Table of Contents

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:

CONSTELLATION BRANDS, INC.

(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):

Table of Contents

ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

May 25, 2017

To Our Stockholders:

You are cordially invited to attend the Annual Meeting of Stockholders of Constellation Brands, Inc. in the Callahan Theater at the Nazareth College Arts Center, 4245 East Avenue, Rochester, New York 14618, on Tuesday, July 18, 2017 at 11:00 a.m. (EDT). The Arts Center doors will open at approximately 10:30 a.m.

The Nazareth College Arts Center is located on the campus of Nazareth College in the Town of Pittsford, New York. Parking is available in Parking Lot A off South Campus Drive.

The attached Notice of Annual Meeting of Stockholders and Proxy Statement describe in detail the matters expected to be acted upon at the meeting. Also provided is the Company’s 2017 Annual Report that contains important business and financial information regarding the Company.

We hope you are able to attend this year’s Annual Meeting.

Very truly yours,

RICHARD SANDS

Chairman of the Board

Table of Contents

Notice of Annual Meeting of Stockholders and Proxy Statement

We are pleased to save costs and help protect the environment by using the “Notice and Access” method of delivery. Instead of receiving paper copies of our proxy materials in the mail, many stockholders will receive an Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials, which provides an Internet website address where stockholders can access electronic copies of the proxy materials and vote. This website also has instructions for voting by telephone and for requesting paper copies of the proxy materials and proxy card(s).

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

i

Table of Contents

CONSTELLATION BRANDS, INC.

207 High Point Drive, Building 100

Victor, New York 14564

PROXY STATEMENT

ANNUAL MEETING INFORMATION

This Proxy Statement is being furnished to the holders of the common stock of CONSTELLATION BRANDS, INC. (the “Company,” “we,” “our,” or “us”) in connection with the solicitation of proxies by the Board of Directors of the Company (the “Board”). The proxies are for use at the 2017 Annual Meeting of Stockholders of the Company and at any adjournment thereof (the “Meeting”). The Meeting will be held on Tuesday, July 18, 2017 at 11:00 a.m. (EDT) in the Town of Pittsford in the Callahan Theater at the Nazareth College Arts Center, 4245 East Avenue, Rochester, New York 14618.

We are delivering proxy materials to many stockholders via the Internet under the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (the “SEC”) “Notice and Access” rules, which saves costs and paper. Using this method of distribution, on or about June 5, 2017, we will mail an Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials (the “Notice”) that contains information about our 2017 Annual Meeting of Stockholders and instructions on how to view all proxy materials, and vote electronically, on the Internet. If you receive the Notice and prefer to receive a paper or e-mail copy of the proxy materials, follow the instructions in the Notice for making this request, and the materials will be sent promptly to you via the preferred method. If you prefer to vote by phone, the website listed on the Notice (www.proxyvote.com) has instructions for voting by phone. If you received paper copies of our proxy materials in the mail, you may submit your proxy by properly executing and returning the proxy card(s) in the enclosed envelope(s). If you received paper copies of this year’s proxy materials by mail, you can elect to receive in the future an e-mail message that will provide a link to those documents on the Internet.

The shares represented by your proxy will be voted at the Meeting as directed by your proxy. You may revoke your proxy at any time before the proxy is exercised by delivering a written revocation to the Secretary of the Company or by submitting a proxy bearing a later date by telephone, via the Internet, or in writing. You may also revoke your proxy by voting in person at the Meeting.

The shares represented by your proxy will be voted FOR the election of each of the director nominees named herein (Proposal 1) unless you specifically withhold authority to vote for one or more of the director nominees. Further, unless you properly direct otherwise, the shares represented by your proxy will be voted FOR the ratification of the selection of KPMG LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending February 28, 2018 (Proposal 2), FOR the approval, by an advisory vote, of the compensation of the Company’s named executive officers as disclosed herein (Proposal 3), ONE YEAR with respect to the frequency of holding future advisory votes on executive compensation (Proposal 4), and FOR the approval of the amendment and restatement of the Company’s Long-Term Stock Incentive Plan (Proposal 5).

As of the close of business on May 19, 2017 (the “Record Date”), the outstanding common stock of the Company consisted of Class A Common Stock, par value $.01 per share (“Class A Stock”), Class B Common Stock, par value $.01 per share (“Class B Stock”), and Class 1 Common Stock, par value $.01 per share (“Class 1 Stock”). Holders of Class 1 Stock have limited voting rights. Holders of

1

Table of Contents

Class A Stock and/or Class B Stock are entitled to vote on Proposals 1 through 5 described in this Proxy Statement. Stockholders who receive a proxy card for Class A Stock and a proxy card for Class B Stock must sign and return both proxy cards in accordance with their respective instructions or submit a proxy by telephone or via the Internet with respect to both Class A Stock and Class B Stock in order to ensure the voting of the shares of each class owned.

If your shares are owned directly in your name in an account with the Company’s stock transfer agent, Computershare Inc., you are considered the stockholder of record of those shares in your account. If your shares are held in an account with a broker or other nominee, you are considered a “beneficial” stockholder of those shares, which are held in “street name.” The broker or other nominee is considered the stockholder of record for those shares. As a beneficial owner, you have the right to instruct the broker or other nominee how to vote those shares.

If you are a stockholder of record, you may vote your shares of Class A Stock and/or Class B Stock at the Meeting by completing a ballot at the Meeting. If you are a beneficial stockholder and want to vote your shares of Class A Stock and/or Class B Stock in person at the Meeting, you must bring a signed legal proxy from your broker or other nominee giving you the right to vote the shares, which must be submitted with your ballot at the Meeting.

The cost of soliciting proxies will be borne by the Company. In addition to solicitation by use of the Internet and the mail, directors, officers, or regular employees of the Company, without extra compensation, may solicit proxies in person or by telephone, facsimile, Internet, or electronic mail. Banks, brokerage firms, and other entities holding stock for others in their names or in the names of nominees are requested to forward the proxy materials to the beneficial owners of such shares. If requested, the Company will reimburse such persons for their reasonable expenses in forwarding the proxy materials.

Voting Securities

The capital stock of the Company entitled to be voted at the Meeting that was outstanding as of the Record Date consisted of 171,903,983 shares of Class A Stock and 23,338,727 shares of Class B Stock. Each share of Class B Stock is convertible into one share of Class A Stock at any time at the option of the holder. Shares of Class 1 Stock have limited voting rights, and holders of Class 1 Stock are not entitled to vote on any of the proposals described in this Proxy Statement.

Only holders of record of Class A Stock and/or Class B Stock on the books of the Company at the close of business on the Record Date for determining eligibility to vote at the Meeting are entitled to notice of and to vote at the Meeting. Except as otherwise required by Delaware law, holders of Class A Stock and holders of Class B Stock will vote together as a single class on all matters other than the election of directors as set forth below. When holders of Class A Stock and holders of Class B Stock vote together as a single class, each holder of Class A Stock is entitled to one (1) vote for each share of Class A Stock registered in such holder’s name, and each holder of Class B Stock is entitled to ten (10) votes for each share of Class B Stock registered in such holder’s name. Therefore, holders of Class A Stock are entitled to cast a total of 171,903,983 votes for proposals at the Meeting and holders of Class B Stock are entitled to cast a total of 233,387,270 votes for proposals at the Meeting.

Holders of shares representing a majority of the outstanding aggregate voting power of Class A Stock and Class B Stock, present at the Meeting in person or by proxy, will constitute a quorum. Shares represented by proxies marked as abstentions will be counted toward determining

2

Table of Contents

the presence of a quorum. “Broker non-votes” occur when brokers or other nominees submit proxies relating to shares held in “street name” that they may vote with respect to at least one of, but not all, the matters to be considered at the Meeting because they have not received instructions from the respective beneficial owners of the shares. Shares with respect to which broker non-votes occur would be counted as shares present for purposes of determining whether a quorum is present at the Meeting. Under the rules of the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”), brokers and nominees will not be permitted to vote with respect to Proposals 1, 3, 4, and 5 without receiving direction from the beneficial owners of the Class A Stock or Class B Stock held by such broker or nominee; however, authorized brokers and nominees will be permitted to vote with respect to Proposal 2 without receiving such direction. Accordingly, the Company may receive broker non-votes with respect to Proposals 1, 3, 4, and 5, but does not expect to receive broker non-votes with respect to Proposal 2 unless one or more beneficial owners have withheld discretionary authority from their respective brokers or nominees.

Under Delaware law and the Company’s certificate of incorporation and by-laws, directors are elected by a plurality of the votes cast (the highest number of votes cast) by the holders of the shares entitled to vote, and actually voting, in person or by proxy. Pursuant to the Company’s certificate of incorporation and based on the number of shares of Class A Stock and Class B Stock that were outstanding on the Record Date, holders of Class A Stock, voting as a separate class, are entitled to elect one-fourth of the number of directors to be elected at the Meeting (rounded up to the next number if the total number of directors to be elected is not evenly divisible by four). Holders of Class A Stock and holders of Class B Stock, voting as a single class, are entitled to elect the remaining number of directors to be elected at the Meeting, with holders of Class A Stock having one (1) vote per share and holders of Class B Stock having ten (10) votes per share. Since the Board nominated ten (10) directors, holders of Class A Stock will be entitled to elect three (3) directors and holders of Class A Stock and holders of Class B Stock, voting as a single class, will be entitled to elect seven (7) directors. Because the directors are elected by a plurality of the votes cast in each election, votes that are withheld (including broker non-votes) will not affect the outcome of the elections.

The ratification of the selection of KPMG LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending February 28, 2018 (Proposal 2), the approval, by an advisory vote, of the compensation of the Company’s named executive officers as disclosed in this Proxy Statement (Proposal 3), and the approval of the amendment and restatement of the Company’s Long-Term Stock Incentive Plan (Proposal 5) each requires the affirmative vote of a majority of the votes entitled to be cast by stockholders present in person or represented by proxy at the Meeting. With respect to these proposals, holders of Class A Stock and holders of Class B Stock are entitled to vote as a single class at the Meeting, with holders of Class A Stock having one (1) vote per share and holders of Class B Stock having ten (10) votes per share. Abstentions will have the effect of negative votes. However, because broker non-votes, if any, are not considered entitled to vote, they will not affect the outcome of these votes.

The advisory vote with respect to the frequency of holding future advisory votes on executive compensation (Proposal 4) allows stockholders to indicate which option (One Year, Two Years, or Three Years) they would prefer. The affirmative vote of a majority of the votes entitled to be cast by stockholders present in person or represented by proxy at the Meeting shall determine the stockholders’ preferred option with regard to the frequency of such advisory vote. In the event that no option receives such a majority of the votes, we will consider the option that receives the most votes to be the non-binding stockholder recommended option as to the frequency of future advisory votes on executive compensation. With respect to this advisory vote, holders of Class A Stock and

3

Table of Contents

Class B Stock will vote together as a single class at the Meeting, with holders of Class A Stock having one (1) vote per share and holders of Class B Stock having ten (10) votes per share. Because of the structure of this vote, abstentions and broker non-votes will not affect the outcome of the vote.

Stockholder Proposals for the 2018 Annual Meeting

In order for any stockholder proposal submitted pursuant to Rule 14a-8 promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to be included in our Proxy Statement to be issued in connection with our 2018 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, such proposal must be received by us no later than February 3, 2018 and otherwise comply with the requirements of Rule 14a-8.

Any notice of a proposal submitted outside the processes of Rule 14a-8 which a stockholder intends to bring forth at our 2018 Annual Meeting of Stockholders must comply with the provisions of our by-laws. Any such notice will be untimely for purposes of our by-laws if it is received by us after February 3, 2018. See the heading “The Board of Directors and Committees of the Board” and the subheading “Corporate Governance Committee” for information regarding submission of a director nomination for consideration by the Corporate Governance Committee.

All such communications regarding the 2018 Annual Meeting of Stockholders must be provided in writing and be directed to the attention of the Company’s Secretary, Constellation Brands, Inc., 207 High Point Drive, Building 100, Victor, New York 14564.

If we receive a notice after February 3, 2018, then the notice is untimely and we will not have an obligation to present the proposal at the 2018 Annual Meeting of Stockholders. If the Company chooses to present a proposal that a stockholder submits other than pursuant to Rule 14a-8 at the 2018 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, then the person(s) appointed by the Board and named in the proxies for the 2018 Annual Meeting of Stockholders may exercise discretionary voting power with respect to that proposal.

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

The Board of Directors and Committees of the Board

Board Leadership Structure

Our Board of Directors’ Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that there is no pre-determined policy as to whether or not the roles of Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer should be separate and, if the roles are to be separate, whether or not the Chairman of the Board should be a non-management director. If the Chief Executive Officer serves as Chairman of the Board or if there is a separate Chairman of the Board who is also a member of management, our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide for the designation of one of the independent directors as lead director. The lead director schedules and presides at executive sessions of non-management directors (and, if any non-management director is not independent, executive sessions of independent directors). As required, the lead director also facilitates communication between other members of the Board and the Chairman of the Board or the Chief Executive Officer. Since our Chairman of the Board, Mr. Richard Sands, serves as a member of management, a lead director has been designated. Currently, Mr. Locke serves in this capacity. Our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that there is no fixed schedule for the rotation of the lead director, although rotation may be desirable from time to time. We believe this structure is appropriate as it provides us with a Chairman

4

Table of Contents

who is a significant stockholder and has provided nearly forty years of service to us, including over 13 years of service as Chief Executive Officer; a current Chief Executive Officer who is also a significant stockholder and has also provided over 30 years of service to us in a variety of roles, including approximately a decade of service as Chief Executive Officer; as well as an independent lead director to oversee executive sessions of the Board and to facilitate communications as necessary among management and non-management directors.

Risk Oversight

The Board oversees the management of risks inherent in the operation of our business, with a focus on the most significant risks that we face. The Board performs this oversight role at multiple levels. In connection with its oversight of our strategic direction, as well as operations of our beer and wine and spirits divisions and corporate functions, the Board considers and addresses the primary risks associated with those strategic plans, divisions and functions on a macro level. In addition, each Board committee addresses the risks specific to the function of that committee. For example, the Board committees address the following risks:

We have created a management committee named the Risk Management Oversight Committee. This committee is comprised of members of management whose job functions relate to a wide variety of risk-sensitive areas, including operations, internal audit, finance, accounting, legal, and information technology. The committee meets periodically for the purposes of identifying and

5

Table of Contents

assessing risks that we face and developing and implementing processes and procedures to manage, mitigate, or otherwise address identified risks. To facilitate the Board’s and the Board committees’ oversight functions as they relate to risk issues, the Risk Management Oversight Committee periodically reports to, and receives comments from, the Board and the Audit Committee.

Director Independence

The Board adopted and reviews on an annual basis the Board of Directors’ Corporate Governance Guidelines containing categorical standards for determining director independence. These standards, which were most recently revised on October 1, 2014, are designed to satisfy the applicable requirements of the SEC and the NYSE. The Board of Directors’ Corporate Governance Guidelines, including the categorical standards, are available on our website at www.cbrands.com/investors/corporate-governance.

The Board has affirmatively determined that each current member of the Board, other than Mr. Robert Sands and Mr. Richard Sands, meets the categorical standards set by the Board to qualify as an independent director. Therefore, each director, other than Mr. Robert Sands and Mr. Richard Sands, is independent, and a majority of the members of the current Board are independent.

As part of its oversight of director independence, the Board has considered the following relationships. Mr. Locke serves as Senior Counsel to our principal outside counsel, Nixon Peabody LLP, and as an uncompensated director of Friends of the Constellation Brands-Marvin Sands Performing Arts Center, Inc. (“CMAC”). CMAC is a registered New York charity to which we make payments for naming rights and for food and entertainment at CMAC events. Several of our employees, including Mr. Richard Sands, serve as uncompensated officers or directors or otherwise volunteer their time at CMAC. During fiscal 2017, we also made small in-kind donations to this charity. Also during fiscal 2017 we had arms’ length transactions with Cott Corporation, where Mr. Fowden serves as Chief Executive Officer, consisting of the receipt of packaging services by us and sales of bulk vodka to Cott Corporation. Also during fiscal 2017, we had arms’ length transactions with Frontier Communications Corporation, where Mr. McCarthy serves as Chief Executive Officer, consisting of the receipt of voice and internet services by us. The Board considered these relationships and determined none are material relationships that would impair a director’s independence under our categorical standards of independence.

The non-management members of the Board, all of whom are independent, meet periodically in regularly scheduled sessions without management. Each member of the three standing Board committees is independent in accordance with the applicable requirements of the NYSE listing standards, the SEC, and the categorical standards of independence contained within our Board of Directors’ Corporate Governance Guidelines.

Board and Committee Meetings and Committee Membership

During fiscal 2017, the Board of Directors met six times. All of our incumbent directors attended at least 75% of the total number of meetings held by the Board and each committee of the Board on which he or she served during his or her period of service. Our directors are expected to attend each annual meeting of stockholders, and all directors who were at that time standing for re-election attended our 2016 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

6

Table of Contents

The table below lists our three separately designated, standing Board committees, the directors who currently serve on them, and the number of committee meetings held in fiscal 2017. Each committee operates under a written charter that was approved by the Board and is available on our website at www.cbrands.com/investors/corporate-governance.

All directors, including committee chairs, served on the respective committees listed above for the entire 2017 fiscal year, except (1) Mr. Cumenal was a member of the Human Resources Committee from July 20, 2016 to November 1, 2016 and has served as a member of the Audit Committee since November 1, 2016, and (2) Mr. Hanson was a member of the Audit Committee until November 1, 2016 and has served as a member of the Human Resources Committee since such date.

Audit Committee

This committee performs the Board’s oversight responsibilities as they relate to our accounting policies, internal controls, and financial reporting practices, including, among other things, the integrity of our financial statements, our compliance with legal and regulatory requirements, the qualifications and independence of the independent registered public accounting firm, and the performance of our internal audit function and the independent registered public accounting firm. In addition, this committee maintains a line of communication between the Board and our financial management, internal auditors, and independent registered public accounting firm. The Board has determined that each member of the Audit Committee is (i) independent (as independence is determined for audit committee members under NYSE listing standards) and (ii) an audit committee financial expert. Each of Messrs. McCarthy and Cumenal acquired the relevant experience and expertise required for an audit committee financial expert from their experience as a chief executive officer of a US public company, including certifying the effectiveness of internal controls and procedures in such capacity. Additional information regarding the experience of each committee member is set forth under the heading “Director Nominees.” No committee member simultaneously serves on the audit committees of more than two other public companies.

Audit Committee Report

The following report shall not be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the federal securities laws by virtue of any general incorporation of this Proxy Statement by reference and shall not otherwise be treated as filed under the federal securities laws.

The Audit Committee of the Board provides oversight to our financial reporting process through periodic meetings with our independent registered public accounting firm, internal auditors, and management. Our management is responsible for the preparation and integrity of the financial

7

Table of Contents

reporting information and related systems of internal controls. The independent registered public accounting firm is responsible for performing an independent audit of our consolidated financial statements and our internal control over financial reporting in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and for issuing reports thereon. The Audit Committee, in carrying out its role, relies on our senior management and independent registered public accounting firm.

In connection with the preparation and filing of our 2017 Form 10-K, the Audit Committee met, reviewed, and discussed with our management and with KPMG LLP, our independent registered public accounting firm, our audited financial statements and related disclosures and KPMG LLP’s evaluation of our internal control over financial reporting. Also, the Audit Committee discussed with KPMG LLP the matters required to be discussed by Auditing Standard No. 16 as adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board relating to communications with audit committees.

In addition, the Audit Committee has received the written disclosures and the letter from KPMG LLP required by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding communications with audit committees concerning independence. The Audit Committee also has discussed with KPMG LLP the independence of that firm as our independent registered public accounting firm. The Audit Committee has concluded that KPMG LLP’s provision of audit and non-audit services to us is compatible with KPMG LLP’s independence.

Based on the review and discussions described above, the Audit Committee recommended to the Board that our audited financial statements be included in our 2017 Form 10-K for filing with the SEC.

Audit Committee:

Barry A. Fromberg (Chair)

Frederic Cumenal

Daniel J. McCarthy

Judy A. Schmeling

8

Table of Contents

Corporate Governance Committee

This committee functions as the nominating committee of the Board. The Corporate Governance Committee identifies individuals qualified to become Board members consistent with criteria and qualifications for membership approved by the Board and selects, or recommends that the Board select, director nominees for each annual meeting of stockholders. The Corporate Governance Committee advises the Board concerning the appropriate composition of the Board and its committees, develops and recommends corporate governance guidelines to the Board, and advises the Board regarding appropriate corporate governance practices and assists the Board in achieving them. Among other matters, this committee also makes recommendations to the Board with respect to an officer to be designated as Chief Executive Officer, a director to serve as Chairman of the Board, and, if applicable, an independent director to serve as lead director. In addition, this committee advises the Board with regard to compensation for the non-management directors and reviews related person transactions involving the Company and its directors, director nominees, executive officers, or significant stockholders.

The Corporate Governance Committee identifies potential director candidates from any outside advisors it may retain, as well as from other members of the Board, executive officers, and other contacts. The Corporate Governance Committee has from time to time engaged the services of an independent third-party search firm in order to assist it in identifying and evaluating potential director candidates who will bring to the Board specific skill sets as established by the Corporate Governance Committee.

The Corporate Governance Committee will also consider director nominations identified by our stockholders. Nominations by stockholders must be provided in a timely manner and must include sufficient biographical information so that the Corporate Governance Committee can appropriately assess the proposed nominee’s background and qualifications. In its assessment of potential candidates, the Corporate Governance Committee will review the candidate’s character, wisdom, judgment, ability to make independent analytical inquiries, business experiences, understanding of our business environment, acumen, and ability to devote the time and effort necessary to fulfill his or her responsibilities, all in the context of the perceived needs of the Board at that time. For a stockholder to have his or her candidate considered by the Corporate Governance Committee for inclusion as a director nominee at the 2018 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, stockholder submissions of candidates for nomination to the Board must be received in writing at our offices by the Company’s Secretary, Constellation Brands, Inc., 207 High Point Drive, Building 100, Victor, New York 14564 no later than February 3, 2018. Potential nominees recommended by a stockholder in accordance with these procedures will be considered and evaluated in the same manner as other potential nominees.

Pursuant to our Board of Directors’ Corporate Governance Guidelines, individual diversity as well as diversity in experience and areas of expertise are factors that are considered by the Corporate Governance Committee in its assessment of candidates. The Board, however, has not adopted any objective diversity-driven criteria or composition requirements. The Board seeks individuals having knowledge and experience in such disciplines as finance and accounting, international business, marketing, law, human resources, and consumer products. The Board also seeks individuals who bring unique and varied perspectives and life experiences to the Board. As such, the Corporate Governance Committee assists the Board by selecting or recommending director candidates who it believes will enhance the overall diversity of the Board.

9

Table of Contents

Human Resources Committee

This committee functions as the compensation committee of the Board. In addition to satisfying the applicable independence requirements of the SEC and the NYSE and qualifying as independent under the Board of Directors’ Corporate Governance Guidelines, the Members of the Human Resources Committee also meet the independence standards for “outside directors” under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, and are considered “non-employee directors” under Rule 16b-3 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

This committee fulfills the Board’s responsibilities relating to the compensation of our executives, including the Chief Executive Officer, and engages an independent consultant to assist the committee in its review and analysis of executive compensation. Additionally, the Human Resources Committee monitors, among other matters, the following: our human resources policies and procedures as they relate to our goals and objectives and good management practices; our material policies and procedures which relate to compliance with pertinent human resources laws and regulations, the ethical conduct of the business as it relates to human resources matters, and the management of human resources capital; and our procedures and internal controls that relate to personnel administration, pay practices, and benefits administration. The Human Resources Committee is responsible for evaluating the performance of the Chief Executive Officer and approves each element of his compensation, as well as the compensation of our other executive officers. This committee also annually reviews with management the Compensation Discussion and Analysis and, as appropriate, recommends to the Board that it be included in our applicable filings with the SEC.

This committee presently oversees our Long-Term Stock Incentive Plan, Annual Management Incentive Plan, and 1989 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, and reviews our senior management development and succession plans as well as other important human resources issues. The Human Resources Committee has not delegated any authority with respect to the compensation of our executive officers. The Human Resources Committee has delegated to our Chief Human Resources Officer limited authority to grant equity awards (including stock options, restricted stock units (RSUs) and performance share units (PSUs)) to non-executive officer employees, subject to certain limitations on the aggregate annual value of such awards and the annual value of awards granted to an individual recipient.

The Role of Our Executive Officers

Executive officers, including the Chairman of the Board and the President and Chief Executive Officer, may make recommendations and provide information to, and answer questions from, the Human Resources Committee as it fulfills its responsibilities regarding executive compensation during each fiscal year. No executive officer has the authority to approve his compensation or to grant awards of equity compensation to himself or to any other executive officer.

The Role of the Independent Compensation Consultant

The Human Resources Committee directly engaged Frederic. W. Cook & Co., Inc. (“FW Cook”) to serve as its independent compensation consultant. The scope of services relating to fiscal 2017 executive compensation performed by FW Cook generally consisted of the following:

10

Table of Contents

FW Cook also serves as the independent compensation consultant to the Corporate Governance Committee of the Board concerning compensation of the non-management directors. The Corporate Governance Committee has directly engaged FW Cook to assist with its review and recommendations concerning the non-management director compensation program for action by the Board in July 2017.

During fiscal 2017, FW Cook provided advice and recommendations on executive and director compensation and did not provide us with any additional services.

The Human Resources Committee has considered the independence of FW Cook, as required under NYSE listing rules. The committee has also considered the relevant factors, including but not limited to those set forth in Rule 10C-1(b)(4)(i) through (vi) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that could give rise to a potential conflict of interest with respect to FW Cook. Based on its reviews, the Human Resources Committee has not identified any conflicts of interest regarding the services of FW Cook or its employees.

Communications with the Board of Directors

Stockholders or other interested parties may arrange to communicate directly with the directors, the lead director, or the non-management directors as a group by writing to them in the care of the Board of Directors, Constellation Brands, Inc., 207 High Point Drive, Building 100, Victor, New York 14564. We will forward all such communications (other than unsolicited advertising materials). Stockholders or other interested parties may also communicate concerns via our 24-hour hotline as set forth in the policy regarding Communications from Stockholders or Other Interested Parties available on our website at www.cbrands.com/investors/corporate-governance.

Director Compensation

Our compensation program for non-management members of the Board currently runs on an annual cycle starting with the first Board meeting immediately following the Annual Meeting of Stockholders and includes compensation in the form of cash, restricted stock or RSUs, and stock options. As part of the annual compensation review process, our director compensation program was reviewed by FW Cook, the Corporate Governance Committee’s independent compensation consultant. The changes below, recommended by FW Cook, were reviewed and approved by the Board at its July 20, 2016 meeting:

11

Table of Contents

The cash component of non-management director compensation currently consists of (i) an annual retainer of $70,000, payable in quarterly installments, (ii) a Board meeting fee of $2,500 for each Board meeting attended, (iii) a committee meeting fee of $1,500 for each meeting attended, (iv) an annual fee of $15,000 to the Chairs of the Human Resources Committee and the Corporate Governance Committee, payable in quarterly installments, and (v) an annual fee of $20,000 to the Chair of the Audit Committee, payable in quarterly installments.

Equity awards are another element of non-management director compensation. Each non-management director currently receives annually, if and as approved by the Board, a stock option grant and a restricted stock or RSU award. Under our updated compensation program for non-management directors, (i) the annual Class 1 stock option grant has a grant date fair value, computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718, of $55,000, and (ii) the annual restricted stock or RSU award is not to exceed the number of restricted shares or RSUs obtained by dividing $85,000 by the closing price of a share of Class A Stock on the date of grant. While the Board has the flexibility to determine at the time of each grant the vesting provisions for that grant, historically these stock option awards vest six months following the date of grant and these restricted stock or RSU awards vest one year following the date of grant. U.S. resident directors receive restricted stock and non-U.S. resident directors receive RSUs.

Under the updated program, on July 20, 2016 we granted a stock option award to purchase up to 1,267 shares of Class 1 Stock to each non-management director who then served on the Board. These awards reflected an exercise price of $166.34 per share, vesting on the six-month anniversary of the date of grant and a ten-year exercise period. In addition, on July 20, 2016 each U.S. resident non-management director who then served on the Board was also granted 511 restricted shares of Class A Stock. Mr. Hernández, a non-U.S. resident director, was granted 511 RSUs. On the date of these grants, the closing price of Class A Stock was $166.34 per share. Subject to applicable provisions in the award documents, the restricted stock or RSUs will vest on the one-year anniversary of the date of grant, or earlier in the event a director dies or becomes disabled, we undergo a change-in-control, or the director’s term expires without him or her being renominated other than for cause.

We reimburse our non-management directors for reasonable expenses incurred in connection with attending Board and Board committee meetings. We also provide our non-management directors with complimentary products having a value of up to $5,000 per calendar year.

We maintain a charitable matching program pursuant to which we will match donations by employees and directors up to $2,500 per person per fiscal year to charitable organizations focused on health, education, or the arts. Non-management directors are eligible to participate on the same terms as employees. During fiscal 2017, Mr. Fromberg had one $2,500 donation matched by us under this program.

Our current non-management directors are Mr. Cumenal, Mr. Fowden, Mr. Fromberg, Mr. Hanson, Mr. Hernández, Mr. Locke, Mr. McCarthy, Ms. Schmeling, and Mr. Wandell. The remaining two directors, Mr. Robert Sands and Mr. Richard Sands, who are also employees of the Company, receive no additional compensation for serving as directors.

The Board is expected to consider director compensation at a future Board meeting at which time the compensation paid to non-management directors may be modified. The Corporate Governance Committee advises the Board with regard to compensation of non-management directors. The Corporate Governance Committee has engaged FW Cook to assist with such matters

12

Table of Contents

during fiscal 2017 and fiscal 2018. Management personnel within the Human Resources Department support the Corporate Governance Committee and the Board in their work concerning non-management director compensation. Executive officers, including the Chairman of the Board and the President and Chief Executive Officer, may make recommendations or provide information to, or answer questions from, the Corporate Governance Committee and the Board regarding non-management director compensation.

Director Compensation in Fiscal 2017

13

Table of Contents

Beneficial Ownership

This section presents information concerning the beneficial ownership of our common stock by certain individuals, entities and groups. Determinations as to whether a particular individual, entity or group is the beneficial owner of our common stock have been made in accordance with Rule 13d-3 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Under Rule 13d-3, a person is deemed to be the beneficial owner of any shares as to which such person: (i) directly or indirectly has or shares voting power or investment power, or (ii) has the right to acquire such voting or investment power within sixty (60) days through the exercise of any stock option or other right. The fact that a person is the beneficial owner of shares for purposes of Rule 13d-3 does not necessarily mean that such person would be the beneficial owner of securities for other purposes. The percentages of beneficial ownership reported in this section were calculated on the basis of 171,823,164 shares of Class A Stock, 23,338,727 shares of Class B Stock, and 7,720 shares of Class 1 Stock outstanding as of the close of business on May 15, 2017, subject to adjustment as appropriate in each particular case in accordance with Rule 13d-3.

Beneficial Security Ownership of More Than 5% of the Company’s Voting Common Stock

The following tables present information, as of May 15, 2017 (except the information relating to those certain entities described in footnotes (10) through (12) to the tables is as of the dates disclosed in such footnotes and percentages are calculated assuming continued beneficial ownership at May 15, 2017), regarding the beneficial ownership of Class A Stock or Class B Stock by each person who is known to be the beneficial owner of more than 5% of such classes of stock. Many shares reported in the following tables for Robert Sands, our President and Chief Executive Officer, Richard Sands, our Chairman of the Board, and other Sands related beneficial owners are reflected more than once as many of those shares are held by various Sands related family investment vehicles and foundations in which more than one of the beneficial owners listed in the tables below serves as a partner, manager, trustee, director or officer. The information reported for the “stockholders group” in the tables and footnotes below effectively represents the aggregate shares beneficially owned by Messrs. Robert and Richard Sands and other Sands related beneficial owners without counting any shares more than once. This stockholders group beneficially owns an aggregate of 30,061,048 shares of Class A Stock and Class B Stock. The outstanding shares included in this number represent approximately 15% of the combined outstanding Class A Stock and Class B Stock and approximately 58% of the combined voting power of the outstanding Class A Stock and Class B Stock when voting together as a single class. Except as otherwise noted below, the address of each person or entity listed in the tables is c/o Constellation Brands, Inc., 207 High Point Drive, Building 100, Victor, New York 14564.

14

Table of Contents

Class A Stock

Class B Stock

NA = Not Applicable

15

Table of Contents

16

Table of Contents

17

Table of Contents

Beneficial Security Ownership of Directors and Executive Officers

The Board has established guidelines for the minimum amounts of our common stock that our non-management directors and executive officers should beneficially own. These guidelines for stock ownership consider the length of a director’s tenure on the Board or an executive officer’s tenure as an executive officer. We allow individuals five years in which to reach the applicable ownership guideline. The ownership guidelines can be satisfied by the ownership of stock, vested stock options, unvested restricted stock, unvested restricted stock units, and unvested performance share units after the relevant performance period has been completed and the Human Resources Committee has certified the number of shares that will be issued upon satisfaction of the service requirement.

The guideline for non-management directors is the beneficial ownership of five (5) times the annual cash retainer fee paid to them. The guideline for executive officers is based on each officer’s position in the organization and is a multiple of annual base salary. The Chairman of the Board and the President and Chief Executive Officer each has a stock ownership guideline of six (6) times his annual base salary. Each of the other executive officers has a stock ownership guideline of three (3) times his annual base salary. As of May 15, 2017, each of our non-management directors and each of our executive officers had either met his or her respective target or was within the five-year window for doing so.

18

Table of Contents

The following table sets forth, as of May 15, 2017, the beneficial ownership of Class A Stock, Class B Stock, and Class 1 Stock by our directors, the named executive officers (as defined under the heading “Compensation Tables and Related Information” below) and all of our directors and executive officers as a group. The Class A Stock information in the table below does not include shares of Class A Stock that are issuable upon the conversion of either Class B Stock or Class 1 Stock, although such information is provided in footnotes where applicable. Unless otherwise noted, the individuals listed in the table have sole voting and dispositive power with respect to the shares attributed to them.

19

Table of Contents

20

Table of Contents

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 requires our directors and executive officers, and persons who beneficially own more than 10% of our Class A Stock or Class B Stock, each a registered class of equity securities, to file with the SEC reports of ownership and changes in ownership of our equity securities. Executive officers, directors, and greater than 10% stockholders are required to furnish us with copies of all such reports they file. Based solely upon review of copies of such reports furnished to us and related information, we believe all filing requirements were complied with in a timely manner during fiscal 2017.

Certain Relationships and Related Transactions

Transactions with Related Persons

The Inn on the Lake in Canandaigua, New York and the Seagate Hotel & Spa, Beach Club, and Country Club in Delray Beach, Florida (the “Hotel Properties”) are indirectly owned by several trusts, the beneficiaries of which are the descendants of Mr. Robert Sands and Mr. Richard Sands, and Ms. Abigail Bennett and Mr. Zachary Stern, who are significant stockholders and the niece and nephew, respectively, of Mr. Robert Sands and Mr. Richard Sands. From time to time, we use these properties for functions and employee lodging. We do not pay these entities more than standard rates for their services. During fiscal 2017, we paid an aggregate of approximately $228,854 for these services.

By an agreement dated December 20, 1990, the Company entered into a split-dollar insurance agreement with a trust established by Marvin Sands of which Robert Sands is the trustee. Pursuant to the agreement, in prior years the Company paid the annual premium on an insurance policy held in the trust, and the trust has reimbursed the Company for the portion of the premium equal to the “economic benefit” to Marvin and/or Marilyn Sands. The policy is a joint life policy payable upon the death of Marilyn Sands, as the survivor of the two insureds. Pursuant to the terms of the trust, the proceeds will be split into thirds, with Robert Sands (in his individual capacity) and Richards Sands each receiving one-third, and Ms. Abigail Bennett and Mr. Zachary Stern sharing the remaining third of the proceeds of the policy (after the repayment of the indebtedness to the Company out of such proceeds as described below) if they survive Marilyn Sands. While the Company has made no premium payment on behalf of the trust since fiscal 2002, from the inception of the agreement through the end of fiscal 2002, the Company paid aggregate premiums, net of reimbursements, of approximately $2.4 million. The aggregate amount of such unreimbursed premiums constituted indebtedness from the trust to the Company and was secured by a collateral assignment of the policy. On December 19, 2016, the trust exercised its pre-existing right under the December 20, 1990 split-dollar insurance agreement to repay such unreimbursed premium payments to the Company. This action by the trust required the Company to release its interest in the insurance policy subject to the split-dollar insurance agreement and cancel its collateral assignment of the policy.

Mrs. Susan Hetterich, the spouse of Mr. F. Paul Hetterich, Executive Vice President and President, Beer Division, was employed by us during fiscal 2017 initially on a full-time basis and then most recently on a part-time basis reporting to the Executive Vice President, General Counsel. She is

21

Table of Contents

deemed to be a “related party” under SEC rules because she is the spouse of Mr. Hetterich, an executive officer of the Company. Mrs. Hetterich participated in the Company’s compensation and benefit plans in the same manner as other employees of the same level with similar responsibilities, as appropriately adjusted to reflect her part-time status. During fiscal 2017, Mrs. Hetterich was paid salary and bonus and non-cash compensation of $210,954. Also, in fiscal 2017, in connection with Mrs. Hetterich’s departure from the Company and pursuant to Company policy and in exchange for her commitment to successfully transition her responsibilities, the Company paid Mrs. Hetterich a cash payment of $274,479 immediately following her departure on July 31, 2016, contingent upon her execution of a standard release of all claims, and $5,048 for accrued but unused paid time off.

Policy Regarding Related Person Transactions

The Board and the Corporate Governance Committee has adopted a written policy providing that all related person transactions or series of similar transactions required to be disclosed pursuant to SEC Regulation S-K Item 404(a) must be presented to the Corporate Governance Committee of the Board for pre-approval or ratification. The policy requires each of our (i) directors or director nominees, (ii) executive officers, and (iii) security holders known by the Company to own of record or beneficially own more than 5% of any class of our voting securities to notify the General Counsel promptly and, whenever possible, in advance of the occurrence of any potential related person transaction in which such person is directly or indirectly involved.

The General Counsel is responsible for reviewing all potential related person transactions and taking reasonable steps to ensure that all related person transactions requiring disclosure under Regulation S-K Item 404(a) are presented to the Corporate Governance Committee for pre-approval or ratification by members of the committee in their discretion at the committee’s next regularly scheduled meeting or, if deemed appropriate, by consent in lieu of a meeting. No director may engage in a vote to pre-approve or ratify any related person transaction in which he or she or any member of his or her immediate family has a material interest; provided, however, that such director must provide any information concerning such related person transaction that the Corporate Governance Committee may reasonably request. If a potential related person transaction involves the General Counsel, the Chief Financial Officer would assume the responsibilities of the General Counsel under the policy with respect to that transaction.

The Corporate Governance Committee may consider all factors it deems relevant when determining whether to approve or ratify a related person transaction. In the context of evaluating potential transactions, the Corporate Governance Committee may consider, among other factors, the nature of the transaction and the related person’s interest in the transaction, the size of the transaction, whether we are able to engage in a comparable transaction with an unaffiliated party on more favorable terms, the benefit of the transaction to us, and the impact of the transaction on the related person. We are not aware of any related person transaction required to be reported under Regulation S-K Item 404(a) since the beginning of fiscal 2017 that has not been pre-approved or ratified pursuant to this policy.

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

Since the beginning of fiscal 2017, Mr. Fowden served as Chair of the Human Resources Committee and Messrs. Hernández and Wandell served as members of the committee. Mr. Cumenal served on the committee from July 20, 2016 to November 1, 2016. Mr. Hanson joined the committee

22

Table of Contents

on November 1, 2016. None of these individuals are or have ever been officers or employees of the Company. None of our executive officers served on the compensation committee or the board of directors of any company that had one or more of its executive officers serving as a member of our Human Resources Committee or Board during fiscal 2017.

EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

Information concerning the Company’s executive officers and their terms of office can be found in Part I of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended February 28, 2017 (the “2017 Form 10-K”).

PROPOSAL 1 – ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

Director Nominees

The Board has nominated ten (10) directors to be elected by the stockholders at the Meeting to hold office until the next Annual Meeting of Stockholders and until their successors are elected and qualified. The nominees for election to the Board are Mr. Jerry Fowden, Mr. Barry A. Fromberg, Mr. Robert L. Hanson, Mr. Ernesto M. Hernández, Mr. James A. Locke III, Mr. Daniel J. McCarthy, Mr. Richard Sands, Mr. Robert Sands, Ms. Judy A. Schmeling, and Mr. Keith E. Wandell, all of whom are currently serving as directors of the Company until the Meeting and until their successors are elected and qualified. Of the ten (10) nominees, Messrs. Fowden, Fromberg, and Wandell have been designated as the three (3) nominees to be elected by holders of Class A Stock, voting as a separate class. The remaining seven (7) nominees are to be elected by holders of Class A Stock and holders of Class B Stock, voting together as a single class.

Each of these nominees was recommended to the Board by the Corporate Governance Committee of the Board. In making its recommendation, the Corporate Governance Committee considered (i) the experience, qualifications, attributes, and skills of each nominee as set forth in the biographies below, (ii) each director’s past performance on and contributions to the Board, and (iii) which director nominees should be presented for election by holders of Class A Stock and which director nominees should be presented for election by holders of Class A Stock and holders of Class B Stock, voting as a single class. Management does not anticipate that any of the nominees will become unavailable to serve for any reason, but if that should occur before the Meeting, proxies will be voted FOR another nominee or nominees to be selected by the Board. The reported age of each nominee as presented in the following biographies is as of June 2, 2017.

Mr. Fowden, age 60, has served as Chief Executive Officer of Cott Corporation (NYSE: COT), an international beverage manufacturer and distributor as well as a leading North American and European provider of water, coffee, tea and filtration services, since February 2009 having joined Cott in September 2007. He has also served as a member of Cott’s Board of Directors since March 2009. Prior to joining Cott, he served as Chief Executive Officer of Trader Media Group, undertook various roles with AB InBev, including global Chief Operating Officer and Chief Executive Officer of the AB InBev subsidiary Bass Brewers, was Managing Director of the Rank Group’s Hospitality Division and served on the Rank Group Plc’s Board of Directors, was Chief Executive Officer of Hero AG’s European

23

Table of Contents

beverage operations, and undertook various international roles within PepsiCo’s beverage operations across the US, Europe, Middle East and Africa, as well as having sales, marketing and management roles with Mars pet care operations. Mr. Fowden has not served as a director of any other public company (other than for Cott Corporation) during the past five years. Mr. Fowden is a current chief executive officer of a public company and brings to the Board his extensive experience in executive leadership, the beverage industry, and international operations.

Mr. Fromberg, age 62, has served as Chief Financial Officer of HNI Healthcare (formerly Hospitalists Now, Inc.), a technology-enabled health care services company, since June 2010. Prior to that, Mr. Fromberg was Chief Financial Officer of Goodman Networks, Inc., a telecommunications services company, from March 2010 through May 2010. Mr. Fromberg served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Dean Foods Company, a food and beverage company, from 1998 until 2006. From 1995 to 1998, Mr. Fromberg served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of a subsidiary of Paging Network, Inc., a provider of wireless communications services; and from 1993 to 1995 he was Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Paging Network, Inc. He served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Simmons Communications, Inc., a cable television operator, from 1987 to 1993. He is a Certified Public Accountant. From 2010 until February 2017, Mr. Fromberg served on the Board of Directors of Xtera Communications, Inc. Mr. Fromberg brings to the Board extensive accounting, audit and financial reporting expertise, having served as chief financial officer of two public corporations as well as having held senior financial and leadership roles at a variety of public and private corporations over the course of his career.

Mr. Hanson, age 54, has served as Chief Executive Officer of John Hardy Global Limited, a luxury jewelry brand, since August 1, 2014. Prior to that, Mr. Hanson served as Chief Executive Officer and a Director of American Eagle Outfitters, Inc., a leading global specialty retailer of clothing, accessories and personal care products from January 2012 to January 2014. Mr. Hanson served Levi Strauss & Co. from 1988 to 2011 in a variety of important leadership roles across multiple brands where he led cross-functional teams, including merchandising, product development, multi-channel operations, marketing and creative teams, in addition to a full support staff. Mr. Hanson’s roles at Levi’s included serving as Global President of the Levi’s Brand from 2010 to 2011; President, Levi’s Strauss Americas/North America from 2006 to 2010; President, Levi’s Brand U.S. from 2001 to 2006; and President/Vice President, Levi’s Europe/Africa/Middle East from 1998 to 2001. Mr. Hanson has not served as a director of any other public company (other than for American Eagle Outfitters, Inc.) during the past five years. Mr. Hanson is a sitting chief executive officer and also a former chief executive officer of a public company and brings to the Board extensive knowledge and understanding of global operations, management, and stewardship of premium brands.

Mr. Hernández, age 59, has since June 2011 been President and Managing Director of General Motors de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V., a subsidiary of General Motors Company, a global automobile manufacturing company which through a subsidiary also provides automotive financing services. Prior to that appointment he served as Vice President and Executive Director of Sales, Service and Marketing of General Motors de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V., having served in that role from April 2003 through May 2011. Mr. Hernández began his career with General Motors de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. in 1980 and has held numerous positions of growing responsibility within that company.

24

Table of Contents

Mr. Hernández has not served as a director of any other public company during the past five years. Mr. Hernández brings to the Board his extensive leadership skills, insight, and perspective from his many years of service with a major manufacturing company as well as valuable insights regarding Mexican business operations.

Mr. Locke, age 75, has been engaged in the practice of business and corporate law, including primarily mergers and acquisitions, since 1971. Currently, Mr. Locke is Senior Counsel to the law firm of Nixon Peabody LLP. From 1996 through January 2008, he was a partner with Nixon Peabody LLP. He is located in the Rochester, New York office of the firm. Nixon Peabody LLP is the Company’s principal outside counsel. Prior to joining Nixon Peabody LLP, Mr. Locke practiced law in Rochester as a partner with another law firm. Mr. Locke has not served as a director of any other public company during the past five years. Mr. Locke brings to the Board his extensive knowledge in the areas of business and corporate law, corporate governance, and mergers and acquisitions. He also has had direct experience with the Company and its management since the Company first became a public company, including through his more than 30 years of service on the Board. As a result, he is able to have a broad understanding of and provide insight and guidance with respect to the Company’s development and strategies. He currently serves as the lead director.

Mr. McCarthy, age 53 has, since April 2015, served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Frontier Communications Corporation (NasdaqGS: FTR), a communications company. He was elected to the Frontier Board of Directors in May 2014. Prior to that he was President and Chief Operating Officer from April 2012 to April 2015, and, previously, was Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer from January 2006 to April 2012, Senior Vice President, Field Operations from December 2004 to December 2005, and Senior Vice President, Broadband Operations from January 2004 to December 2004. Mr. McCarthy began his career with Frontier Communications Corporation in 1990 and has held numerous positions of increasing responsibility within that company. Mr. McCarthy has not served as a director of any other public company (other than Frontier Communications Corporation) during the past five years. Mr. McCarthy brings to the Board his leadership skills as well as his experience in strategic planning, financial reporting, the competitive environment, mergers and acquisitions, and regulatory affairs.

Mr. Sands, age 66, is the Chairman of the Board of the Company. He has been employed by the Company in various capacities since 1979. Mr. Sands was elected Chairman of the Board in September 1999. He served as Chief Executive Officer from October 1993 to July 2007; as President from May 1986 to December 2002; as Chief Operating Officer from May 1986 to October 1993; and as Executive Vice President from 1982 to May 1986. Mr. Sands has not served as a director of any other public company during the past five years. Mr. Sands is the brother of Robert Sands, the Company’s President and Chief Executive Officer, and a son of the Company’s founder, the late Mr. Marvin Sands. He is also a significant stockholder of the Company. Mr. Sands brings to the Board a depth and breadth of knowledge of the Company based on nearly forty years of service, which includes over 13 years of service as Chief Executive Officer. Mr. Sands has extensive experience with the Company’s management, operations and strategic direction, as well as substantial knowledge regarding the beverage alcohol industry.

25

Table of Contents

Mr. Sands, age 58, is President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company. He was appointed Chief Executive Officer in July 2007 and was appointed President in December 2002. Mr. Sands also served as Chief Operating Officer from December 2002 to July 2007; as Group President from April 2000 through December 2002; as Chief Executive Officer, International from December 1998 through April 2000; as Executive Vice President from October 1993 through April 2000; as General Counsel from June 1986 to May 2000; and as Vice President from June 1990 through October 1993. Mr. Sands has not served as a director of any other public company during the past five years. Mr. Sands is the brother of Richard Sands, the Company’s Chairman of the Board, and a son of the Company’s founder, the late Mr. Marvin Sands. He is also a significant stockholder of the Company. Mr. Sands brings to the Board over 30 years of experience in a variety of legal, operational, and management roles at the Company, including approximately nine years of service as Chief Executive Officer. He also possesses substantial knowledge of, and has extensive relationships within, the beverage alcohol industry.

Ms. Schmeling, age 57, has served as President of Cornerstone Brands since August 2016 and Chief Operating Officer of HSN, Inc. (NasdaqGS: HSNI), an interactive multichannel retailer, since May 2013. She also served as Chief Financial Officer of HSN, Inc. from May 2013 to November 2016. From August 2008 to May 2013, Ms. Schmeling served as HSN, Inc.’s Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Prior to that, Ms. Schmeling held positions of increasing responsibility within the HSN operating segment. She served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of HSN (when it was IAC Retailing) from February 2002 to August 2008; as Senior Vice President, Finance from November 1999 to February 2002; as Chief Operating Officer of international operations from January 2001 to February 2002; as Vice President, Strategic Planning and Analysis from January 1998 to November 1999; and as Director of Investor Relations and Operating Vice President, Finance from September 1994 to January 1998 (during the time when HSN was a separately traded public company). Ms. Schmeling has not served as a director of any other public company during the past five years. Ms. Schmeling is a chief operating officer of a public company and brings to the Board extensive accounting and financial expertise and valuable experience associated with operations as well as with the oversight of treasury, financial planning and analysis, tax, and investor relations functions.

Mr. Wandell, age 67, is the retired Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of Harley-Davidson, Inc., a global motorcycle manufacturer. He served as Chairman of the Board from February 2012 to April 2015 and as President and Chief Executive Officer from May 2009 until May 2015. Prior to that, Mr. Wandell served as the President and Chief Operating Officer of Johnson Controls, Inc., a global manufacturer of automotive, power and building solutions from 2006 to 2009. He also served at Johnson Controls as Executive Vice President from 2005 to 2006; Corporate Vice President from 1997 to 2005; President of the Automotive Experience business from 2003 to 2006; and President of the Power Solutions business from 1998 to 2003. Mr. Wandell has served as Chairman of the Board of Exide Technologies, a global provider of stored electrical energy solutions, since April 30, 2015. Mr. Wandell is a director and the Non-Executive Chairman of the Board of Dana Holding Corporation (NYSE: DAN), a world leader in the supply of highly engineered drivetrain, sealing, and thermal-management technologies, and a director of Dover Corp. (NYSE: DOV), a diversified global manufacturer. Mr. Wandell served as a director of Harley-Davidson, Inc. from 2009

26

Table of Contents

until April 2015. Mr. Wandell is a former chief executive officer of a public company and brings to the Board his expertise in executive leadership, international business matters, operations, and oversight of a global premium brand.

Additional information concerning the director nominees is set forth under the headings “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions” and “The Board of Directors and Committees of the Board.” For information with respect to the number of shares of the Company’s common stock beneficially owned by each of the above-named director nominees, see the tables and the footnotes under the heading “Beneficial Ownership.”

Vote Required

Directors will be elected at the Meeting pursuant to Proposal 1 in the following manner. A plurality of the votes cast at the Meeting by holders of Class A Stock is required for the election of the three (3) directors to be elected by holders of Class A Stock. A plurality of the votes cast at the Meeting by holders of Class A Stock and holders of Class B Stock voting together as a single class is required for the election of the seven (7) directors to be elected by holders of Class A Stock and holders of Class B Stock voting as a single class, with holders of Class A Stock having one (1) vote per share and holders of Class B Stock having ten (10) votes per share.

The Board of Directors recommends a vote “FOR” all nominees. Unless authority to vote for one or more of the nominees is specifically withheld, the shares represented by your proxy, if properly submitted and not revoked, will be voted FOR all of the nominees for whom you are entitled to vote.

PROPOSAL 2 – RATIFICATION OF THE SELECTION OF KPMG LLP AS

INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

On April 4, 2017, the Audit Committee determined to engage KPMG LLP to serve as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending February 28, 2018. Although ratification by stockholders of this selection is not required, the selection of KPMG LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm will be presented to the stockholders for their ratification at the Meeting. If the stockholders do not ratify the selection of KPMG LLP, the Audit Committee will reconsider its choice. Even if the appointment is ratified, the Audit Committee, in its discretion, may direct the appointment of a different independent registered public accounting firm at any time during the year if they determine that such a change would be in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders. A representative of KPMG LLP is expected to be present at the Meeting and will be given an opportunity to make a statement if he or she so desires and will be available to respond to any appropriate questions.

27

Table of Contents

Fees Paid to KPMG LLP

The following table shows the amounts that were billed to us by KPMG LLP during the last two fiscal years for “Audit Fees,” “Audit-Related Fees,” “Tax Fees,” and “All Other Fees,” respectively:

Audit Fees. These amounts relate to the annual audit of our consolidated financial statements included in our Annual Reports on Form 10-K and annual audit of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting (which includes audit fees associated with the evaluation of the merits of executing an initial public offering for a portion of our Canadian wine business), quarterly reviews of interim financial statements included in our Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, and services normally provided by the independent registered public accounting firm in connection with statutory or regulatory filings or engagements.

Audit-Related Fees. These amounts relate to professional services for audits of employee benefit plans and unconsolidated investments.

Tax Fees. These amounts relate to professional services for tax audits and compliance, and tax advice.

All Other Fees. No additional services were provided by KPMG LLP to the Company for the last two fiscal years.

Pre-Approval Policies and Procedures

The Audit Committee has adopted a policy for the pre-approval of audit and non-audit services that may be provided by our independent registered public accounting firm. The committee’s policy is to pre-approve all audit and permissible non-audit services provided by KPMG LLP prior to the engagement. Any pre-approval is detailed as to the particular service or category of services and is generally subject to a specific budget. The Audit Committee has delegated to its Chair authority to pre-approve proposed audit and non-audit services that arise between Audit Committee meetings, provided that the decision to approve the service is presented at the next scheduled Audit Committee meeting. All audit and non-audit services performed by KPMG LLP during the fiscal years ended February 28, 2017 and February 29, 2016 were pre-approved in accordance with this policy. These services have included audit services, audit-related services, tax services, and all other services. The Audit Committee did not pre-approve any other products or services that did not fall into these categories, and KPMG LLP provided no other products or services during the past two fiscal years.

Vote Required

The adoption of Proposal 2 to ratify the selection of KPMG LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm requires the affirmative vote of a majority of the votes entitled to be cast by

28

Table of Contents

stockholders present in person or represented by proxy at the Meeting. With respect to this proposal, holders of Class A Stock and holders of Class B Stock will vote together as a single class at the Meeting, with holders of Class A Stock having one (1) vote per share and holders of Class B Stock having ten (10) votes per share.

The Board of Directors recommends a vote “FOR” the ratification of the selection of KPMG LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending February 28, 2018. Unless you properly direct otherwise, the shares represented by your proxy, if properly submitted and not revoked, will be voted FOR such proposal.

PROPOSAL 3 – ADVISORY VOTE ON EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Pursuant to Section 14A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 added by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (“Dodd-Frank Act”) and related SEC rules, we are seeking your support in an advisory vote from our stockholders on the compensation of our named executive officers as disclosed in this Proxy Statement. This is often referred to as a “say-on-pay” vote.

As described below in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, we have designed the elements of our executive compensation program to operate together in a manner that seeks to reward our named executive officers for their respective abilities and day-to-day service, assistance with the achievement of annual goals and financial targets, and contributions toward enhancing long-term stockholder value. We believe the overall design of our executive compensation program has provided the intended results, and we continue to periodically review the program elements in an effort to maintain or improve the alignment of the executive compensation program with our strategic priorities and with our performance. We believe our compensation is market competitive and has resulted in the attraction, motivation and retention of executives who can contribute to our future success. In addition, we believe the program creates a strong linkage between pay and performance through our incentive bonuses and equity awards such that executives will receive higher compensation in more successful periods for the Company and lower compensation during less successful periods.

We conduct a say-on-pay vote every year, and last conducted a say-on-pay vote at the 2016 Annual Meeting of Stockholders. At that meeting, stockholders approved our executive compensation as disclosed in the 2016 Proxy Statement with approximately 99% of the vote being cast in favor of approval.

This proposal gives you, as a stockholder, the opportunity to express your views on our named executive officers’ compensation. This vote is not intended to address specific items of compensation, but rather the overall compensation of our named executive officers and our executive compensation policies and programs as described in this Proxy Statement. This vote is advisory, which means that the vote is not binding on the Company, the Board, or the Human Resources Committee. Even though it is not binding, we will describe in our next Proxy Statement how we considered the results of this vote and how that consideration affected our executive compensation decisions and policies.

For the reasons stated above, we believe the compensation of our named executive officers is deserving of stockholder support. Accordingly, we ask you to vote “FOR” the following resolution:

“RESOLVED, that the Company’s stockholders approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation of the named executive officers, as disclosed in the

29

Table of Contents

Company’s Proxy Statement for the 2017 Annual Meeting of Stockholders pursuant to the executive compensation disclosure rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission, including the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, the Summary Compensation Table and the other related tables and disclosure.”

Vote Required

The adoption of the foregoing resolution requires the affirmative vote of a majority of the votes entitled to be cast by stockholders present in person or represented by proxy at the Meeting. With respect to this advisory vote, holders of Class A Stock and holders of Class B Stock will vote together as a single class at the Meeting, with holders of Class A Stock having one (1) vote per share and holders of Class B Stock having ten (10) votes per share.

The Board of Directors recommends that the stockholders approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation of the Company’s named executive officers as disclosed in this Proxy Statement and, accordingly, recommends that you vote “FOR” Proposal 3. Unless you properly direct otherwise, the shares represented by your proxy, if properly submitted and not revoked, will be voted FOR such proposal.

PROPOSAL 4 – ADVISORY VOTE ON THE FREQUENCY OF HOLDING

FUTURE ADVISORY VOTES ON EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

As required by the Dodd-Frank Act and related SEC rules, we are asking our stockholders to vote, on an advisory basis, for their preference regarding the frequency of future advisory votes on the compensation of our named executive officers. Specifically, stockholders may vote on whether the advisory vote on the compensation of our named executive officers should occur every one, two or three years.

The Board has given consideration to the preferred frequency of the advisory vote on the compensation of our named executive officers. After considering the benefits and consequences of available options, the Board recommends that stockholders vote in favor of holding the advisory vote on the compensation of our named executive officers every year. An annual advisory vote would continue to provide the Board with consistent feedback from our stockholders on this important matter.

When voting on this proposal, stockholders should understand that they are not voting “for” or “against” the recommendation of the Board to hold the advisory vote every year. Rather, stockholders will have the option to choose whether to approve holding future advisory votes on the compensation of our named executive officers every one, two, or three years, or to abstain entirely from voting on the matter.

Vote Required

The option that receives the affirmative vote of a majority of the votes entitled to be cast by stockholders present in person or represented by proxy at the Meeting will be the frequency of the advisory vote on the compensation of our named executive officers that stockholders recommend. In

30

Table of Contents

the event that no option receives such a majority, we will consider the option that receives the most votes to be the option selected by stockholders of the Company. Although this advisory vote is not binding, the Board will review and consider the outcome of this vote when making its determination as to the frequency of future advisory stockholder votes on the compensation of our named executive officers. With respect to this advisory vote, holders of Class A Stock and Class B Stock will vote together as a single class at the Meeting, with holders of Class A Stock having one (1) vote per share and holders of Class B Stock having ten (10) votes per share.

The Board of Directors recommends a vote for the option of “ONE YEAR” as the preferred frequency of future advisory votes on executive compensation. Unless you properly direct otherwise, the shares represented by your proxy, if properly submitted and not revoked, will be voted for the option of ONE YEAR as the preferred frequency.

PROPOSAL 5 – PROPOSED AMENDMENT AND RESTATEMENT OF THE COMPANY’S

LONG-TERM STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN

We are requesting that stockholders approve the amendment and restatement of our Long-Term Stock Incentive Plan (the “Plan”), which was approved by the Human Resources Committee (the “Committee”) on April 4, 2017 and the Board of Directors on April 5, 2017 subject to stockholder approval at the 2017 Annual Meeting. If this proposal is approved:

We are not requesting stockholders to approve an increase in the number of shares available for awards under the Plan.

Other significant changes that have been made to the Plan at this time include the following:

We have also made administrative changes and clarifications as discussed below.

If this proposal is not approved by stockholders at the 2017 Annual Meeting, we will be unable to grant any cash or equity awards under the Plan or the Annual Management Incentive Plan as “performance-based compensation” exempt from the $1 million deduction limitation under Section

31

Table of Contents

162(m) (other than stock options and stock appreciation rights under the Plan) and there will be no limit imposed under the Plan on compensation payable to non-employee directors. In addition, consultants will not be eligible to receive grants under the Plan, and employees will be ineligible to receive incentive stock options.

Section 162(m) requires that stockholders approve the material terms of an incentive compensation plan every five years if the Company has the ability to change performance goals for “performance-based compensation” from year to year. The Plan was last re-approved by the Company’s stockholders on July 27, 2012. Re-approval of the material terms of the performance goals will provide the Committee with the continued ability to make awards (including cash awards) that qualify as “performance-based compensation” under Section 162(m). We believe it is in the stockholders’ interest that the Committee has the authority to grant cash and equity awards that are deductible in excess of $1 million for federal income tax purposes.

We are requesting that stockholders approve specific limits on the amount of compensation payable to non-employee directors. The purpose of this change, which reflects current market practice, is to protect against a conflict of interest, given that the Board is responsible for fixing its own compensation. We believe that the amount of compensation being provided to our non-employee directors is reasonable, and we regularly review our non-employee director compensation with Frederic. W. Cook & Co., Inc., the Committee’s and Corporate Governance Committee’s independent compensation consultant. The compensation provided to our non-employee directors is set forth above under the heading “Director Compensation.”

The amendment and restatement of the Plan will become effective upon the approval of the stockholders of the Company. Each of the changes noted above and other material provisions of the Plan as amended and restated are summarized below. This summary does not purport to summarize all the terms of the Plan and is subject to and qualified in its entirety by reference to the full text of the Plan, which is attached hereto as Appendix 1.

Changes that Require Stockholder Approval

We are requesting that stockholders approve the amendment and restatement of the Plan to include the following changes that require stockholder approval.

Material Terms for Performance-Based Compensation under Section 162(m)

The Plan has been amended and restated so that the Committee can, in its sole discretion, grant both equity and cash awards to executive officers and other employees that satisfy the requirements of “performance-based compensation” within the meaning of Section 162(m). In general, compensation must qualify as being “performance-based” under Section 162(m) in order for us to deduct compensation in excess of $1 million paid in any one year to our Chief Executive Officer or any of our other named executive officers (other than our Chief Financial Officer or any officer who is not subject to U.S. income tax).

As noted above, one of the requirements of performance-based compensation under Section 162(m) is that the material terms of the performance goals under which compensation may be paid must be disclosed to and approved by stockholders every five years. For purposes of Section 162(m), the material terms include:

32

Table of Contents

Each of these terms as proposed to apply to both equity and cash awards granted on and after the 2017 Annual Meeting under the Plan is discussed below.

Employees Eligible to Receive Compensation. The Committee administers the Plan. It has the authority to determine the executive officers and other key employees to whom awards granted as “performance-based compensation” are to be granted under the Plan.

Description of the Business Criteria on Which the Performance Goals Are Based. For each restricted stock award, restricted stock unit, performance share unit, cash incentive award and other stock-based award (other than stock options and stock appreciation rights) intended to qualify as “performance-based compensation” under Section 162(m), the Committee will establish specific performance targets for specified performance periods. The performance targets will be based on one or more business criteria. The permissible business criteria that were previously approved by stockholders in 2012 and that we seek re-approval of consist of the following:

For 2017, we are also seeking approval to use, as permitted business criteria for performance-based compensation, (i) strategic business objectives, consisting of one or more objectives based on

33

Table of Contents

meeting specified cost targets, business expansion goals or goals relating to acquisitions or divestitures, and (ii) units produced, in addition to units sold or depleted as approved in 2012.

Performance criteria may be: (i) established on a corporate, divisional, business unit or consolidated basis, (ii) measured on an absolute basis or relative basis (e.g., passage of time (such as year-over-year growth) as a relative comparison to a peer group, industry index, broad-based index, etc.), (iii) calculated on a pre-tax or after-tax basis, (iv) calculated on a per share basis, (v) calculated on a GAAP or non-GAAP basis, and/or (vi) calculated for all or a portion of a single year or calculated over multiple years. Performance targets must be established while the performance relative to the target remains substantially uncertain within the meaning of Section 162(m).

The Committee may provide for automatic adjustments (in measures of achievement, amounts payable, or other award terms) under performance goals to reflect objectively determinable events that may affect performance criteria, including but not limited to, extraordinary, unusual, transition, one-time and/or nonrecurring items of gain or loss (including, but not limited to, charges for reorganizing and restructuring, discontinued operations and asset write-downs); the effect of changes in tax laws, corporate tax rates, accounting principles, or other applicable laws affecting reported results; the effects of mergers, acquisitions, divestitures, spin-offs or similar significant transactions; events of an “unusual nature” or of a type that indicates “infrequency of occurrence”; exchange rate effects, foreign exchange gains and losses; discontinued operations and nonrecurring charges; stock split, recapitalization, split-up, or similar changes, share repurchases; a change in the Company’s fiscal year or litigation or claim judgments or settlements.

Employees are only entitled to receive payments of performance-based compensation to the extent that the pre-established objective performance targets set by the Committee for such period are attained. With regard to a particular performance period, the Committee will have the discretion, subject to the Plan’s terms, to select the length of the performance period, the type(s) of performance criteria to be used, the performance targets that will be used to measure performance for the period, and the performance formula that will be used to determine what portion, if any, of the award has been earned for the period. Compensation that is intended to be “performance based compensation” may be provided by either (i) granting awards with the earned portion of such award subject to attaining performance goals or (ii) making the grant of awards only after one or more performance goals have been obtained. The Committee may reduce the amount of “performance-based compensation” that would otherwise be payable upon achieving a performance goal in its sole discretion, provided that such adjustment with respect to equity awards is consistent with the applicable requirements for fixed accounting.

Maximum Amount of Compensation. Subject to certain adjustments permitted under IRS regulations:

No Obligation to Grant “Performance-Based Compensation”. Stockholder approval of this proposal will constitute approval of the material terms of the Plan as amended and restated for

34

Table of Contents

purposes of Section 162(m) with respect to grants made on or after the 2017 Annual Meeting. However, nothing in this proposal precludes the Company or the Committee from granting equity or cash incentive awards that do not qualify as “performance-based compensation” under Section 162(m) under the Plan or otherwise, nor is there any guarantee that incentive awards intended to qualify for tax deductibility under Section 162(m) will ultimately be viewed as so qualifying by the Internal Revenue Service.

Award Limits for Non-Employee Directors

If this proposal is approved, compensation payable to non-employee directors will be subject to lower limits that apply to other participants. No non-employee director will be granted cash compensation and equity compensation (under the Plan or any other plan, program or policy of the Company) that, in the aggregate, exceeds $750,000 for a fiscal year. Equity awards will be counted against this limit by using their grant date fair value, as determined by the Company for financial reporting purposes. Cash compensation for purposes of this limit means cash retainers and meeting fees, but not expense reimbursements related to service as a director, allowances for use of company products and charitable matching contributions. The compensation that we provided to our non-employee directors for fiscal 2017 was substantially below this limit, as set forth above under the heading “Director Compensation.”

Persons Eligible to Receive an Award include Consultants

Exchange listing rules require the Company to obtain stockholder approval with respect to the persons eligible to receive awards under the Plan. In addition to employees and directors, the amended and restated Plan allows the Committee to grant equity awards to service providers who are consultants (as defined under Form S-8 registration rules). Management believes that it may be appropriate to permit grants to consultants in appropriate situations. There is no current intention to make grants to consultants.

Incentive Stock Options

The Plan as amended and restated permits the Committee, in its sole discretion, to grant options in either the form of non-qualified stock options or incentive stock options. Provisions have been added to the Plan’s stock option rules to comply with IRS regulations for granting incentive stock options. Those provisions include imposing a 10-year limit for granting incentive stock options under the Plan, limiting who may receive incentive stock options and placing additional restrictions on setting the exercise price and permitted option exercise period.

Other Significant Changes under the Amended and Restated Plan

The Plan includes several provisions that promote best practices by reinforcing alignment with stockholders’ interests. These provisions include, but are not limited to, the following:

No Automatic Single Trigger Vesting for Awards Granted under the Plan

There would be no automatic single trigger vesting for awards granted under the Plan. Instead, the following rules would generally apply:

35

Table of Contents

In addition, provisions have also been added to the Plan to enhance the Company’s authority to replace existing awards with new awards upon a corporate transaction, including a change in control, and to include new conditions on payment as required under agreements entered into as part of any such transaction, including imposing escrow agreement requirements.

Share Reserve Accounting

Shares that are used to pay the exercise price of a stock option and shares withheld to satisfy tax withholding obligations with respect to an award will not be available for further grants of awards under the Plan. Substitute awards will not be counted against the shares available for granting awards under the Plan to the maximum extent permitted by exchange listing rules and applicable laws.

Restriction on Dividend Equivalents

Dividend equivalents will only become payable to participants upon vesting. For example, a dividend equivalent on a restricted stock unit will only become vested when the vesting conditions for distributions of the shares underlying the restricted stock unit have been met.

No Reload Options

The Plan will prohibit the Committee from granting reload options.

No Payments in Exchange for Underwater Options or SARs

The Plan prohibits repricing of stock options and stock appreciation rights other that in connection with a corporate transaction involving the Company. The amended and restated Plan

36

Table of Contents

extends this prohibition to cash payments in exchange for the surrender of underwater stock options or SARs (options or SARs with an exercise price in excess of the then current fair market value of share of stock subject to such award) without stockholder approval.

Other Administrative Changes under the Plan

Management and the Committee reviewed the Plan in light of current market practices for equity compensation plans and existing practices under the Plan. As a result of that review, the following administrative changes were made under the amendment and restatement of the Plan:

Summary of Other Plan Terms

The following is a summary of the remainder the material terms under the Plan. It is qualified by reference to the full text of the Plan, which is attached as Appendix 1 to this proxy statement.

Types of Awards

Awards under the Plan may consist of any combination of stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock, restricted stock units, performance share units or other stock-based awards. As used in this section, the phrase “other stock-based awards” means all awards other than stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock, restricted stock units and performance share units.

Share Reserve

The number of shares that remained available for grant under the Plan and all other equity compensation plans we sponsor as of the end of our last fiscal year are set forth below following this Proposal under the heading “Equity Compensation Plan Information.” As described above, under the amendment and restatement shares used to pay the exercise price of a stock option and shares withheld to satisfy tax withholding obligations with respect to an award will not be available for further grants of awards under the Plan.

37

Table of Contents

Administration

The Plan is generally administered by the Human Resources Committee. The amendment and restatement of the Plan clarifies the Committee’s authority to delegate administrative or ministerial functions to officers or employees of the Company. Among other things, the Committee is charged with responsibility for selecting the participants, for determining the number and type of awards to be granted and for setting forth the other terms and conditions of awards consistent with the terms of the plan. The Committee shall have the authority to accelerate the vesting of equity awards in its sole discretion. Our Board may act in lieu of the Committee in its discretion, including with respect to grants of awards to non-employee directors.

Eligibility

The persons who are eligible to participate in the Plan include directors and employees (including officers) of the Company and its subsidiaries and, under the amendment and restatement, consultants. Approximately 6,900 employees, 400 consultants, and eight non-management directors are eligible to participate in the Plan. However, only non-employee directors, employees, and consultants selected by the Committee will be granted awards under the Plan.

Amendment and Termination

The Plan may be amended, modified or terminated by the Committee from time to time. No amendment, modification or termination of the Plan will be effective without stockholder approval if such approval is required under any applicable law, rule or regulation. The amendment and restatement of the Plan clarifies that stockholder approval also be obtained for certain transactions that are considered to be equivalent to a stock option repricing. Awards previously granted pursuant to the Plan will not be affected by the amendment of the Plan and will remain outstanding until they are exercised, expire or otherwise terminate.

Stock Options

Under the Plan, the Committee may grant awards in the form of stock options to purchase shares of Class A Stock and Class 1 Stock. The Committee will, with regard to each stock option, determine the class and number of shares subject to the option, the manner and period during which the option may be exercised and the exercise price per share of stock subject to the option. The exercise price of stock options granted to participants must be equal to or greater than the fair market value of the shares subject to the stock option on the date the stock option is granted. For purposes of the Plan, the fair market value of a share of Class A Stock is the closing price of the Class A Stock on the New York Stock Exchange or other national stock exchange on which the Class A Stock is actively traded. The fair market value of a share of Class 1 Stock is equal to the fair market value of a share of Class A Stock unless the Committee determines that such value is not a reasonable proxy for the fair market value of a share of Class 1 Stock, in which case the Committee will determine the fair market value of a share of Class 1 Stock or establish a methodology for doing so. Upon exercise, the option price may be paid in a manner determined by the Committee, which may include payment in cash, by delivery of shares of Class A Stock or Class 1 Stock, through a cashless exercise arrangement, or through another method that the Committee deems appropriate. The Plan contains provisions to facilitate the amendment of stock options to purchase shares of Class A Stock so that they represent the right to purchase shares of Class 1 Stock on the same terms. The market value of the Class A Stock as of May 19, 2017 was $182.94 per share. No trading market exists for the Class 1 Stock.

38

Table of Contents

Stock Appreciation Rights

The Plan authorizes the Committee to grant stock appreciation rights (“SARs”) either in tandem with a stock option or independent of a stock option. SARs may be granted with respect to Class A Stock or Class 1 Stock. An SAR is a right to receive a payment equal to the difference between the fair market value of the underlying share on the date the SAR is exercised and the SAR’s reference price. A tandem SAR may be granted either at the time of the grant of the related stock option or at any time thereafter during the term of the stock option. The reference price of an SAR will be fixed by the Committee, but the reference price of an SAR must equal or exceed the fair market value of the underlying share on the date of the grant. Upon the exercise of a stock option as to some or all of the shares covered by a tandem SAR, the related tandem SAR will automatically expire in accordance with the terms and conditions specified in the grant, and vice versa.

Restricted Stock Awards

The Plan authorizes the Committee to grant awards in the form of restricted shares of Class A Stock and Class 1 Stock. Such awards will be subject to such terms, conditions, restrictions, and/or limitations, if any, as the Committee deems appropriate, including restrictions on transferability and continued employment.

Restricted Stock Units and Performance Share Units

The Plan authorizes the Committee to grant awards in the form of restricted stock units and performance share units relating to shares of Class A Stock and Class 1 Stock. Restricted Stock Units and Performance Share Units are subject to such terms, conditions, restrictions, and/or limitations, if any, as the Committee deems appropriate, including restrictions on transferability and continued employment. The holder of a restricted stock unit or a performance share unit may receive a payout that is calculated based on the satisfaction of performance goals, service requirements and/or other terms specified in the award agreement. The Committee will specify in the award agreement whether any earned restricted stock units and performance share units will be paid in the form of shares or cash (or in a combination thereof). The Committee may or may not grant to the holder of restricted stock units or performance share units the right to receive payments corresponding to dividends paid on shares underlying the award; provided, no dividends may be paid to a participant on any Restricted Stock Units or Performance Share Units that do not fully vest.

Other Stock-Based Awards

The Committee may make other stock-based awards under the Plan. The other stock-based awards will be subject to such terms, conditions and limitations as the Committee deems appropriate.

U.S. Tax Consequences

The following summary sets forth the tax treatment pertaining to awards that may be made under the Plan. This summary omits the tax laws of any municipality, state, or foreign country in which a participant resides.

Non-Qualified Stock Options

A participant will realize ordinary income when exercising a non-qualified stock option, and we will be entitled to a deduction, equal to the excess of the fair market value of the stock on the

39

Table of Contents

date of exercise over the option price. Upon disposition of the shares, any additional gain or loss realized by the recipient will be taxed as a capital gain or loss, long-term or short-term, based upon how long the shares are held.

Incentive Stock Options

For stock options that qualify for treatment as “incentive stock options” under the Code, a participant will realize no taxable income, and we will not be entitled to any related deduction, at the time an incentive stock option is granted. If certain statutory employment and holding period conditions are satisfied before the participant disposes of shares acquired pursuant to the exercise of such an option, then no taxable income will result upon the exercise of such option, and we will not be entitled to any deduction in connection with such exercise. Upon disposition of the shares after expiration of the statutory holding periods, any gain or loss realized by a participant will be a long-term capital gain or loss. We will not be entitled to a deduction with respect to a disposition of the shares by a participant after the expiration of the statutory holding periods. Except in the event of death, if shares acquired by a participant upon the exercise of an incentive stock option are disposed of by such participant before the expiration of the statutory holding periods, such participant will be considered to have realized as compensation, taxable as ordinary income in the year of disposition, an amount, not exceeding the gain realized on such disposition, equal to the difference between the exercise price and the fair market value of the shares on the date of exercise of the option. We will be entitled to a deduction at the same time and in the same amount as the participant is deemed to have realized ordinary income. Any gain realized on the disposition in excess of the amount treated as compensation or any loss realized on the disposition will constitute capital gain or loss, respectively. Such capital gain or loss will be long-term or short-term based upon how long the shares were held. The foregoing discussion applies only for regular tax purposes. For alternative minimum tax purposes, an incentive stock option will be treated as if it were a non-qualified stock option.

Stock Appreciation Rights

In general, (a) the participant will not realize income upon the grant of a stock appreciation right; (b) the participant will realize ordinary income, and we will be entitled to a corresponding deduction, in the year cash or shares of common stock are delivered to the participant upon exercise of a stock appreciation right; and (c) the amount of such ordinary income and deduction will be the amount of cash received plus the fair market value of the shares of common stock received on the date of issuance. The federal income tax consequences of a disposition of unrestricted shares received by the participant upon exercise of a stock appreciation right are the same as described below with respect to a disposition of unrestricted shares.

Restricted and Unrestricted Stock; Restricted Stock Units and Performance Stock Units

Unless the participant files an election to be taxed under Section 83(b) of the Code: (a) the participant will not realize income upon the grant of restricted stock; (b) the recipient will realize ordinary income, and we will be entitled to a corresponding deduction (subject to the limitations of Section 162(m) of the Code), for grants of restricted stock subject only to time-based vesting and not including any performance conditions), when the restrictions have been removed or expire; and (c) the amount of such ordinary income and deduction will be the fair market value of the restricted stock on the date the restrictions are removed or expire. If the participant files an election to be taxed under Section 83(b) of the Code, the tax consequences to the recipient will be determined as of

40

Table of Contents

the date of the grant of the restricted stock rather than as of the date of the removal or expiration of the restrictions. A participant will not realize income upon the grant of restricted stock units or performance stock units, but will realize ordinary income, and we will be entitled to a corresponding deduction (subject to the limitations of Section 162(m) of the Code), for grants of restricted stock units subject only to time-based vesting or performance stock units not granted as “performance-based compensation”), when the restricted stock units and performance stock units have vested and been settled in cash and/or shares of our common stock. The amount of such ordinary income and deduction will be the amount of cash received plus the fair market value of the shares of our common stock received on the date of issuance. When the participant disposes of restricted or unrestricted stock, the difference between the amounts received upon such disposition and the fair market value of such shares on the date the recipient realizes ordinary income will be treated as a capital gain or loss, long-term or short-term, based upon how long the shares are held.

Section 162(m)

As described above, equity and awards granted under the Plan may be, but are not required to be, structured to qualify as performance-based compensation under Section 162(m) of the Code. Awards must satisfy the conditions set forth in Section 162(m) of the Code to qualify as “performance-based compensation”, and stock options and other awards must be granted under the Plan by a committee consisting solely of two or more “outside directors” (as defined under Section 162(m) regulations) and must satisfy the Plan’s limit on the total number of shares that may be awarded to any one participant during any fiscal year. For awards other than stock options and stock appreciation rights to qualify, the grant, issuance, vesting, or retention of the award must be contingent upon satisfying one or more of the performance criteria set forth in the Plan, as established and certified by a committee consisting solely of two or more “outside directors.” The rules and regulations promulgated under Section 162(m) are complicated and subject to change from time to time, and may apply with retroactive effect. In addition, a number of requirements must be met in order for particular compensation to so qualify. As such, there can be no assurance that any compensation awarded or paid under the Plan will be deductible under all circumstances.

New Plan Benefits

Because of the discretionary nature of any future awards under the Plan, the amount of such awards is not determinable at this time with respect to the Company’s executive officers, including the named executive officers, and the Company’s other employees.

Reasons for Approval

The Board of Directors believes that the approval of the amendment and restatement will benefit the Company by allowing the Committee to grant compensation in ways that will preserve tax deductions for the Company on certain types of performance based compensation paid in cash and equity. It will also allow the Committee to grant awards to consultants and to issue incentive stock options in its sole discretion. As discussed above, cash and equity compensation to non-employee directors would be subject to an annual limit.

Vote Required

The approval of the amended and restated Plan requires the affirmative vote of a majority of the votes entitled to be cast by stockholders present in person or represented by proxy at the

41

Table of Contents

Meeting. With respect to this proposal, holders of Class A Stock and Class B Stock will vote together as a single class at the Meeting, with holders of Class A Stock having one (1) vote per share and holders of Class B Stock having ten (10) votes per share.

The Board of Directors recommends that the stockholders approve the amendment and restatement of the Plan and, accordingly, recommends that you vote “FOR” Proposal 5. Unless you properly direct otherwise, the shares represented by your proxy, if properly submitted and not revoked, will be voted FOR such proposal.

Securities Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans

The following table sets forth information with respect to our compensation plans under which our equity securities may be issued, as of February 28, 2017. The equity compensation plans approved by security holders include our Long-Term Stock Incentive Plan and our 1989 Employee Stock Purchase Plan.

Equity Compensation Plan Information

42

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

This Compensation Discussion and Analysis, or CD&A, focuses on our executive compensation philosophy, the elements of our executive compensation program, and the factors that were considered in making compensation decisions for our named executive officers during our fiscal year ended February 28, 2017. Our named executive officers are as follows:

Note Regarding Our Fiscal Years

Our fiscal year ends on the last day of February of each year. Throughout this Proxy Statement, fiscal years are referred to by the year in which a fiscal year ends. For example, the fiscal year covered by this CD&A began on March 1, 2016 and ended on February 28, 2017, and is referred to as “fiscal 2017.”

Executive Summary

Business Highlights

In fiscal 2017, we achieved impressive commercial, financial, and operational results driven primarily by the continued momentum of our beer business and positive growth in our wine and spirits business.

Our beer business executed on its strategy of leading the high-end U.S. beer industry with strong commercial sales growth fueled by the continued success of our iconic Corona and Modelo Especial Brands. We unified Modelo Especial, Modelo Negra and Modelo Chelada under the Casa Modelo Brand family to drive more effective cross-promotion and to establish a platform for future product innovation. Ballast Point maintained its position as one of the fastest growing major craft brands, and Pacifico achieved excellent growth with expanded media support. In order to support the future growth of our Mexican beer brands, we completed our capacity expansion to 25 million hectoliters ahead of schedule at our Nava brewery in Mexico. Also, acquired the Obregon brewery, which provides us with immediate functioning brewery capacity and flexibility for future innovation initiatives. The Obregon brewery acquisition also enabled us to become fully independent from an interim supply agreement with Grupo Modelo, S.A.B. de C.V., which was terminated in conjunction with this acquisition.

Our wine and spirits business achieved strong earnings growth and margin expansion driven by our fast-growing, high-margin focus brands, which include the Kim Crawford, Meiomi, and Ruffino

43

Table of Contents

wine brands. We also acquired and integrated the fast-growing Prisoner and Charles Smith wine brands, as well as the High West Whiskey brands into our portfolio and divested the lower-margin Canadian wine business. These actions have helped drive our positive fiscal 2017 results and further strengthen our position in the higher-margin, higher-growth segments of the U.S. wine and spirits categories.

We also continued to deliver significant value to our stockholders. The price of our Class A Stock appreciated by approximately 12% during fiscal 2017, and, for the three-year period from the beginning of fiscal 2015 through the end of fiscal 2017, our total stockholder return was in the 96^th percentile as compared to the other companies in the S&P 500 Index. For fiscal 2017, we also delivered strong Net Sales, comparable earnings before interest and taxes, or Comparable EBIT, and free cash flow, or FCF, as compared to both our fiscal 2017 operating plan and our actual fiscal 2016 results:

These strong financial results provided financial flexibility that enabled us to repurchase more than $1 billion of our Class A Stock, acquire attractive brands, achieve an investment grade debt rating and increase our quarterly dividend by approximately 30%.

How Company Performance Affects Compensation

Our executive compensation program consists of base salary, short-term cash incentive bonuses, long-term equity incentives, and perquisites and other benefits. We demonstrate our pay-for-performance philosophy through our short-term cash incentive bonuses and long-term equity incentives, which tie the compensation of our named executive officers directly to the performance of our Company and its Class A Stock. We believe the following attributes of our short-term cash incentive bonus program and our long-term equity incentives provide a strong link between executive compensation and Company performance:

44

Table of Contents

Key Executive Compensation Actions During Fiscal 2017

Base Salaries: Based on its review of Company performance, market conditions, and peer group compensation data, the Human Resources Committee of the Board of Directors, referred to in this CD&A as the Committee, approved an increase in annual base salary of approximately 2.5% for each of Messrs. Robert Sands, Richard Sands, and Hackett in April 2016, which took effect in June 2016. The Committee did not adjust annual base salary levels for Messrs. Klein or Hetterich effective during fiscal 2017.

Short-Term Cash Incentive Bonus Structure: In April 2016, the Committee made the following important decisions regarding the fiscal 2017 short-term cash incentive bonus structure:

Short-Term Cash Incentive Bonus Results: After the conclusion of fiscal 2017, the Committee reviewed our performance and approved cash bonus payments to our named executive officers. For fiscal 2017, we exceeded our target operating goals for Net Sales performance and Comparable EBIT performance, and we exceeded the maximum performance level for FCF under our fiscal 2017 short-term cash incentive bonus program. Based on those strong fiscal 2017 results, named executive officers received short-term cash incentive bonus payments under our stockholder-approved Annual Management Incentive Plan, or AMIP, at approximately 147% of the target award levels set by the Committee for fiscal 2017. The relevant performance and related payouts are discussed below under the heading “Short-Term Cash Incentive Bonuses.”

Long-Term Equity Incentives: As was the Committee’s approach in prior years, the Committee calculated the target value of the fiscal 2017 long-term equity incentives granted in April 2016 as a specified percentage of each officer’s base salary, based on the individual officer’s role and increasing level of responsibility at the Company. The target percentages for the fiscal 2017 long-term equity incentives are set forth in the following table.

Fiscal 2017 Long-Term Equity Incentives

45

Table of Contents

Each named executive officer’s long-term equity incentives were provided 50% in stock options, 25% in restricted stock units, or RSUs, and 25% in PSUs, with the exception of our Chairman of the Board who continued to receive his entire equity award in the form of stock options. For the fiscal 2017 PSUs granted in April 2016, the vesting levels will depend on our TSR performance during fiscal 2017-2019 relative to the companies included in the S&P 500 Index. The Committee believes these PSUs enhance the linkage between executive compensation and stockholder value creation. Any payouts of these PSUs will be further conditioned on the satisfaction of a service vesting requirement, which generally requires continued service with us until May 1, 2019 to receive shares in settlement of earned PSUs.

For fiscal 2017 equity awards, the Committee revised the definition of retirement eligibility for all recipients to age 60 with five years of continuous service so long as the recipient remained employed through November 1, 2016. The Committee made this change to the definition of retirement eligibility in order to facilitate succession planning, to reduce the need to consider unique vesting provisions on a case-by-case basis, to provide appropriate incentives to recruit and retain key employees, and to better align with market practice as reported by the Committee’s independent compensation consultant. This modified definition of retirement eligibility did not result in any of our named executive officers becoming retirement eligible as of the date of grant of the fiscal 2017 equity awards (Messrs. Richard Sands and Hackett were retirement eligible prior to this change). A named executive officer’s fiscal 2017 equity awards will vest upon an eligible retirement. This change did not affect any equity awards granted prior to fiscal 2017.

In April 2017, the Committee reviewed our results for the fiscal 2015-2017 performance period for purposes of certifying performance pursuant to our fiscal 2015 PSU awards. In April 2017, the Committee certified achievement for these PSU awards to Messrs. Robert Sands, Klein, Hackett, and Hetterich at 200% of the target award levels set by the Committee at the time of those grants, as described below under the subheading “Company Performance.”

Compensation Program Governance

The list below highlights our compensation program governance policies and practices, which are designed to drive company performance and serve the long-term interests of our stockholders.

46

Table of Contents

Say-on-Pay Vote

At the 2016 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, we conducted a vote to approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation of our named executive officers as disclosed in the 2016 Proxy Statement (a “say-on-pay” vote). Stockholders approved our named executive officer compensation at that time, with approximately 99% of the vote being cast in favor of approval. The Committee believes that the vote confirms that our compensation philosophy is sound and our objective of linking our executives’ compensation to achieving operational goals and generating stockholder value is effective. We view this level of support as an affirmation of our current pay practices. The Committee will continue to consider the outcome of our say-on-pay votes in its future executive compensation decisions.

Philosophy and Objectives

We operate in a highly competitive, complex, and international business environment. Our executive compensation program is designed to support our sustainable, long-term success by attracting, motivating, and retaining key executives. The program achieves that objective by providing a compensation package that is competitive with the pay practices of other high performing companies of comparable size, status, and industry or business model.

The compensation program for our named executive officers consists of fixed compensation (base salary), variable compensation (short-term cash incentive bonus and long-term equity incentives), and certain perquisites and other benefits. We have designed the elements of executive compensation to operate together in a manner that seeks to reward our named executive officers for their respective abilities and day-to-day service, assistance with the achievement of annual goals and financial targets, and contributions toward enhancing long-term stockholder value.

We believe that the overall design of our executive compensation program has provided the intended results. We continue to periodically review the program elements in an effort to maintain or improve the alignment of the executive compensation program with our strategic priorities and with our performance. We also believe our compensation is market competitive and has resulted in the attraction and retention of executives who have contributed to, and will continue to contribute to, our future success. Finally, we believe the program creates a strong linkage between pay and performance through our short-term cash incentive bonus program and long-term equity incentives such that executives will receive higher compensation in our more successful periods and lower compensation during less successful periods.

How Executive Compensation is Established

The Committee discharges the Board’s responsibilities relating to executive compensation, including the annual review and approval of named executive officer compensation. Management personnel within our Human Resources Department support the Committee in its work. Executive

47

Table of Contents

officers, including the Chairman of the Board and the President and Chief Executive Officer, may make recommendations and provide information to, and answer questions from, the Committee as the Committee fulfills its responsibilities regarding executive compensation. However, neither the Chairman of the Board nor the President and Chief Executive Officer make recommendations to the Committee regarding his own compensation. The Committee will review and approve, or recommend that the Board approve, as appropriate each element of compensation for our President and Chief Executive Officer and each other named executive officer, including the Chairman of the Board.

Independent Compensation Consultant

The Committee directly engaged Frederic W. Cook & Co., Inc., or FW Cook, as its independent compensation consultant for fiscal 2017. FW Cook assisted with the Committee’s review and analysis of executive compensation and provided data and advice on matters relating to executive officer compensation, including peer group and general executive compensation survey data used as a market check in connection with base salary adjustments and Committee deliberations on other elements of executive compensation during fiscal 2017. As discussed above under the subheading “The Role of the Independent Compensation Consultant,” the Committee has considered the independence of FW Cook and, based on such review, has not identified any conflicts of interest regarding the services of FW Cook or its employees.

Peer Group

The Committee evaluates each element of our executive compensation program. Its evaluation may include comparing our practices against those of a specific peer group of consumer products companies. The peer group considered for the Committee’s key fiscal 2017 compensation decisions for our named executive officers (including April 2016 actions to set base salaries, short-term cash incentive targets, and grant long-term equity incentives) was established by the Committee in October 2015. In establishing this peer group, the Committee worked with FW Cook and sought to ensure that the group consisted of companies of appropriate size, type, and complexity. The Committee accomplished this by: (i) reviewing metrics such as gross revenues (targeting companies with gross revenues between 0.4 and 2.5 times those of the Company), market capitalization (targeting companies with market capitalizations between 0.33 and 3.0 times that of the Company) and profit margin structure; (ii) considering whether the potential peers were competitors for executive talent or investor capital; (iii) considering whether the potential peers were a “peer-of-peers” (a common member of the peer groups of the Company’s peer group companies); and (iv) assessing the overall reasonableness of designating a particular potential peer as a member of the Company’s peer group.

48

Table of Contents

Based on that review in October 2015, the Committee elected to maintain the existing peer group, except for removing Lorillard, Inc., due to its acquisition by another peer group company, Reynolds American Inc. This change to the peer group did not affect any of the compensation awarded to or earned by our named executive officers. The executive compensation peer group for compensation decisions effective in fiscal 2017 consisted of the following companies:

Fiscal 2017 Peer Group

FW Cook presented information to the Committee in January 2016 in connection with the Committee’s annual review of executive compensation indicating that our revenues approximated the median of these peer group companies and, given the significant appreciation of our stock price, our market capitalization approximated the 75^th percentile of these peer group companies. Notably, just one year earlier, FW Cook had informed the Committee that our market capitalization was slightly below the median (approximating the 46^th percentile) of our peer group in effect at that time.

In addition to its review of peer group executive compensation data, the Committee may receive general executive compensation survey data when insufficient peer group data is available for a specific executive position or as another means of performing a market check on our overall executive compensation program, or on individual components of the program. This information assists the Committee in making well-informed decisions regarding executive compensation matters. Throughout this CD&A, the peer group and other survey data is sometimes referred to as “applicable market data.”

Compensation of Named Executive Officers

The Committee reviews the executive compensation program on at least an annual basis, with awards and adjustments generally being made each April. Compensation decisions may be made at other times of the year in the case of promotions, new hires, or changes in responsibilities. In making these determinations, the Committee may consider our performance, the individual performance of a named executive officer, information from FW Cook, and recommendations from management. As part of this process, the Committee may also review tally sheets comparing current and proposed base salaries, short-term cash incentive bonuses, and long-term equity incentives.

Named Executive Officers other than the Chairman of the Board

The Committee generally believes that the amount of annual target cash compensation (that is, base salary and potential short-term cash incentive bonus at target level) awarded to our named

49

Table of Contents

executive officers should approximate the median of the applicable market data. While this is true for our executives as a whole, target cash compensation for individual executives may exceed or fall short of the median. These variations may occur due to the specific expertise of an executive, the complexity or criticality of the business managed by the executive, an executive’s tenure in the role, changes in job duties, and internal pay equity considerations.

The data shared with the Committee by FW Cook in January 2016 indicated that, other than for Mr. Klein, the annual target cash compensation of our named executive officers approximated the median of the applicable market data, and was generally aligned with the Company’s philosophy of targeting the market median. Mr. Klein’s annual target cash compensation as of January 2016 approximated the 25th percentile of the applicable market data, which the Committee determined was appropriate given his recent promotion and relatively short tenure in his role.

In order to align the interests of our named executive officers with those of our stockholders, the Committee allocates a majority of the annual target compensation opportunity for our named executive officers to performance-based awards in the form of short-term cash incentive bonuses and long-term equity incentive awards. However, other than the fact that the target level of the short-term cash incentive bonuses and long-term equity incentive awards are each expressed as a percentage of base salary, the Committee does not have a policy regarding the specific allocation of compensation between short-term and long-term compensation or between cash and non-cash compensation.

The Committee places a greater emphasis on long-term equity incentive awards in our executive compensation program and on stock options and PSUs in particular, as it believes this drives our named executive officers to focus on our guiding objective of long-term stockholder value creation.

Compensation of the Chairman of the Board

Mr. Richard Sands serves as our Chairman of the Board and is a member of management. Like all board chairs, Mr. Richard Sands is responsible for the leadership and governance of the Company’s Board of Directors. However, Mr. Richard Sands’ role at the Company is much more extensive than the role of the typical board chair. Mr. Richard Sands has unique depth and breadth of knowledge of the Company, developed over nearly forty years of service to the Company. Mr. Richard Sands leverages his extensive experience with the Company’s management, operations and strategic direction in order to help our leadership team focus the Company in directions that drive and accelerate the Company’s sustained financial performance growth. He also uses his substantial knowledge regarding the beverage alcohol industry to uncover acquisition, partnership and investment opportunities to further drive Company growth.

Based on Mr. Richard Sands’ significant ongoing contribution to the Company, the Committee previously determined that his total direct compensation opportunity (that is, base salary, potential short-term cash incentive bonus at target level, and grant date fair value of equity awards at target level) should generally approximate 85% of the President and Chief Executive Officer’s total direct compensation opportunity. The Committee believes that this level of compensation reflects Mr. Richard Sands’ responsibilities and contributions. The Committee received data from FW Cook in January 2016 indicating that the application of this 85% ratio to the President and Chief Executive Officer’s total direct compensation opportunity resulted in compensation for Mr. Richard Sands that approximated the median of the applicable market data. The Committee determined that

50

Table of Contents

Mr. Richard Sands should continue to receive all of his equity awards in the form of stock options, as the Committee believes stock options provide a strong link to the creation of long-term stockholder value and appropriately reflect the strategic nature of Mr. Richard Sands’ role and his significant equity interest in the Company.

Elements of Compensation and Analysis of Compensation Decisions

Pay Mix

The Committee believes that a significant portion of each named executive officer’s compensation opportunity should be at risk in order to align the interests of our officers with those of our stockholders. Information from FW Cook in January 2016 indicated that approximately 83% of our President and Chief Executive Officer’s annual target compensation opportunity, 79% of our Chairman of the Board’s annual target compensation opportunity, and 76% of the annual target compensation opportunity of our other named executive officers at that time, was delivered in the form of short-term cash incentive bonuses and long-term equity incentives, which are “at risk” and dependent on our Company and stock price performance results. The pay mix of the compensation actually earned by our named executive officers could be different than this pay mix, depending on the level of achievement of the performance metrics applicable to the “at risk” components of the aggregate compensation opportunity.

Base Salary

We set base salary levels for our named executive officers to provide current, predictable compensation for their day-to-day services, taking into account their individual roles and responsibilities as well as their respective experience and abilities. We generally seek to pay each of our named executive officers a base salary that is near the median suggested by the applicable market data. The Committee may decide, however, to set an individual named executive officer’s salary at an amount above or below this level. Some of the reasons such variations may occur are described above under the heading “Compensation of Named Executive Officers.”

The Committee considers base salary adjustments annually as part of its comprehensive review of executive compensation matters. The peer group compensation data shared with the Committee by FW Cook in January 2016 indicated that base salaries of our named executive officers, in the aggregate, approximated the median of the peer group. In April 2016, the Committee approved a salary increase of approximately 2.5% for Messrs. Robert Sands, Richard Sands, and Hackett, effective June 1, 2016. These salary increases were based on market conditions, were reviewed against compensation data for our peer group at that time and were consistent with our overall budget for annual merit-based salary increases. Messrs. Klein and Hetterich did not receive a base salary increase in April 2016, as each had just received a base salary increase in January 2016 in connection with their respective expanded leadership roles. The salaries paid to our named executive officers in fiscal 2017 appear in the Summary Compensation Table.

Short-Term Cash Incentive Bonuses

Our named executive officers have the opportunity to earn short-term cash incentive bonuses based on Company performance. The Committee views these bonuses as an integral element of our compensation program.

51

Table of Contents

Annual Management Incentive Plan – Fiscal 2017

For fiscal 2017, the AMIP served as the primary vehicle for awarding short-term cash incentive bonuses to our named executive officers. The Committee administers an annual short-term cash incentive bonus program to accomplish the following objectives:

We believe these objectives were achieved during fiscal 2017. Due to strong Company performance, the Committee awarded bonus payments for fiscal 2017 based on above target Comparable EBIT performance, above target Net Sales performance, and FCF performance in excess of the maximum level contemplated by our fiscal 2017 short-term cash incentive bonus program.

Company Performance

In April 2016, the Committee determined that performance would be measured under the fiscal 2017 short-term cash incentive bonus program based on a weighted mix of three performance measures: Comparable EBIT, Net Sales, and FCF. Under the fiscal 2017 program, if the Company achieves target performance on all three performance measures, named executive officers would receive short-term cash incentive bonuses equal to 100% of their respective target awards. In addition, regardless of performance against any of the three performance measures, no short-term cash incentive bonuses would be paid for fiscal 2017 unless the Company attained the threshold Comparable EBIT goal.

The Committee’s goal is to select targets for Comparable EBIT, Net Sales, and FCF that are challenging but achievable, with each target level corresponding to the targeted level of performance under our fiscal 2017 operating plan. The fiscal 2017 operating plan was reviewed with and approved by the Board in April 2016. The target levels of fiscal 2017 Comparable EBIT and Net Sales performance were established at approximately 112% and 111%, respectively, of our actual fiscal 2016 Comparable EBIT and Net Sales performance. In establishing these targets for fiscal 2017, the Committee required performance that would increase the Company’s market share through Comparable EBIT and Net Sales growth rates in excess of the anticipated market growth rate. The Committee decided to set the FCF targets for fiscal 2017 in line with the Company’s operating plan for fiscal 2017, which anticipated significant capital expenditures in the beer business related to additional expansion of our Nava brewery and activities related to the planning and construction of our additional brewery in Mexicali, Baja California, Mexico.

The following chart sets forth the material terms of our fiscal 2017 short-term cash incentive bonus program, including: the applicable performance measures and how each measure is defined; the purpose and weighting of each performance measure; and the potential payout at threshold, target, and maximum performance levels.

52

Table of Contents

In April 2017, the Committee determined our actual performance against the fiscal 2017 Comparable EBIT, Net Sales, and FCF goals set forth above, which resulted in the payout of short-term cash incentive bonuses at 147.44% of target awards as illustrated in the following chart.

53

Table of Contents

The resulting short-term cash incentive bonus awards paid to our named executive officers under the AMIP for fiscal 2017 are set forth below and also appear in the Summary Compensation Table under the “Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” column.

Other Cash Bonus Awards

In addition to any short-term cash incentive bonuses under the AMIP, the Committee has discretion to pay cash bonuses outside of that plan. Such payments might be paid to executives, for example, after the closing of a significant acquisition or other transaction or as part of a new hire package. No named executive officer received any discretionary bonus in fiscal 2017.

Long-Term Equity Incentive Awards

Equity Award Granting Process

The Committee awards stock options, RSUs, and PSUs to our named executive officers under our Long-Term Stock Incentive Plan, or LTSIP. The Committee believes that the granting of these equity-based awards to our named executive officers, together with the stock ownership guidelines described below, directly links the value of compensation earned by our named executive officers to the value created for our stockholders and aligns the interests of our executive officers with those of our stockholders. These awards also assist in the retention of our named executive officers as the awards generally vest after a period of approximately three years of employment (in the case of PSUs) or over a period of four years of employment (in the case of stock options and RSUs).

The Committee includes stock options as a significant element of named executive officer compensation, as the Committee believes that, because stock options only have value to the extent our stock price increases after the grant date, stock options have a direct link to the creation of stockholder value. The Committee grants options to purchase Class 1 Stock to individuals subject to U.S. taxation. As no trading market exists for Class 1 Stock, the fair market value of a share of Class 1 Stock is deemed to be equal to the fair market value of a share of our Class A Stock, unless the Committee determines otherwise. Accordingly, the fair value of all stock option awards under our LTSIP is based on the closing price of our Class A Stock on the date of grant.

The Committee also issues RSUs and PSUs to named executive officers to diversify our mix of equity awards and, in the case of PSUs, to align our equity mix with our peer group and enhance the linkage between executive compensation and performance. Generally, our PSUs can result in a payout in shares of an amount from 0% to 200% of a named executive officer’s target PSU award, based on our performance with respect to a specified performance metric, such as a comparison of our TSR performance to that of companies in the S&P 500 Index. All PSU awards relate to our Class A Stock.

54

Table of Contents

The Committee annually considers equity awards to named executive officers at a regularly scheduled meeting, usually in April, at which it also considers equity awards to other eligible employees around the world. The Committee may also grant equity awards at other times, such as at other regularly scheduled meetings of the Committee or in connection with new hires, promotions, or significant business activities.

Named Executive Officer Awards – Fiscal 2017

The Committee granted our named executive officers (other than our Chairman of the Board) a mix of stock options, RSUs, and PSUs during fiscal 2017. The chart below reflects the methodology used by the Committee for calculating the total grant date fair value of the fiscal 2017 equity awards, as well as the percentage allocated to each award type. The equity target percentage was a percentage of each officer’s base salary, and, for this purpose, stock options were valued on a Black-Scholes option-pricing model, RSUs were valued at face value, and PSUs were valued at face value of the target award.

With respect to fiscal 2017 PSUs, the Committee again determined that it would be appropriate to base the award payouts on relative TSR performance. Specifically, the Committee awarded fiscal 2017 PSUs, the ultimate payout level of which, if any, will depend on our fiscal 2017-2019 TSR performance as compared to the companies in the S&P 500 Index. For these PSUs to vest, a named executive officer must generally remain employed by the Company until May 1, 2019. The Committee believes the TSR metric and the three-year performance period will further align the interests of our named executive officers with the interests of our stockholders. Payouts of these PSUs will be determined at the end of fiscal 2019 based on the following performance levels (with performance and payouts between these designated performance levels determined by linear interpolation):

More information concerning fiscal 2017 equity awards can be found in the Summary Compensation Table, the Grants of Plan-Based Awards in Fiscal 2017 table, and the Outstanding Equity Awards at February 28, 2017 table.

In April 2017, the Committee also certified fiscal 2015-2017 performance with respect to PSUs granted in fiscal 2015. The performance criterion associated with the fiscal 2015 PSUs was relative

55

Table of Contents

TSR over the three-year performance period (fiscal 2015-2017), which is calculated by comparing the TSR performance of the Company’s Class A Stock to the TSR performance of companies in the S&P 500 Index during the performance period. Based on the Company’s relative TSR performance during fiscal 2015-2017, the Company had the 15^th highest stock price performance of any company in the S&P 500 Index during that period and the Committee certified achievement at 200% of target for the PSUs granted in fiscal 2015, as follows:

More information concerning these fiscal 2015 PSUs can be found below in the Outstanding Equity Awards at February 28, 2017 table.

Stock Ownership Guidelines

In order to further align the interests of our executive officers with the interests of our stockholders, the Board has established guidelines for the amounts of our common stock that our executive officers should beneficially own. In establishing these guidelines for stock ownership, we considered the length of an executive officer’s tenure. We allow individuals five years in which to reach the applicable ownership guideline. The ownership guidelines can be satisfied by the ownership of stock, vested stock options, unvested restricted stock awards, unvested RSUs, and unvested PSUs after the relevant performance period has been completed and the Committee has certified the number of shares that will be issued upon satisfaction of the service requirement. The current guidelines for our executive officers are as follows:

Compliance with our stock ownership guidelines is assessed periodically, and not less frequently than annually. Once an executive officer achieves the ownership level established by these guidelines, he or she has a reasonable period of time to return to such ownership level if his or her ownership drops below the guideline due to a fluctuation in the value of the Company’s stock. As of February 28, 2017, each of our named executive officers had met his respective stock ownership guideline or was within the five-year window for doing so.

Clawback Rights and Prohibition Against Hedging

Since fiscal 2013, all of our individual LTSIP award agreements with employees contain a clawback provision. This same clawback language was also incorporated into the LTSIP itself in fiscal 2013 with the approval of our stockholders. A similar provision was first added to the annual AMIP program in fiscal 2016. Although we have not had to utilize this provision, its purpose is to allow us to

56

Table of Contents

recoup performance-based awards or the value thereof, if and as required by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 or other law.

Effective January 3, 2017, the Committee adopted a formal clawback policy. Under this policy, in the event the Company is required to restate its financial results due to material noncompliance with the securities laws, the independent members of the Board, in their sole discretion, may cancel or seek to recover all or any portion of any excess cash or equity incentive-based compensation that is earned or vested based wholly or in part on the attainment of a financial reporting measure and that was awarded to our named executive officers and certain other executives of the Company whose fraud or intentional misconduct contributed significantly to the financial restatement.

In order to prevent an appearance of improper conduct, executive officers and directors, among others, may not participate in transactions involving the hedging of our stock by trading in third-party derivative securities of our stock by writing or buying puts, calls, or other derivatives.

Perquisites and Other Benefits

Savings Plans and Health and Welfare Benefits

As with other eligible employees, we offer our named executive officers the following retirement savings opportunities and health and welfare benefits in order to help provide a reasonable level of support during and after employment with us and to attract, retain, and motivate employees with a competitive benefits package:

In addition, named executive officers are eligible to participate in our 2005 Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, which is a non-qualified retirement savings plan designed to provide

57

Table of Contents

participants with the benefit of our annual contributions and supplemental profit sharing contributions, if any, that could not be made under the 401(k) and Profit Sharing Plan due to Internal Revenue Code limitations. Further detail concerning this plan is provided under the heading “Nonqualified Deferred Compensation.”

Severance Benefits

Our employment agreements with our named executive officers executed during or after fiscal 2011 do not include severance benefits in the event of retirement, a gross-up on any excise tax payments, or any post-employment continuation of personal use of corporate aircraft, automobile benefits or product allowances. More information concerning the material terms of the employment agreements with each of our named executive officers and the amounts payable in the event of a severance or change-in-control event are described under the heading “Potential Payments upon Termination or Change-in-Control.”

Perquisites

We provide our named executive officers with perquisites and other personal benefits that we believe to be reasonable and competitive with those offered by comparable companies to their executive officers. The Committee believes these benefits further our objective of attracting, motivating, and retaining key executive talent and assist executive officers in dedicating the appropriate amount of time and attention to business initiatives. Other than taxes related to certain relocation benefits, our named executive officers pay the personal income taxes that are attributable to the taxable perquisites we provide. We offer the following to our named executive officers:

We may provide additional benefits to our named executive officers in special circumstances, such as the payment of cost of living adjustments, tax preparation fees and tax equalization costs in

58

Table of Contents

the event of an expatriate assignment, or relocation benefits (including related taxes) in the event of a new hire or transfer. The perquisites and other personal benefits we provided to our named executive officers during fiscal 2017 are further quantified in the footnotes to the Summary Compensation Table.

Tax Deductibility of Compensation

Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code provides that certain compensation in excess of $1 million per year paid to certain executive officers of a company who are employed at year-end may not be deductible by the company unless the compensation qualifies as performance-based compensation. The Committee recognizes the benefits of structuring executive compensation so that, where appropriate, Section 162(m) does not limit our tax deductions for compensation, and our LTSIP and AMIP have been designed so that the Committee may award performance-based compensation that is not subject to the limits imposed by Section 162(m). Under certain circumstances, the Committee may decide to award executive compensation in an amount and form that is not deductible under Section 162(m).

Cash incentive bonuses under the AMIP for fiscal 2017 were intended to qualify as performance-based compensation under Section 162(m). The maximum amount available to be paid for each named executive officer for fiscal 2017 was equal to 0.50% of fiscal 2017 EBIT for our Chairman and our President and Chief Executive Officer and 0.25% of fiscal 2017 EBIT for each of our other named executive officers. As discussed above, the actual amount of the short-term cash incentive bonuses payable to each named executive officer was determined by the Committee using the formula described above under the subheading “Short-Term Cash Incentive Bonuses.” As discussed above in Proposal 5, we are proposing to replace the cash bonus opportunity for our executive officers under the AMIP with a cash bonus opportunity under our LTSIP.

Compensation Committee Report

The following report shall not be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the federal securities laws by virtue of any general incorporation of this Proxy Statement by reference and shall not otherwise be treated as filed under the federal securities laws.

We, the Human Resources Committee of the Board (which committee functions as the compensation committee of the Board), have reviewed and discussed the Compensation Discussion and Analysis set forth above with the management of the Company, and, based on such review and discussions, have recommended to the Board the inclusion of the Compensation Discussion and Analysis in this Proxy Statement and, through incorporation by reference to this Proxy Statement, the Company’s 2017 Form 10-K.

Human Resources Committee:

Jerry Fowden (Chair)

Robert Hanson

Ernesto M. Hernández

Keith E. Wandell

59

Table of Contents

Compensation Tables and Related Information

The following table sets forth the compensation awarded to, earned by or paid to our named executive officers, consisting of our President and Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and three other most highly compensated executive officers for fiscal 2017 (our fiscal year ended February 28, 2017). These individuals are referred to as “named executive officers.” Where applicable, the following table also sets forth the compensation awarded to, earned by or paid to these named executive officers for fiscal 2016 (our fiscal year ended February 29, 2016) and fiscal 2015 (our fiscal year ended February 28, 2015).

Summary Compensation Table