Prior
Year to
Vesting Date
of Unvested
Equity
Awards that
Vested
During Year
($)
Fair Value at
Last Day of
Prior Year of
Equity
Awards
Forfeited
During Year
($)
Value of
Dividends or
Other
Earnings Paid
on Stock or
Option
Awards Not
Otherwise
Included
($)
Total—
Inclusion of
Equity Values
($)
Chad R.
Abraham
2022
4,503,199 (3,854,605) (1,224,276) (575,682)
2021
6,614,712 6,707,894 180,599