Compensation Practices

4

5

ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

Our Board of Directors

Historically, the terms of service of directors were staggered in three groups, and directors elected at each annual meeting (or such directors’ successors) were elected to hold office for a term expiring at the annual meeting held in the third year following the year of their election and until their successors had been elected and qualified. At our 2012 annual meeting of shareholders, our shareholders approved an amendment to our articles of incorporation that will result in the declassification of our board of directors. At this annual meeting of shareholders, shareholders will vote upon seven director nominees to hold office for a term expiring at the 2015 annual meeting of shareholders and until their successors have been elected and qualified. At the 2015 annual meeting of shareholders and each annual meeting of shareholders thereafter, allAll directors will be elected to hold office for a term expiring at the next annual meeting of shareholders and until their successors have been elected and qualified.

All of the nominees for election as director at the annual meeting are incumbent directors. No nominee for director has been nominated pursuant to any agreement or understanding between us and any person, and there are no family relationships among any of our directors or executive officers. These nominees have consented to serve as a director if elected, and management has no reason to believe that any nominee will be unable to serve. Unless otherwise specified, the shares of common stock represented by the proxies solicited hereby will be voted in favor of the nominees proposed by the board of directors. In the event that any director nominee becomes unavailable for re-election as a result of an unexpected occurrence, shares will be voted for the election of such substitute nominee, if any, as the board of directors may propose. The affirmative vote of a majority of votes cast is required for the election of directors. A description of the majority voting provisions in our by-laws appears below under the heading “– Majority Voting.”

Nominees for Election

Each person listed below is nominated for election to serve as a director until the next annual meeting of shareholders and until his or her successor is elected and qualified.The board of directors recommends that you vote in favor of its nominees for director.

Christopher M. Flink (age 42) has been a director since 2012. Mr. Flink is a partner at the innovation and design firm IDEO where he leads key client relationships, guiding portfolios of innovation projects in retail, education and consumer products. In his 15 years at IDEO, Mr. Flink has held a variety of roles, from heading the firm’s Consumer Experience Design practice to co-founding its New York office. Mr. Flink also teaches at Stanford University where he is a lecturer at the Graduate School of Business, a consulting associate professor at the Hasso Plattner Institute of Design (d.school), and a member of the d.school’s leadership team. In the past five years, in addition to Fiserv, Mr. Flink has served on the board of E*TRADE Financial Corporation (current), a publicly traded financial services company. The board concluded that Mr. Flink should be a director of the company because of his strong understanding of innovative technologies and his nearly 20 years of experience helping companies of all kinds innovate and grow.Principal Occupation: Partner, IDEO.

Dennis F. Lynch(age 65) has been a director since 2012. Mr. Lynch is Chairman of Cardtronics, Inc., a publicly traded company and the largest owner and operator of retail ATMs worldwide. He was appointed Chairman in 2010 and has served as a director of Cardtronics since 2008. Mr. Lynch is also a director, and former Chairman, of the Secure Remote Payments Council, a cross-industry organization dedicated to accelerating the growth, development and market adoption of more secure ecommerce and mobile payments. He previously served as: Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of RightPath Payments, Inc. from 2005 to 2008; a director of Open Solutions, Inc. from 2005 to 2007; President and Chief Executive Officer of NYCE Corporation from 1996 to

6

2004; and Chairman of Yankee 24 ATM Network from 1988 to 1990. In the past five years, in addition to Fiserv, Mr. Lynch has served as a director of Cardtronics, Inc. (current). The board concluded that Mr. Lynch should be a director of the company because he has over 30 years of experience in the payments industry and is a leader in the introduction and growth of payment solutions.Principal Occupation: Chairman, Cardtronics, Inc.

Denis J. O’Leary(age 57) has been a director since 2008. In 2009, Mr. O’Leary became Managing Partner of Encore Financial Partners, Inc., a company focused on the acquisition and management of banking organizations in the United States. From 2006 to 2009, he was a senior advisor to The Boston Consulting Group with respect to the enterprise technology, financial services and consumer payments industries. Through early 2003, he spent 25 years at J.P. Morgan Chase & Company and its predecessors in various capacities, including Director of Finance, Chief Information Officer, Head of Retail Branch Banking, Managing Executive of Lab Morgan, and, from 1994 to 2003, Executive Vice President. In the past five years, in addition to Fiserv, Mr. O’Leary has served on the board of directors of Crowdstrike, Inc. (current), a privately held computer security software company, Hamilton State Bancshares, Inc. (current), a privately held bank holding company, and McAfee, Inc. (former), a formerly publicly traded supplier of computer security solutions. The board concluded that Mr. O’Leary should be a director of the company because of his extensive knowledge of and experience in both the banking and information technology industries.Principal Occupation: Managing Partner, Encore Financial Partners, Inc.

Glenn M. Renwick(age 58) has been a director since 2001. Mr. Renwick is President and Chief Executive Officer of The Progressive Corporation, a publicly traded property and casualty insurance company. Before being named Chief Executive Officer in 2001, Mr. Renwick served as Chief Executive Officer – Insurance Operations and Business Technology Process Leader from 1998 through 2000. Prior to that, he led Progressive’s consumer marketing group and served as president of various divisions within Progressive. Mr. Renwick joined Progressive in 1986 as Auto Product Manager for Florida. In the past five years, in addition to Fiserv, Mr. Renwick has served on the board of directors of The Progressive Corporation (current) and UnitedHealth Group Incorporated (current), a publicly traded provider of health insurance. The board concluded that Mr. Renwick should be a director of the company because he is an accomplished business leader with significant information technology experience.Principal Occupation: President and Chief Executive Officer of The Progressive Corporation.

Kim M. Robak (age 58) has been a director since 2003. Since 2004, Ms. Robak has been a partner at Mueller Robak, LLC, a government relations firm. Prior to that, Ms. Robak was Vice President for External Affairs and Corporation Secretary at the University of Nebraska from 1999 to 2004. Ms. Robak served as the Lieutenant Governor of the State of Nebraska from 1993 to 1999, as Chief of Staff from 1992 to 1993, and as Legal Counsel from 1991 to 1992. Prior to 1991, Ms. Robak was a partner at the law firm Rembolt Ludtke Milligan and Berger. During her tenure in state government, she chaired the Governor’s Information Resources Cabinet and led the Information Technology Commission of Nebraska. In the past five years, in addition to Fiserv, Ms. Robak has served on the board of directors of Ameritas Mutual Holding Company (current), a provider of life insurance, annuities, and mutual funds; Union Bank & Trust Company (current), a financial institution; FBL Financial Group, Inc. (former), a publicly traded life insurance holding company; and First Ameritas Life Insurance Corporation of New York (former), a life insurance company. The board concluded that Ms. Robak should be a director of the company because she is an accomplished business person and community leader who brings a variety of experiences to the board through her work in the fields of law, government and technology.Principal Occupation: Partner at Mueller Robak, LLC.

Doyle R. Simons(age 50) has been a director since 2007. Mr. Simons is President and Chief Executive Officer of Weyerhaeuser Company, a publicly traded company focused on timberlands, forest products and homebuilding. Prior to joining Weyerhaeuser in 2013, Mr. Simons served in a variety of roles for Temple-Inland, Inc., a formerly publicly traded manufacturing company focused on corrugated packaging and building products which was acquired in 2012. From 2007 to early 2012, he served as the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer; from 2005 to 2007, he was Executive Vice President; from 2003 to 2005, he served as its Chief Administrative Officer; from 2000 to 2003, he was Vice President – Administration; and from 1994 to 2000, he served as

7

Director of Investor Relations. In the past five years, in addition to Fiserv, Mr. Simons has served on the board of directors of Weyerhaeuser Company (current) and Temple-Inland, Inc. (former). The board concluded that Mr. Simons should be a director of the company because he is an accomplished business person with diverse experiences in senior management and financial and legal matters.Principal Occupation: President and Chief Executive Officer of Weyerhaeuser Company.

Thomas C. Wertheimer(age 73) has been a director since 2003. Mr. Wertheimer is a Certified Public Accountant and a retired Senior Audit Partner of PricewaterhouseCoopers (“PwC”). He served as lead audit partner for a number of key multinational and national clients of PwC, including publicly held automotive manufacturing, financial services and retail companies. He also held technical accounting and audit quality positions including Director of Accounting, Auditing and SEC for the Midwest Region of Coopers & Lybrand. Mr. Wertheimer served on the Board of Partners at Coopers & Lybrand from 1995 until its merger with Price Waterhouse in 1998. From 2003 to 2007, he was a consultant to the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, assisting in designing and executing its program of inspection of registered accounting firms. In the past five years, in addition to Fiserv, Mr. Wertheimer has served on the board of directors of Vishay Intertechnology, Inc. (current), a publicly traded electronic component manufacturer, and Xinyuan Real Estate Co., Ltd. (current), a residential real estate developer in China. The board concluded that Mr. Wertheimer should be a director of the company because of his extensive knowledge of and experience in accounting, auditing and financial reporting matters.Principal Occupation: Financial Consultant.

Continuing Directors

Continuing terms expiring in 2015

Daniel P. Kearney(age 74) has been a director since 1999. Mr. Kearney is a financial consultant and served as Chief Investment Officer of Aetna, Inc. from 1991 to 1998. In 1995, he assumed the additional responsibility of President of Aetna’s annuity, pension and life insurance division, retiring in 1998. Prior to joining Aetna, Mr. Kearney was President and Chief Executive Officer of the Resolution Trust Corporation Oversight Board. Before that, he was a principal at Aldrich, Eastman and Waltch, Inc., a Boston-based pension fund advisor. From 1977 to 1988, Mr. Kearney was with Salomon Brothers, Inc. as Managing Director of its Real Estate Financing Department and a founder of its Mortgage Securities Department, and from 1976 to 1977 he was Associate Director of the United States Office of Management and Budget. He served as President of the Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae) from 1974 to 1976, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development from 1973 to 1974, and as Executive Director of the Illinois Housing Development Authority from 1969 to 1973. Previously, he was in private law practice in Chicago, Illinois. In the past five years, in addition to Fiserv, Mr. Kearney has served as a director of MGIC Investment Corporation (current), a publicly traded mortgage insurance company, and non-executive Chairman of MBIA, Inc. (current), a publicly traded financial guarantor. The board concluded that Mr. Kearney should be a director of the company because of his over 40 years of experience in the banking, insurance and legal industries.Principal Occupation: Financial Consultant.

Jeffery W. Yabuki (age 54) has been a director and our President and Chief Executive Officer since 2005. Before joining Fiserv, Mr. Yabuki served as Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer for H&R Block, Inc., a financial services firm, from 2002 to 2005. From 2001 to 2002, he served as Executive Vice President of H&R Block and from 1999 to 2001, he served as the President of H&R Block International. From 1987 to 1999, Mr. Yabuki held various executive positions with American Express Company, a financial services firm, including President and Chief Executive Officer of American Express Tax and Business Services, Inc. In the past five years, in addition to Fiserv, Mr. Yabuki has served on the board of directors of Ixonia Bancshares, Inc. (current), a privately held banking holding company, and MBIA, Inc. (former), a publicly traded financial guarantor. The board concluded that Mr. Yabuki should be a director of the company because he has extensive senior management experience at a number of large corporations and serves as the chief executive officer of the company.Principal Occupation: President and Chief Executive Officer of Fiserv, Inc.

8

Majority Voting

Our by-laws provide that each director will be elected by the majority of the votes cast with respect to that director’s election at any meeting of shareholders for the election of directors, other than a contested election. A majority of the votes cast means that the number of votes cast “for” a director’s election exceeds the number of votes cast “withheld” with respect to that director’s election. In a contested election, each director will be elected by a plurality of the votes cast with respect to that director’s election. Once our chairman of the board determines that a contested election exists in accordance with our by-laws, the plurality vote standard will apply at a meeting at which a quorum is present regardless of whether a contested election continues to exist as of the date of such meeting.

Our by-laws further provide that, in an uncontested election of directors, any nominee for director who is already serving as a director and receives a greater number of votes “withheld” from his or her election than votes “for” his or her election will promptly tender his or her resignation. The nominating and corporate governance committee of the board of directors will then promptly consider the tendered resignation, and the committee will recommend to the board whether to accept or reject it. Following the board’s decision, we will promptly file a Current Report on Form 8-K with the Securities and Exchange Commission that sets forth the board’s decision whether to accept the resignation as tendered, including a full explanation of the process by which the decision was reached and, if applicable, the reasons for rejecting the tendered resignation. Any director who tenders a resignation pursuant to this provision will not participate in the committee recommendation or the board consideration regarding whether to accept the tendered resignation.

11

PROPOSAL 3

RATIFICATION OF THE SELECTION OF DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Background

The audit committee of the board of directors is directly responsible for the appointment, compensation, retention and oversight of our independent registered public accounting firm. The audit committee has appointed Deloitte & Touche LLP (“Deloitte”) to serve as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2014. Deloitte has served as our independent public accounting firm since 1986. The audit committee, from time to time, evaluates the performance and independence of Deloitte to determine whether we should continue to retain Deloitte. To this end, at least annually, Deloitte makes a presentation to the committee regarding the services it provides, and our chief financial officer provides the committee with his assessment of the firm’s performance. The audit committee is responsible for the audit fee negotiations associated with the retention of Deloitte. In addition, in conjunction with the mandated rotation of Deloitte’s lead engagement partner, the audit committee and its chairman actively participate in the selection of a successor lead engagement partner. The members of the audit committee and the board believe that the continued retention of Deloitte to serve as our independent registered public accounting firm is in the best interests of the company and its shareholders.

A representative of Deloitte is expected to be present at the annual meeting, will have an opportunity to make a statement if he or she so desires, and will be available to respond to appropriate questions.

Reasons for the Proposal

Selection of our independent registered public accounting firm is not required to be submitted for shareholder approval, but the audit committee of our board of directors is seeking ratification of its selection of Deloitte as a matter of good corporate practice. If our shareholders do not ratify this selection, the audit committee of the board of directors will consider it a direction to seek to retain another independent public accounting firm. Even if the selection is ratified, the audit committee may, in its discretion, appoint a different independent registered public accounting firm at any time if it determines that such a change would be in our shareholders’ best interests.

Vote Required and Recommendation of the Board of Directors

To ratify the selection of Deloitte as our independent registered public accounting firm, the number of votes cast “for” the proposal must exceed the number of votes cast “against” the proposal. Unless otherwise specified, the proxies solicited hereby will be voted to ratify the selection of Deloitte as our independent registered public accounting firm for 2014.

The board of directors recommends that you vote in favor of Proposal 3.

Nominations of Directors

The nominating and corporate governance committee recommends to the full board of directors the nominees to stand for election at our annual meeting of shareholders and to fill vacancies occurring on the board. In this regard, the nominating and corporate governance committee regularly assesses the appropriate size of the board of directors and whether any vacancies on the board of directors are expected due to retirement or otherwise. In the event that vacancies are anticipated or otherwise arise, the committee utilizes a variety of methods to identify and evaluate director candidates. Candidates may come to the attention of the committee through current directors, professional search firms, shareholders or other persons.

The committee evaluates prospective nominees in the context of the then current constitution of the board of directors and considers all factors it considersbelieves appropriate, which include those set forth in our governance guidelines. Our governance guidelines provide that the membersa majority of our board of directors should have diverse backgrounds with outstanding business experience, proven ability and skills. The diversity that the committee seeks includes diversity of education, professional experience as well as diversity of gender, race and national origin, in order thatsignificant accomplishments through other enterprises to enable the board representsof directors to represent a broad set of skillscapabilities and viewpoints. Other than as set forth in our governance guidelines, the committee does not have a formal policy with respect to diversity. The board of directors and the nominating and corporate governance committee believe the following minimum qualifications must be met by a director nominee to be recommended by the committee:

In addition, the nominating and corporate governance committee seeks to have at least one director who is an “audit committee financial expert” under Item 407(d)(5) of Regulation S-K under the Exchange Act, and we must have at least one director (who may also be an “audit committee financial expert”) who, in accordance with the NASDAQ Marketplace Rules, has past employment experience in finance or accounting, requisite professional certification in accounting or any other comparable experience or background which results in the individual’s financial sophistication, including being or having been a chief executive officer, chief financial officer or other senior officer with financial oversight responsibilities.

16

In making recommendations to the board of directors, the nominating and corporate governance committee examines each director nomineecandidate on a case-by-case basis regardless of who recommended the nominee.candidate. The committee will consider persons recommended by shareholders to become nominees for election as directorsshareholder-recommended director candidates in accordance with the foregoing and other criteria set forth in our governance guidelines and the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee Charter. Recommendations for consideration by the committee must be submitted in writing to the chairman of the board and/or president and the chairman of the nominating and corporate governance committee together with appropriate biographical information concerning each proposed candidate. The committee does not evaluate shareholder nomineesshareholder-recommended director candidates differently than any other nominee.director candidate.

PursuantIn 2016, we amended our by-laws to include a provision pursuant to which a shareholder, or group of up to 20 shareholders, owning continuously for at least three years shares of our stock representing an aggregate of at least 3% of our outstanding shares may nominate and include in our proxy material director nominees constituting up to 20% of our board of directors – so called

“proxy access.” Alternatively, a shareholder may nominate director nominees under our by-laws that the shareholder does not intend to have included in our proxy materials. In either case, such shareholders must comply with the procedures set forth in our by-laws, including that the shareholders and nominees satisfy the requirements in our nominatingby-laws and corporate governance committee will consider shareholder nominations for directors if our corporate Secretary receives timely written notice, in proper form, of the intent to make a nomination at aan annual meeting of shareholders. To be in proper form, the notice must, among other matters: list the name and residence address of the person or persons to be nominated; include each nominee’s written consent to be named in our proxy statement and to serve as a director if elected; describe all arrangements or understandings between the nominating shareholder and each nominee, including any understanding with any person as to how such nominee, if elected, will act or vote on any issue or question and all direct and indirect compensation and any other material monetary arrangements during the past three years between the nominating shareholder and its affiliates and each nominee and his or her affiliates; describe information about the nominating shareholder and each nominee; and contain such other information regarding each nominee proposed by such shareholder and any such beneficial owner as would be required to be disclosed in solicitations of proxies for a contested election of directors, or would be otherwise required to be disclosed, in each case pursuant to Section 14 of the Exchange Act. To be timely, the notice must be received by the applicable deadline set forth in our by-laws. The detailed requirements for nominations are set forth in our by-laws, which were attached as an exhibit to our CurrentAnnual Report on Form 8-K10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 24, 2012.February 19, 2016. A copy of our by-laws will be provided upon written request to our corporate Secretary. Additional requirements regarding shareholder proposals includingand director nominations, including the dates by which notices must be received, are described below under the heading ““Other Matters – Shareholder Proposals for the 20152018 Annual Meeting.Meeting.”

Audit Committee

Membership and Responsibilities

The audit committee’s primary role is to provide independent review and oversight of our financial reporting processes and financial statements, system of internal controls, audit process and results of operations and financial condition. In doing so, it is the responsibility of the audit committee to provide an open avenue of communication between the board of directors, management, our internal audit function and our independent auditor. The audit committee is directly and solely responsible for the appointment, compensation, retention, termination and oversight of our independent auditor. The members of the audit committee are Mr. Wertheimer (Chairman), Mr. Kearney and Mr. O’Leary, each of whom is independent as defined by applicable NASDAQ and Securities and Exchange Commission rules. The board of directors has determined that all three of the members of the audit committee are “audit committee financial experts,” as that term is used in Item 407(d)(5) of Regulation S-K. Mr. Kearney will no longer serve on the audit committee when he becomes Chairman at the 2014 annual meeting of shareholders. The board of directors has appointed Mr. Flink to serve on the audit committee effective at the 2014 annual meeting of shareholders. The audit committee held seven meetings during 2013.

Audit Committee Report

In accordance with its written charter, the audit committee provides independent review and oversight of the accounting and financial reporting processes and financial statements of Fiserv, Inc., the system of internal controls that management and the board of directors have established, the audit process and the results of operations of Fiserv, Inc. and its financial condition. Management has the responsibility for preparing the company’s financial statements, and Deloitte & Touche LLP (“Deloitte”), the company’s independent registered public accounting firm, has the responsibility for examining those statements.

17

The audit committee has reviewed and discussed with management and Deloitte the audited financial statements of Fiserv, Inc. for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013. The audit committee has also discussed with Deloitte the matters required to be discussed under Public Company Accounting Oversight Board standards. The audit committee has received the written disclosures and letter from Deloitte required by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding the independent registered public accounting firm’s communications with the audit committee concerning independence, and has discussed with Deloitte its independence.

The audit committee also discussed with management, the internal auditors and Deloitte the quality and adequacy of the internal controls and internal audit organization, responsibilities, budget and staffing of Fiserv, Inc. The audit committee reviewed with both Deloitte and the internal auditors their respective audit plans, audit scope and identification of audit risks. Based on the above-mentioned reviews and discussions, the audit committee recommended to the board of directors that the audited financial statements of Fiserv, Inc. be included in its Annual Report on Form 10-K for 2013, for filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Thomas C. Wertheimer, Chairman

Daniel P. Kearney

Denis J. O’Leary

Compensation Committee

The compensation committee of the board of directors is responsible for overseeing executive officer compensation. The members of the compensation committee are currently Mr. Renwick (Chairman), Mr. Lynch and Mr. Simons, each of whom is a non-employee director and “independent” as defined by applicable NASDAQ Marketplace Rules. The compensation committee operates under a written charter that identifies its responsibilities which include: approval of executive officer compensation; approval of compensation programs and benefit plans in which our executive officers participate; review of compensation-related risk; administration of our equity incentive plans including compliance with executive share ownership requirements; approval of severance or similar termination payments to executive officers; and oversight of regulatory compliance with respect to compensation matters. The compensation committee held five meetings during 2013. Additional information regarding the compensation committee and our policies and procedures regarding executive compensation, including, among other matters, our use of compensation consultants and management’s role in determining compensation, is provided below under the heading “Compensation Discussion and Analysis – Determining Compensation.”

Risk Oversight

Our management is responsible for managing risks,risk, and our board of directors is responsible for overseeing management. To discharge this responsibility, the board seeks to be informed about the risks facing the company so that it may evaluate actual and potential risks and understand how management is managingaddressing such risks. To this end, the board, as a whole and at the committee level, regularly receives reports from management about risks faced by the company. For example, the board of directors regularly receives reports directly from our chief executive officer about, among other matters, developments in our industry so that the board may evaluate the competitive and other risks faced by the company. In addition, our chief financial officer, at each meeting of the board, presents information regarding our financial performance and condition in an effort to understand financial risks faced by the company. Furthermore, at each meeting, the board receives a cybersecurity update from our chief executive officer, chief risk officer, chief information officer or chief legal officer, or a combination of the foregoing, in each case depending on the focus of the matters under review.

As discussed above, the positions of chief executive officer and Chairman are held by different

individuals. We believe a separate Chairman position enhances the effectiveness of our board’s risk oversight function by providing leadership to the board that is independent from those tasked with managing the risk profile of our company.

The committees of the board also play a critical role in the board’s ability to collect and assess information. The audit committee’s charter charges it with a variety of risk-related oversight duties, including: (i) 

18

At each of its quarterly meetings, the audit committee receives reports from our chief audit executive regarding significant audit findings during the quarter and management’s responses thereto. In addition, the committee regularly receives reports from our chief compliance officer and chief risk officer. Our chief risk officer leads our enterprise risk and resilience group which is responsible foroperates Fiserv’s enterprise risk management program. The program that encompasses our business continuity planning, incident management, risk assessment, operational regulatory compliance, insurance and information security across all Fiserv businesses and support functions.

In addition, ourOur compensation committee regularly receives reports from our human resources department and our senior management about our compensation programs and policies to enable it to oversee management’s administration of compensation-related risks.

The nominating and corporate governance committee also works closely with our general counselchief legal officer and the members of the board to seek to manage risks associated with director and executive officer succession, the independence of the directors, conflicts of interest and other corporate governance related matters.

Communications with the Board of Directors

Shareholders may communicate with our board of directors or individual directors by submitting communications in writing to us at 255 Fiserv Drive, Brookfield, Wisconsin 53045, Attention: Lynn S. McCreary, Executive Vice President, General CounselChief Legal Officer and Secretary. Communications will be delivered directly to our board of directors or individual directors, as applicable.

Review, Approval or Ratification of Transactions with Related Persons

A related person transaction is a transaction in which we are proposed to be a participant and in which a related person, such as an executive officer or director, mayWe have a direct or indirect material interest. Our board of directors has adopted a written policy requiring that requires allany related person transactionstransaction that would require disclosure under Item 404(a) of Regulation S-K under the Exchange Act be reviewed and approved by: theby our audit committee of the board of directors; or, if the audit committee is not able to review the transaction for any reason, (e.g., if a majority of its membersour disinterested directors. Compensation matters regarding our executive officers or directors are interested in a transaction), a majority of the disinterested members of the board; or, if the transaction involves thereviewed and approved by

our compensation of an executive officer or director, the compensation committee of the board of directors.committee. The policy also provides that, at least annually, eachany such ongoing, previously approved related person transaction is to be reviewed by the body that originally approved the transaction: to ensure that it is being pursued in accordance with all of the understandings and commitments made at the time that it was previously approved; to ensure that the commitments being made with respect to such transaction are appropriately reviewed and documented; and to affirm the continuing desirability of and need for the related person arrangement. The audit committee (or, as applicable, the board of directors or the compensation committee) will consider all

All relevant factors with respect to a proposed related person transaction and will only approvebe considered, and such a transaction will only be approved if the audit committee determines that the transactionit is in our and our shareholders’ best interests or, if an alternate standard of review is imposed by applicable laws, statutes, governing documents or listing standards, if such alternate standard of review is satisfied.

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting ComplianceDirector Compensation

Section 16Objectives for Director Compensation

Quality non-employee directors are critical to our success. We believe that the two primary duties of non-employee directors are to effectively represent the long-term interests of our shareholders and to provide guidance to management. As such, our compensation program for non-employee directors is designed to meet several key objectives:

Elements of Director Compensation

The compensation committee of the Exchange Act requiresboard of directors reviews non-employee director compensation every other year and considers our directorsfinancial performance, general market conditions and executive officersnon-employee director compensation at the peer group companies set forth below under “Compensation Discussion and persons who own more than ten percent of a registered classAnalysis – Structuring Compensation – Peer Group.”

We believe that the following components of our director compensation program support the objectives above:

Non-Employee Director Deferred

Compensation Plan

Under our non-employee director deferred compensation plan, each non-employee director may defer up to 100% of his or her cash fees. Based on his or her deferral election, the director is credited with a number of share units at the time he or she would have otherwise received the portion of the fees being deferred. Share units are equivalent to shares of our common stock except that share units have no voting rights.

Upon cessation of service on the board, the director receives a share of our common stock for each share unit. Shares are received in a lump sum distribution, and any fractional share units are paid in cash. Share units credited to a director’s account are considered awards granted under the Amended and Restated Fiserv, Inc. 2007 Omnibus Incentive Plan (the “Incentive Plan”) and count against that plan’s share reserve.

Stock Ownership Requirements

Under our stock ownership policy, non-employee directors are required by Securitiesto accumulate and Exchange Commission regulationshold our common stock having a market value equal to furnish us with copies of all Section 16 forms they file. To our knowledge, based solely on a reviewat least six times the amount of the copies of such reports furnishedannual board retainer.

Non-employee directors have five years after they become subject to us and written representations from Section 16 reporting persons, we believethe policy to meet the ownership requirements provided that interim ownership milestones are achieved during the five-year period. All non-employee directors are in compliance with our fiscal year ended December 31, 2013, all Section 16 reporting persons complied with all applicable filing requirements.stock ownership policy.

Director Compensation Program

Our 2016 non-employee director compensation program is summarized below on an annualized basis:

19

AUDIT FEES

Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm and Fees

The following table presents the aggregate fees billed by Deloitte & Touche LLP and related entities (“Deloitte”) for services provided during 2012 and 2013. The 2013 fees were impacted by our acquisition of Open Solutions in early 2013. The audit committee has concluded that Deloitte’s provision of the audit and permitted non-audit services described below is compatible with Deloitte maintaining its independence.