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.    )

Check the appropriate box:

Gentherm Incorporated

(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):

INVITATION TO OUR SHAREHOLDERS

April 27, 201518, 2017

To our Shareholders:

We cordially invite you to attend our 20152017 annual meeting of shareholders, which will be held on Thursday,Friday, May 28, 2015,19, 2017, at 9:30 a.m., Eastern Time, at our offices located at 21680 Haggerty Road, Suite 101, Northville, Michigan.  The business to be conducted at the annual meeting is set forth in the attached Notice of 20152017 Annual Meeting of Shareholders and Proxy Statement.proxy statement.

Thank you for your continued support of Gentherm.

Sincerely,

Daniel R. Coker

President and Chief Executive Officer

GENTHERM INCORPORATED

NOTICE OF 20152017 ANNUAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS

Our 20152017 annual meeting of shareholders will be held on Thursday,Friday, May 28, 2015,19, 2017, at 9:30 a.m., Eastern Time, at our offices located at 21680 Haggerty Road, Suite 101, Northville, Michigan to conduct the following items of business:

Only holders of our common stock at the close of business on April 13, 2015,3, 2017, the record date, are entitled to receive this notice and to attend and vote at the annual meeting.

Your vote is important. Whether or not you plan to attend the meeting, we urge you to vote promptly and save us the expense of additional solicitation. If you attend the annual meeting, you may revoke your proxy in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Proxy Statementproxy statement and vote in person.

Northville, Michigan

April 27, 201518, 2017

PROXY SUMMARY

This proxy summary highlights information contained elsewhere in this proxy statement.  This summary does not contain all of the information that you should consider and therefore you should read the entire proxy statement before voting.  For more complete information regarding the Company’s 20142016 performance of Gentherm Incorporated (the “Company”), review our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014.2016.

Please Vote Today

Your vote is important. Whether or not you plan to attend the annual meeting, we urge you to vote promptly to save us the expense of additional solicitation. Please carefully review the proxy materials for the 20152017 annual meeting and follow the instructions below to cast your vote on all of the proposals.

Proposals, Board Recommendations and Required Vote

────────────────────

Voting Methods in Advance of Annual Meeting

Even if you plan to attend the 20152017 annual meeting in person, please vote right away using one of the following voting methods (see page 2 for additional details). Make sure to have your proxy card or voting instruction card in hand and follow the instructions.

Attend and Vote at Annual Meeting

Shareholders of record and beneficial owners (if in possession of a proxy from your broker, bank or other nominee) as of April 13, 20153, 2017 may attend and vote at the annual meeting.

Director Nominees

The Board currently consists of nine directors.  On November 16, 2016, the Company’s Chairman of the Board, Oscar B. Marx, III, informed the Board of his intention to retire from the Board effective as of the 2017 annual meeting of shareholders.  Consequently, Mr. Marx is not standing for re-election at the 2017 annual meeting.  All directors are elected annually and serve one-year terms.terms until his or her successor has been duly elected and qualified or until such director’s earlier resignation, retirement or both.  The Board has re-nominated allthe remaining eight current directors and, effective as of the current directors.annual meeting, has reduced the number of directors of the Company to eight in accordance with the Company’s bylaws.  The following table provides summary information about such director nominees.

Executive Compensation Highlights

At the 2017 annual meeting, shareholders are being asked to provide advisory (non-binding) approval of the compensation of our named executive officers in 2016, as disclosed in this proxy statement in accordance with SEC rules (commonly known as a “say-on-pay” proposal).  See “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” beginning on page 1617 for information regarding our compensation philosophy, objectives and design, our compensation-setting process and our executive compensation program components, as well as the decisions made for 20142016 with respect to each of our named executive officers.

Say-on-Pay Proposal

The Company’s say-on-pay proposal presented at the 20142016 annual meeting of shareholders, whereby shareholders were asked to provide advisory approval of the Company’s compensation for its named executive officers in 2013,2015, was approved by approximately 94%93% of the votes cast.cast (not including abstentions and broker non-votes).  

Frequency of Say-on-Pay Proposal

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010, commonly known as the Dodd-Frank Act, requires that we seek an advisory shareholder vote at least every six years indicating whether shareholders prefer a say-on-pay advisory vote be taken every one, two or three years.  At our 2011 annual meeting of shareholders, 91% of the votes cast on the proposal regarding the frequency of our say-on-pay advisory vote were in favor of every year as the frequency.  At the 20152017 annual meeting, shareholders are being asked to provideagain indicate how frequently we should seek an advisory approvalvote on the compensation of the Company’s compensation program for itsour named executive officers in 2014.officers.

Governance Highlights

The Company is committed to good corporate governance appropriate to the Company and its shareholders.  Highlights include:

Ratification of Appointment of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for 20152017

At the 20152017 annual meeting, shareholders are being asked to ratify the appointment of Grant Thornton LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2015.2017.

The following table sets forth the fees the Company was billed for audit and other services provided by Grant Thornton in 20142016 and 2013.2015.  All of such services were approved in conformity with the pre-approval policies and procedures described under “Audit Committee Matters—Pre-Approval Policies and Procedures” on page 37.38.  The Audit Committee of the Board, based on its reviews and discussions with management and Grant Thornton, determined that the provision of these services was compatible with maintaining Grant Thornton’s independence.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PROXY STATEMENT

ANNUAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS

MAY 28, 201519, 2017

ABOUT THE ANNUAL MEETING

Who is soliciting my vote?

The Board of Directors (the “Board”) of Gentherm Incorporated (the “Company”) is soliciting your proxy, as a holder of our common stock, for use at the 20152017 annual meeting of shareholders and any adjournment or postponement of such meeting (the “annual meeting”). The annual meeting will be held on Thursday,Friday, May 28, 2015,19, 2017, at 9:30 a.m., Eastern Time, at our offices located at 21680 Haggerty Road, Suite 101, Northville, Michigan.

The notice of annual meeting, proxy statement and form of proxy was first mailed to shareholders of record of our common stock on or about April 27, 2015.18, 2017.

What is the purpose of the annual meeting?

At the annual meeting, you will be voting on:

The Board recommends a vote FOR each of the director nominees listed in this proxy statement, FOR the ratification of the appointment of Grant Thornton’s appointment,Thornton, FOR the approval of the compensation of our named executive officers, EVERY YEAR as the frequency of an advisory vote on the compensation of our named executive officers and FOR the approval of an amendment to our Articlesthe Gentherm Incorporated 2013 Equity Incentive Plan to eliminate cumulative voting in director elections.increase the number of shares available for award under the plan and increase the ratio used to count full value awards issued under the plan against the maximum number of shares issuable under the plan. We are not aware of any other matters that will be brought before the shareholders for a vote at the annual meeting. If any other matter is properly brought before the meeting and you are a shareholder of record of our common stock, your signed proxy card gives authority to your proxies to vote on such matter in their best judgment; proxy holders named in the proxy card will vote as the Board recommends or, if the Board gives no recommendation, in their own discretion.

During or immediately following the annual meeting, management will report on our performance and will respond to appropriate questions from shareholders. Representatives of Grant Thornton will be present at the annual meeting, will make a statement, if they desire to do so, and will answer appropriate questions from our shareholders.

Who is entitled to vote?

You may vote if you owned shares of our common stock at the close of business on April 13, 2015,3, 2017, the record date, provided such shares are held directly in your name as the shareholder of record or are held for you as the beneficial owner through a broker, bank or other nominee. As of April 13, 2015,3, 2017, we had 35,895,32236,723,099 shares of common stock outstanding and entitled to vote.  Each share of common stock is entitled to one vote on each matter properly brought before the annual meeting; however, see “Can I cumulate my votes for directors at the annual meeting?” below.meeting.

What is the difference between holding shares as a shareholder of record and a beneficial owner?

Shareholders of Record.    If your common shares are registered directly in your name with our transfer agent, Computershare, you are considered the shareholder of record with respect to those shares, and these proxy materials are being sent directly to you by us. As the shareholder of record, you have the right to grant your voting proxy directly to us through the enclosed proxy card or to vote in person at the annual meeting.

Beneficial Owners.    Many of our shareholders hold their common shares through a broker, bank or other nominee rather than directly in their own names. If your shares are held in a stock brokerage account or by a bank or other nominee, you are considered the beneficial owner with respect to those shares, and these proxy materials (including a voting instruction card) are being forwarded to you by your broker, bank or nominee who is considered the shareholder of record with respect to those shares. As the beneficial owner, you have the right to direct your broker, bank or nominee on how to vote and are also invited to attend the annual meeting. However, since you are not the shareholder of record, you may not vote these shares in person at the annual meeting unless you request and obtain a proxy from your broker, bank or nominee. Your broker, bank or nominee has enclosed a voting instruction card for you to use in directing the broker, bank or nominee on how to vote your shares.

May I vote my shares in person at the annual meeting?

Even if you plan to be present at the annual meeting, we encourage you to vote your shares prior to the meeting.

Shareholders of Record.    If you are a shareholder of record and attend the annual meeting, you may deliver your completed proxy card or vote by ballot.

Beneficial Owners.    If you hold your common shares through a bank, broker or other nominee and want to vote such shares in person at the annual meeting, you must obtain a proxy from your broker, bank or other nominee giving you the power to vote such shares.

Can I vote my shares without attending the annual meeting?

You may vote by completing, signing and returning the enclosed proxy card or voting instruction card. If you are a shareholder of record and the postage-paid envelope is missing, please mail your completed proxy card to Gentherm Incorporated, c/o Corporate Secretary, 21680 Haggerty Road, Suite 101, Northville, MI 48167.  You may have the option to vote your shares via the internet or telephone.

Can I change my vote?

Shareholders of Record.    You may change your vote at any time before the proxy is exercised by voting in person at the annual meeting or by filing with our corporate secretary either a notice revoking the proxy or a properly signed proxy.  In each case, such notice or proxy must bear a later date than your prior proxy.  If sent by mail, it must be received by our corporate secretary no later than 5:00 p.m., Eastern Time, on May 27, 2015.18, 2017. Your attendance at the annual meeting in person will not cause your prior proxy to be revoked unless you file the proper documentation for it to be so revoked.

Beneficial Owners.   If you hold your shares through a bank, broker or other nominee, you should contact such person prior to the time such voting instructions are exercised.

What does it mean if I receive more than one proxy card or voting instruction card?

If you receive more than one proxy card or voting instruction card, it means that you have multiple accounts with banks, brokers, other nominees and/or our transfer agent. Please sign and deliver, or otherwise vote, each proxy card and voting instruction card that you receive. We recommend that you contact your nominee and/or our transfer agent, as appropriate, to consolidate as many accounts as possible under the same name and address. Our transfer agent is Computershare, P.O. Box 30170, College Station, TX 77842-3170; Telephone: (800) 962-4284.

What if I do not vote for some of the items listed on my proxy card or voting instruction card?

Shareholders of Record.    If you indicate a choice with respect to any matter to be acted upon on your proxy card, the shares will be voted in accordance with your instructions. Proxy cards that are signed and returned, but do not contain voting instructions with respect to certain matters, will be voted in accordance with the recommendations of the Board on such matters or if the Board gives no recommendation, then in the discretion of the proxy holders.

Beneficial Owners.    If you indicate a choice with respect to any matter to be acted upon on your voting instruction card, the shares will be voted in accordance with your instructions. If you do not indicate a choice or return the voting instruction card, the bank, broker or other nominee will determine if it has the discretionary authority to vote on each applicable matter. Under applicable law, a bank, broker or nominee has the discretion to vote on routine matters, including the ratification of the appointment of an independent registered public accounting firm. For all other matters at the 20152017 annual meeting, brokers and certain banks and nominees will be unable to vote on your behalf if you do not instruct them how to vote your shares in the manner set forth on your voting instruction card. Therefore, it is very important for you to vote your shares for each proposal.

How many shares must be present to hold the annual meeting?

In order for us to conduct the annual meeting, a majority of the outstanding shares entitled to vote at the annual meeting as of April 13, 2015 must be present in person or by proxy at the meeting. This is known as a quorum. Abstentions, withheld votes and broker non-votes will be considered present for purposes of determining a quorum.

What vote is required to approve each item of business?

Proposal No. 1—Election of Directors.

_____________________

 The nine nominees receiving the highest number of “for” votes at the annual meeting will be elected directors. This number is called a plurality. Withheld votes and broker non-votes will have no effect on the outcome of the vote.

Notwithstanding that directors will be elected by a plurality of votes cast at the annual meeting, in the event any director nominee receives a greater number of votes “withheld” than votes “for” his or her election, the Company’s majority voting policy requires such nominee to promptly tender his or her resignation, conditioned on Board acceptance.  The majority voting policy will not apply, however, if cumulative voting rights are exercised with respect to director elections at the annual meeting.  See “Board Matters – Corporate Governance – Corporate Governance Guidelines” for further information regarding our majority voting policy.

Proposal No. 2—Ratification of Appointment of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for 2015. The affirmative vote of holders of a majority of votes cast at the annual meeting with respect to this proposal is required for ratification of the appointment of Grant Thornton as our independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2015. Abstentions will have the same effect as votes against the matter.

Proposal No. 3—Advisory Vote on Named Executive Officer Compensation. The affirmative vote of holders of a majority of votes cast at the annual meeting with respect to this proposal is required for the approval of the compensation of our named executive officers. Abstentions will have the same effect as votes against the matter. Broker non-votes will have no effect on the outcome of the vote.

Proposal No. 4 – Approval of an Amendment to the Restated Articles of Incorporation to Eliminate Cumulative Voting in Director Elections.  The affirmative vote of holders of a majority of shares of our common stock outstanding and entitled to vote is required for approval of an amendment to our Articles to eliminate cumulative voting in director elections, commencing with the 2016 annual meeting of shareholders.  Abstentions and broker non-votes will have the same effect as votes against the matter.

Other Matters.If any other matter is properly submitted to the shareholders at the annual meeting, its adoption generally will require the affirmative vote of holders of a majority of votes cast at the annual meeting. The Board does not propose to conduct any business at the annual meeting other than as stated above.

Although the advisory votes in ProposalProposals No. 2, No. 3 and No. 34 are not binding on the Company, the Board and/or respective committee will take your vote into consideration in determining future activities.

Can I cumulate my votesHow many shares must be present to hold the annual meeting?

In order for directorsus to conduct the annual meeting, a majority of the outstanding shares entitled to vote at the annual meeting?

Our Articlesmeeting as of April 3, 2017 must be present in person or by proxy at the meeting. This is known as a quorum. Abstentions, withheld votes and Amended and Restated Bylaws (“Bylaws”) currently permit cumulative voting at a meeting of shareholders at which directors are to be elected, provided that (A) the nominees’ names have been placed in nomination prior to commencement of the voting and (B) a shareholder who intends to cumulate votes gives timely notice to the Company.  If a shareholder complies with the foregoing, then each shareholder is entitled to as many votes as equals the number of directors to be elected multiplied by the number of votes to which such shareholder’s shares are entitled.  A shareholder may cast all such votes for a single director or distribute such votes among as many candidates who have been properly nominated.

Since our 2015 annual meetingbroker non-votes will be held more than 10 days after the first anniversaryconsidered present for purposes of our 2014 annual meeting, to be timely such notice must be delivered not earlier than the 60^th day prior to the 2015 annual meeting and not later than the close of business on the later of (i) the 30th day prior to such meeting and (ii) the 10th day following the day on which public announcement of the date of such meeting is first made by us (which announcement includes the names of the director nominees for election).

As of the date of this proxy statement, we have not received timely notice from any shareholder of an intention to cumulate votes with respect to the election of directors at the 2015 annual meeting.

At the 2015 annual meeting, shareholders are being asked to approve an amendment to our Articles which would eliminate cumulative voting in director elections, commencing with the 2016 annual meeting of shareholders.  See “Proposal No. 4 – Approval of an Amendment to the Restated Articles of Incorporation to Eliminate Cumulative Voting in Director Elections” for further information.determining a quorum.

Is a registered list of shareholders available?

The names of shareholders of record entitled to vote at the annual meeting will be available to such shareholders at the annual meeting for any purpose reasonably relevant to the meeting.

Who will count the votes and where can I find the voting results?

The Inspector of Elections appointed at the 20152017 annual meeting will tabulate the voting results. We intend to announce the preliminary voting results at the annual meeting and, in accordance with rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), we intend to publish the final results in a current report on Form 8-K within four business days of the annual meeting.

PROPOSAL NO. 1—ELECTIONELECTION OF DIRECTORS

The Board currently consists of nine directors.  All directors are elected annually and serve one-year terms.  Each director will serve until a successor is duly elected and qualified or until such director’s earlier resignation, retirement or death.  Mr. Oscar. B. Marx has determined not to stand for re-election at the 2017 annual meeting.  The Board has re-nominated all of the remaining eight current directors.  As discussed below, the Board has affirmatively determined that seven of our nine current directorsthe eight director nominees are independent under the applicable rules of the NASDAQ Global Select Market (“Nasdaq”).

Each nominee has consented to be listed in this proxy statement and agreed to serve as a director if elected by the shareholders. If any nominee becomes unable or unwilling to serve between the date of this proxy statement and the annual meeting, which we do not anticipate, the Board may designate a new nominee and the persons named as proxies in the attached proxy card will vote for that substitute nominee (unless the proxies were previously instructed to withhold votes for the nominee who has become unable or unwilling to serve). Alternatively, the Board may reduce the size of the Board.

The Board recommends that you vote FOR the election of each of the director nominees.

Board of Directors

The directors and director nominees of the Company are as follows:

*  At the time Mr. Marx announced his decision to retire from the Board of Directors as of the 2017 annual meeting and not stand for re-election, the other members of the Board of Directors publicly announced their unanimous decision to appoint Mr. Castaing as the new Chairman of the Board of Directors, effective as of Mr. Marx’s retirement, subject to Mr. Castaing’s re-election to the Board.

Specific Qualifications, Attributes, Skills and Experience to be Represented on the Board

The Nominating Committee is responsible for reviewing and assessing with the Board the appropriate skills, experience and background sought of Board members in the context of our business and the then-current membership on the Board.  The Committee and the Board review and assess the continued relevance of and emphasis on these factors as part of the Board’s self-assessment process and in connection with candidate searches to determine if they are effective in helping to satisfy the Board’s goal of creating and sustaining a Board that can appropriately support and oversee the Company’s activities.

We believe our directors have an appropriate balance of knowledge, experience, attributes, skills and expertise as a group to ensure that the Board appropriately fulfills its oversight responsibilities and acts in the best interests of shareholders. Although specific qualifications for Board membership may vary from time to time, desired qualities include (A) the highest ethical character, integrity and shared values with the Company, (B) loyalty to the Company and concern for its success and welfare, (C) sound business judgment, and (D) sufficient commitment and availability to effectively carry out a director’s duties. Listed below are additional key skills and experience that we consider important for our directors to have in light of our current business and structure. Thereafter, the biographies of the directors and nominees set forth their business experience during at least the past five years, as well as the specific experience, qualifications, attributes and skills that led to the Nominating Committee’s conclusion that each director and nominee should continue to serve on the Board.

Director Background and Qualifications

Lewis Booth has served as a director of the Company since 2013. Mr. Booth served as Executive Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of Ford Motor Company from 2008 until his retirement in 2012. Prior to his appointment to CFO, Mr. Booth held the positions of Chairman and CEO of Ford of Europe as well as President of Ford’s Asia Pacific and Africa Operations. He currently serveshas served on the Board of Directors of publicly-traded Rolls-Royce Holdings since 2011, where he is the Senior Independent Director, Chairman of the Audit Committee, a member of the Nominations and Governance Committee and a member of the Science and Technology Committee, andpublicly-traded Mondelez International since 2012, where he is a member of the Finance Committee and a member of the Human Resources and Compensation Committee. Mr. Booth also serves as a director of the University of Liverpool in America Inc. Mr. Booth, a qualified chartered management accountant, received his Bachelor’s engineering degree from Liverpool University.

As Executive Vice-President and CFO of Ford Motor Company, Mr. Booth was responsible for all of the company’s financial operations, including the Controller’s office, treasury and investor relations. Mr. Booth’s 34-year decorated career at Ford illustrates his financial expertise and knowledge of manufacturing, operations and the investment community. His strategic expertise in the worldwide automotive industry is critical to us as we continue to expand globally.  Based on the foregoing, the Board has determined that Mr. Booth is an “audit committee financial expert” in accordance with SEC rules.

Francois J. Castaing has served as a director of the Company since 2001. Mr. Castaing retired in 2000 as technical advisor to the Chairman of Chrysler Corporation. Prior to his retirement, Mr. Castaing spent 13 years with Chrysler Corporation, where he held various positions, including Vice-President of Vehicle Engineering from 1988 to 1996 and President of Chrysler International from 1996 to 1997. Mr. Castaing was Vice-President of Engineering and Group Vice-President Product and Quality of American Motors, from 1980 until Chrysler acquired that company in 1987. Mr. Castaing began his career with Renault as Technical Director for Renault Motorsport Programs. He currently servesFrom 2004 to 2015, he served as a director of publicly-traded TRW Automotive Holdings Corp., where he iswas a member of the Audit Committee and the Chairman of the Compensation Committee. Mr. Castaing also serves on the board of FIRST in Michigan: For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology, a not-for-profit foundation.  

Mr. Castaing’s distinguished career in the automotive industry has given him extensive experience in our most important customer market. During his tenure at some of the world’s largest automobile manufacturers, Mr. Castaing developed leadership, strategic planning and organizational skills that greatly benefit the Company. In addition, his technical background contributes to his deep understanding of our operations and enables him to assist in problem solving.  He also has significant knowledge of the Company based on his 1416 years of service on the Board.

Daniel R. Coker has served as our President and Chief Executive Officer since 2003, and as a director since 2007.  Mr. Coker joined Gentherm in 1996 as Vice-President of Sales and Marketing. Prior to such time, from 1986 to 1995, Mr. Coker served as Vice-PresidentVice-

President and General Manager of North American Operations for Arvin, Inc.  Mr. Coker received his Bachelor’s degree from Tennessee Technological University.

Mr. Coker has extensive knowledge of the day to day operations of our business. His product development background allows him to fully understand and manage our business. In addition, Mr. Coker’s experience as our highest ranked officer, coupled with the managerial positions he previously held with other automotive-related companies, gives Mr. Coker industry insight and leadership and executive management skills key to our performance.

Sophie Desormière has served as a director of the Company since 2012. Ms. Desormiére has served as General Manager Marketing and Sales, Senior Executive Vice-President at Solvay, a Belgium-based company and a developer of specialty chemicals, since November 2010.  Previously, Ms. Desormière spent 17 years in increasingly responsible positions at Valeo, an independent industrial group focused on the design, production and sale of components, integrated systems and modules for the automotive industry, including Research & Development Product Line Director, Branch Marketing Innovation Director, Group Product Marketing Director and Comfort Enhancement Domain Director.  Ms. Desormière is a graduate of the Ecole Nationale Supérieure de Chimie de Paris, the Institut de Formation du Caoutchouc and the Program for Management Development at Harvard Business School.

Ms. Desormière has broad experience in product planning, product development and market analysis. Her background in these areas assists the Company in its development of long-term product strategies. In addition, the skills Ms. Desormière has developed while working at global companies with significant European operations enables her to provide key insight with respect to the Company’s integration of its worldwide operations.

Maurice E.P. Gunderson has served as a director of the Company since 2007. Mr. Gunderson has served as Managing Member of the consulting firm Shingebiss, LLC since 1999. Previously, Mr. Gunderson spent 15 years as the co-founder and Managing Director of Nth Power, a venture capital firm specializing in investments emerging from the global restructuring of the energy industry, and four years at CMEA Capital, a San Francisco based venture capital firm. Mr. Gunderson alsopreviously served as managing director of Runway Capital Management and currently serves as an advisor to Auto Tech Ventures as welland as a director of Contour Energy,Onboard Dynamics, Inc., Runway Capital ManagementMt. Diablo Pilots Association and Radiant Capital Management,Herd It Through the Grapevine Herding Dog Rescue, all privately-held companies. Mr. Gunderson received a Bachelor of Arts degree and Master of Science degree in mechanical engineering from Oregon State University and an M.B.A.a Master’s in Business Administration from Stanford University.

Mr. Gunderson’s background as a venture capitalist enables him to provide key insight with respect to the Company’s investments in new thermoelectric technologies.technologies, industries and products. Mr. Gunderson also has strong leadership and governance skills, as a result of his board service for several energy and materials-related companies. His engineering background gives him a deep understanding of our business and operations.

Oscar B. Marx, III has served as Chairman of the Board since he joined the Board in 1999.  Mr. Marx also served as Interim Chief Executive Officer of the Company from October 2001 through March 2003. He previously served as President and CEO of TMW Enterprises, Inc., a private investment firm located in Troy, Michigan, from 1995 to 2001. In 1994, Mr. Marx was President and Chief Executive Officer of Electro-Wire Products (predecessor to TMW Enterprises, Inc.), a major supplier of electrical distribution systems to the automotive industry. After 32 years of service, Mr. Marx retired from Ford Motor Company in 1994 as Vice-President of its Automotive Components Group (currently known as Visteon Corporation). 

Mr. Marx has a unique perspective and understanding of the Company’s business, given his prior service as our Interim Chief Executive Officer.  In addition, Mr. Marx’s experience as a senior executive at other automotive-related companies, including Ford Motor Company, gives him relevant industry, managerial and strategic planning expertise key to our success.  He also has significant knowledge of the Company based on his 16 years of service on the Board.

Carlos E. MazzorinYvonne Hao has served as a director of the Company since 2011.  Mr. Mazzorin served2016.  She is currently the COO and CFO of PillPack, an on-line pharmaceutical delivery service.  From 2008 to 2016, Ms. Hao held various positions at Bain Capital, including as senioran Operating Partner starting in 2013 and, prior to that, as interim executive officer for various portfolio companies. At Bain, Ms. Hao was responsible for portfolio company performance, working closely with management of Magna International, Inc. from 2002 until his retirement in 2010, and Ford Motor Company from 1972 to 2002. At Magna, Mr. Mazzorinvarious Bain investment companies. She held the position of Presidentinterim CEO or COO at several of these companies, including Gymboree and COO for Magna MirrorsD&M Holdings. Prior to 2008, Ms. Hao worked at Honeywell in various positions starting in 2003 and then President and COO of Magna Electronics. When Mr. Mazzorin concluded his 30 years of service at Ford MotorMcKinsey & Company starting in 2002, he had held the positions of Group Vice-President South America Operations and Asia Pacific Operations and Global Purchasing. Mr. Mazzorin currently serves on the Board of Directors1997. Ms. Hao served as a director of publicly-traded Bombardier Recreational Products where he servesfrom 2011 until 2016. She has also served as a director of privately-held companies, including Gymboree and Consolidated Container Company; she currently remains a director of the latter.  Ms. Hao holds a B.A. from Williams College and a Masters of Philosophy in Development Economics from Cambridge University.

Ms. Hao’s current role as COO and CFO at PillPack, as well has her roles as interim CEO and COO at other companies, provides her with expertise in executive management, strategic planning, operations and brand marketing. The Company has recently entered the medical market, through the acquisition of a medical device manufacturer in April 2016, and Ms. Hao’s experience at PillPack offers a healthcare industry perspective on the AuditBoard.  She also brings a unique institutional investor perspective resulting from her previous positions at Bain Capital, a global private equity and Investmentventure capital investment firm. Finally, Ms. Hao has international business experience as a result of managing a business expansion in Asia, where the Company has a significant presence with customers and Risk Committees.manufacturing plants.

Having over 40 years of experience working in progressively responsible supply chain and operations management positions within the automotive industry, Mr. Mazzorin brings critical supply-chain management skills to the Board.  His experience working for companies with significant international operations enables him to provide critical insight with respect to the Company’s integration of its worldwide operations.

Franz SchererRonald Hundzinski has served as a director of the Company since 2013.  Dr. Scherer2016.  Since 2012, Mr. Hundzinski has served as Chairman of the Supervisory Board of W.E.T. Automotive Systems AG from 2004 until it was merged into Gentherm GmbH in 2014. Prior to such time, he served as Chief Executive Officer of FTE Automotive Group and SIRONA Group.  Dr. Scherer currently serves on the Supervisory Boards of Mannheimer Versicherungs AG and Seeburger AG. He studied economics and business at the Free University Berlin and the London School of Economics, and holds a master’s degree from the University of Texas and a doctorate degree from the Free University Berlin.

Dr. Scherer has a unique perspective and understanding of the Company’s business and history, given his 10 years of service as Chairman of the Supervisory Board of W.E.T. Automotive Systems AG before its acquisition and merger into Gentherm GmbH.  His experience as Chairman gives him a deep understanding of the related business units that generate a majority of our revenues, which has been critical to our worldwide integration efforts.  Based on Dr. Scherer’s experience as the Chief Executive OfficerVice President and Chief Financial Officer of multinational companies,BorgWarner, Inc. (NYSE:BWA). From 2005 to 2012, Mr. Hundzinski served in BorgWarner’s finance department in positions of increasing responsibility, including as Controller from 2010 to 2011 and Treasurer from 2011 to 2012. Mr. Hundzinski holds a B.B.A. in finance from Western Michigan University and an M.B.A. from the University of Colorado.

Mr. Hundzinski’s experience as the Chief Financial Officer of a large, global automotive supplier brings important practical experience to our Board of Directors. He understands the key operational, strategic and financial issues of the Company as an

executive of a public company in the automotive industry, and he can provide unique, real-time advice on critical industry matters. Mr. Hundzinski also has significant finance and accounting expertise and the Board has determined that Dr. Scherer isthis qualifies him as an “audit committee financial expert” in accordance withunder SEC rules. His expertise and knowledge in our largest industry segment brings invaluable insight to our Board of Directors.

Byron T. Shaw II has served as a director of the Company since 2013. Dr. Shaw has been the President of Byron Shaw LLC, a consulting firm providing diligence, strategy and execution advisory services focusing on automotive technology and related services, since 2012. From 2006 to 2012, Dr. Shaw worked at General Motors in various positions, most recently as Managing Director of the Silicon Valley Office for General Motors and General Motors Ventures LLC. From 1998 to 2003, he worked at BMW in various positions, including Principal Technology Engineer and Manager of Advanced Technology. Dr. Shaw currently serves on the Board of Directors or Advisory Board of several privately-held companies, including Smalltech LLC, Project Renovo, Qualia Networks, Auto Tech Ventures, Up Shift Cars and Rotary Wing Engine. Dr. Shaw received Bachelor of Science degrees and a Master of Science in Mechanical Engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering/controls from University of California, Berkeley.

Dr. Shaw’s extensive experience in the automotive industry and in advanced technologies enables him to provide key insight with respect to improvements in our existing products.  His technical expertise has also been critical to the Company’s development of new products for other markets.

Director Independence

The Board believes that there should be at least a majority of independent directors on the Board. The Board recently undertook its annual review of director independence in accordance with the applicable rules of Nasdaq. The independence rules include a series of objective tests, including that the director is not employed by us and has not engaged in various types of business dealings with us. In addition, the Board is required to make a subjective determination as to each independent director that no relationship exists which, in the opinion of the Board, would interfere with the exercise of independent judgment in carrying out the responsibilities of a director.

Consistent with these considerations, the Board has affirmatively determined that Mr. Booth, Mr. Castaing, Ms. Desormière, Mr. Gunderson, Ms. Hao, Mr. Hundzinski and Messrs. Booth, Castaing, Gunderson, Mazzorin, Scherer andDr. Shaw are independent directors under the applicable rules of Nasdaq.  Mr. Coker is employed by us and therefore is not an independent director.  Mr. Marx is not deemed to be an independent director as a result of his prior role as Interim CEO of the annual compensation received by his son as our employee, which is described in further detail under “Related Person Transactions.”Company.

Each member of the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee, the Nominating Committee, the Corporate Governance Committee and the Technology Committee is independent under Nasdaq rules. In addition, the Board has affirmatively determined that the members of the Audit Committee and Compensation Committee qualify as independent in accordance with the additional independence rules established by the SEC and Nasdaq.

BOARD MATTERS

The Board of Directors

General

The Board has general oversight responsibility for our affairs and, in exercising its fiduciary duties, the Board represents and acts on behalf of the shareholders. Although the Board does not have responsibility for our day-to-day management, it stays regularly informed about our business and provides oversight and guidance to our management through periodic meetings and other communications. The Board provides critical oversight in, among other things, our strategic planning process, leadership development and succession planning, risk management, as well as other functions carried out through the Board committees as described below.

Board Leadership

The Company’s current Board leadership is as follows:

The Board believes that, by separating the positions of Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer, the Board can provide better oversight of risks, including credit, liquidity and operational risks, faced by the Company.  Since neither the Chairman of the Board nor the Chief Executive Officer is considered to be independent, theThe Board has designated a Lead Independent Director to act as a liaison both between the Chairman of the Board and the Chief Executive Officer, and between these individuals, on the one hand, and the independent directors, on the other hand.

Board Oversight of Risk Management

The Board oversees the Company’s risk management primarily through the following:

Meetings

The Board and its committees meet throughout the year on a set schedule, and also hold special meetings and act by written consent from time to time as appropriate. The independent directors hold regularly scheduled executive sessions to meet without management present. These executive sessions generally occur around regularly scheduled meetings of the Board. The independent directors also hold additional meetings periodically as deemed necessary or appropriate.

All directors are expected to attend all meetings of the Board and of the Board committees on which they serve. In 2014, theThe Board met fivesix times in 2016, and each director serving in 2016 (as of and from the date he or she joined the Board and applicable committees) attended significantly more than 75% of the aggregate of all meetings of the Board and the committees of which he or she was a member.member in 2016.

The Board has adopted a policy strongly encouraging directors to attend the Company’s annual meeting of shareholders in person or, if necessary, by telephone or similar communication equipment.  All current directors attended the 20142016 annual meeting of shareholders.

Committees of the Board

The Board has delegated various responsibilities and authority to Board committees. Each committee has regularly scheduled meetings and reports on its activities to the full Board. Each committee operates under a written charter approved by the Board, which is reviewed annually by the respective committee and the Board and is available on our website, www.gentherm.com, under the “About Us” tab.  The table below sets forth the current membership for the five Board committees and the number of meetings held for each in 2014.

2016.

Audit Committee

The Audit Committee’s responsibilities include:

The responsibilities and activities of the Committee are described in greater detail in “Audit Committee Report” and “Audit Committee Matters,” as well as in its charter.

The Board has determined that each Audit Committee member has sufficient knowledge in reading and understanding financial statements to serve on the Committee. The Board has further determined that two Committee members, Messrs.Mr. Booth and Scherer,Mr. Hundzinski, qualify as “audit committee financial experts” in accordance with SEC rules. The designation of an “audit committee financial expert” does not impose upon such persons any duties, obligations or liabilities that are greater than those which are generally imposed on each of them as a member of the Committee and the Board, and such designation does not affect the duties, obligations or liabilities of any other member of the Committee or the Board.

Compensation Committee

The Compensation Committee’s responsibilities include:

The Board has determined that the current members of the Compensation Committee qualify as “non-employee directors” as defined in Rule 16b-3 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and “outside directors” under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”).

The Compensation Committee has the sole authority to engage outside advisors and establish the terms of such engagement, including compensatory fees. In connection with any such engagement, the Committee reviews the independence of such outside advisor, based on the factors specified by Nasdaq as well as any other factors it deems appropriate, and any conflicts of interest raised by the work of such outside advisor.

The Compensation Committee may form and delegate its authority to subcommittees as appropriate.  The responsibilities and activities of the Committee are described further in “Compensation Discussion and Analysis,” as well as in its charter.

Role of Management.  As was also the case in prior years, in 2016 the Compensation Committee received significant input from management with respect to the Company’s executive compensation program.  See “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” for further information.

Role of Compensation Consultant. The Compensation Committee has the sole authority to engage outside advisors and establish the terms of such engagement, including compensatory fees. In connection with any such engagement, the Committee reviews the independence of such outside advisor, based on the factors specified by Nasdaq as well as any other factors it deems appropriate, and any conflicts of interest raised by the work of such outside advisor.

The Compensation Committee may form and delegate its authority to subcommittees as appropriate.  The responsibilities and activities of the Committee are described further in “Compensation Discussion and Analysis,” as well as in its charter.

Role of Management.  Similar to prior years, in 2014During 2016, the Compensation Committee engaged a compensation consultant, Mercer, to provide general market and peer group information for all executive officers.  However, this information was not requested and received significant input from managementuntil the last quarter of 2016 and was not used with respect to 2016 compensation, but will be used as part of the Company’s executive compensation program.Committee’s review of 2017 compensation.  See “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” for further information.

Role of Compensation Consultant.  The  During 2016, Mercer was also retained by the Compensation Committee did notfor the purpose of reviewing the compensation of non-employee directors.  See “—Director Compensation – 2016 Compensation Program” for further information.  The Committee’s determination to engage aMercer and approve the terms of such engagement has been made independently from the Company’s management.  When engaged, the Committee works with management to determine Mercer’s responsibilities and direct its work product, although the Committee is responsible for the formal approval of the work plan. Mercer was paid $50,123 for compensation consultant to perform a comprehensive review with respectconsulting to the Company’s 2014Committee in 2016.  The Mercer consultants who performed the compensation consulting at the direction of the Compensation Committee are referred to as the “Compensation Consultants”.

During 2016, based on the determination of management, the Company retained Mercer to provide other services unrelated to executive and non-employee director or executive compensation, programs.  However,which generally consisted of consultation on global employee titles and levels (aggregate fees of $136,800), preparation of standard materials for 2015,employees regarding long term incentive equity grants (aggregate fees of $6,000) and market evaluation and proposed compensation plans for a comprehensive executive compensation review was completeddirect sales force at our subsidiary, Cincinnati Sub-Zero Products, LLC (aggregate fees of $20,000). While neither the Compensation Committee nor the Board approved such other services, the Committee believes that the advice it has received from Mercer has been objective and will be usednot influenced by Mercer’s other relationships with the Company because of the policies and procedures Mercer and the Committee have in determining 2015 compensation.place. These policies and procedures include:

Except as set forth above, the Committee noted there were no potential conflicts of interest raised by the work of its Compensation Consultants.

Nominating Committee

The Nominating Committee’s responsibilities include:

The responsibilities and activities of the Committee are described in greater detail in its charter.

The Nominating Committee reviews and makes recommendations to the Board, from time to time, regarding the appropriate skills and characteristics required of Board members in the context of the current make-up of the Board, the operations of the Company and the long-term interests of shareholders. See “Proposal No. 1—Election of Directors—Specific Qualifications, Attributes, Skills and Experience to be Represented on the Board” and “Proposal No. 1—Election of Directors—Director Background and Qualifications.” The Committee does not have a specific diversity policy underlying its nomination process, although it seeks to ensure the Board includes directors with diverse backgrounds, qualifications, skills and experience relevant to the Company’s business.

Generally, the Nominating Committee will re-nominate incumbent directors who continue to satisfy the Committee’s criteria for membership on the Board, continue to make important contributions to the Board and consent to continue their service on the Board. If a vacancy on the Board occurs or the Board increases in size, the Committee will actively seek individuals that satisfy the Committee’s criteria for membership on the Board and the Committee may rely on multiple sources for identifying and evaluating potential nominees, including referrals from our current directors and management. In 2014, the Committee did not employ a search firm or pay fees to other third parties in connection with identifying or evaluating Board nominee candidates.

The Nominating Committee will consider recommendations from shareholders of director candidates that are sent on a timely basis and otherwise in accordance with our Bylaws and other applicable law and regulations. The Committee will evaluate nominees recommended by shareholders against the same criteria that it uses to evaluate other potential nominees. We did not receive any recommendations for director nominations from shareholders for the 2017 annual meeting.  See “–Shareholder Communication with the Board” and “Additional Information—Requirements for Submission of Shareholder Proposals and Nominations for 20162018 Annual Meeting” for additional information.

Corporate Governance Committee

Subsequent to its formation in February 2015, theThe Corporate Governance Committee’s responsibilities include:

The foregoing matters were handled by the Board in 2014.  See “—Corporate Governance” for further information.Company’s proxy statement and other reports filed with or furnished to the SEC.

The Corporate Governance Committee may form and delegate its authority to subcommittees as appropriate. The responsibilities and activities of the Committee are described in greater detail in its charter.

Technology Committee

The Technology Committee evaluates and advises management with respect to the development and use of technology by the Company for use in its current and potential future products, including the long-term strategic goals of the Company’s research and development initiatives.  The Technology Committee also advises management on its policies and procedures surrounding cyber security.  The responsibilities and activities of the Committee are described in greater detail in its charter.

Corporate Governance

The Board, as well as management, is committed to responsible corporate governance to ensure that we are managed for the benefit of our shareholders. To that end, the Board and management periodically review and update, as appropriate, our corporate governance policies and practices, and, when required, make changes to such policies and practices as are mandated by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the Dodd-Frank Act, other SEC rules and regulations and the Nasdaq listing standards of Nasdaq.standards.

A copy of the Board’s committee charters, the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics and the Corporate Governance Guidelines are available on our website, www.gentherm.com, under the “AboutUs” tab andwill be sent to any shareholder, without charge, upon written request to Corporate Secretary, Gentherm Incorporated, 21680 Haggerty Road, Suite 101, Northville, MI 48167.

Corporate Governance Guidelines

The Board has adopted Corporate Governance Guidelines which are available on our website, www.gentherm.com, under the “About Us” tab.  These guidelines provide a structure within which our directors and management can effectively pursue the Company’s objectives for the benefit of our shareholders. The Corporate Governance Guidelines address, among other things, Board and committee structure, composition and procedures, director responsibilities, compensation and continuing education, as well as shareholder communications with the Board.

Majority Voting Policy.  Included in ourThe Corporate Governance Guidelines isincludes a policy approved by the Board in early-2014 to be followed if any nominee for director receives a greater number of votes “withheld” from his or her election than votes “for” such election.  In such event, the applicable director must promptly tender his or her resignation, conditioned on Board acceptance, following certification of the shareholder vote; provided, however, that this does not apply when the number of individuals nominated for election exceeds the number of directors to be elected, including as a result of a proxy contest, or if any shareholder exercises cumulative voting rights with respect to that particular election.contest. The Nominating Committee will consider the resignation offer and, within 60 days following certification of the shareholder vote, recommend to the Board whether to accept such resignation. The Board will act on the Committee’s recommendation within 90 days following certification of the shareholder vote. The Board will promptly disclose in reasonable detail its decision and rationale regarding the acceptance or rejection of the resignation, as applicable, in a widely disseminated press release, in a filing with the SEC or by other widely disseminated public announcement.  If a director’s resignation is accepted by the Board, the Board may either fill the resulting vacancy or decrease the size of the Board pursuant to our Bylaws.

Annual Performance Evaluations.  The Corporate Governance Committee oversees the annual performance evaluation process.  The Board and its committees conduct self-evaluations at least annually to determine whether the Board and its committees are functioning effectively.  The Board also reviews the Corporate Governance Committee’s periodic recommendations concerning the performance and effectiveness of the Board and its committees.

Code of Conduct

The Board has adopted a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics (“Code of Conduct”), which sets out the basic principles to guide the actions and decisions of our employees, directors and officers, including our principal executive officer, principal financial officer and principal accounting officer. The Code of Conduct addresses, among other things, ethical principles, insider trading, conflicts of interest, compliance with laws and confidentiality. The Code of Conduct is available on our website, www.gentherm.com, under the “About Us” tab. Any amendments to the Code of Conduct, or any waivers that are required to be disclosed by the rules of either the SEC or Nasdaq, will be posted on our website, www.gentherm.com, under the “About Us” tab within four business days of any such amendment or waiver.

Committee Charters

See “—Committees of the Board” for a description of the Board’s delegation of authority and responsibilities to the five standing committees.

Succession Planning

The succession planning process for executive officers is designed to assist the Board in understanding our readiness and the related transition risks for a crisis as well as a planned transition, and to oversee the development of strong leadership quality and executive bench strength. On at least an annual basis, the Board meets with the Chief Executive Officer and in executive session without management to discuss succession planning and strategies to strengthen and supplement the skills and qualifications of internal succession candidates. Key executives have ongoing exposure to the Board to assist in the Board's oversight. Further, the Chief Executive Officer, other executive officers and Human Resources periodically provide the Board with an assessment of key executives for potential succession and discuss potential sources of external candidates.

Shareholder Engagement

The Company and/or Board engages periodically with the Company's shareholders to discuss performance, strategy, governance practices and compensation programs. Each year, the Company interacts with its shareholders through various engagement activities.

Director CompensationDirector Compensation

Non-employee directors of the Board receive both cash and equity compensation. Such compensation is intended to encourage non-employee directors to continue Board service, further align the interests of the Board and shareholders, and attract new non-employee directors with outstanding qualifications. Directors who are employees or officers of the Company do not receive any additional compensation for Board service.

20142016 Compensation Program

TheThere was no change in the compensation program forof non-employee directors for 2016.  Each non-employee board member receives, annually, $100,000 of equity-based compensation in 2014 did not change from 2013.  Nothe form of restricted shares of common stock.  Each non-employee board member also receives, annually, a cash retainer for Board service and Committee service as set forth in the table below.  During 2016, the compensation consultants wereconsulting firm, Mercer, was retained by the Compensation Committee for the purpose of determining or recommendingreviewing the compensation of non-employee directors.  After reviewing the results of such review, the Compensation Committee concluded not to make any changes to the amount or form of director compensation for 2014.compensation.  

The following table sets forth the compensation program for non-employee directors in 2014.2016.

No additional cash compensation is paid to members of the Corporate Governance Committee.  Consistent with historical practice, the annual cash retainers were paid in advance ofimmediately following the 20142016 annual meeting of shareholders.   Consistent with the terms of the Company’s 2013 Equity Incentive Plan (the “2013 Equity Incentive Plan”), on the date of such meeting, each non-employee director received a restricted stock award having a fair market value of approximately $50,000,$100,000, or 1,3232,723 shares.

The restricted stock vests in full on the first anniversary of the grant date.  The restricted stock will be forfeited in the event of termination of service as a non-employee director of the Company prior to the first anniversary of the grant date, subject to acceleration of vesting upon retirement (as defined under the 2013 Equity Incentive Plan), and subject to the Compensation Committee’s right to accelerate the vesting of all or a portion of the restricted stock at any time. During the restricted period, the restricted stock entitles the participant to all of the rights of a shareholder, including the right to vote the shares and the right to receive any dividends thereon. Prior to the end of the restricted period, restricted stock generally may not be sold, assigned, pledged, or otherwise disposed of or hypothecated by participants.

The Company does not provide any perquisites to directors, but does reimburse directors for out-of-pocket expenses incurred in attending Board and committee meetings.

20142016 Compensation Table

The table below sets forth the compensation of each non-employee director in 2014.2016.

────────────────────

At December 31, 2014,2016, each non-employee director had the following number of shares underlying2,723 unvested restricted stock awards and only Mr. Gunderson had unexercised stock option awards (all(granted to him from service as a director of which were fully vested atthe Company in prior years).  At December 31, 2014) and unvested restricted stock awards, respectively:  Mr. Booth, 0 and 1,323; Mr. Castaing, 5,000 and 1,323; Ms. Desormière, 0 and 1,323;2016, Mr. Gunderson 50,000 and 1,323; Mr. Marx, 0 and 1,323; Mr. Mazzorin, 10,000 and 1,323; Dr. Scherer, 0 and 1,323; and Dr. Shaw, 0 and 1,323.had 20,000 unexercised stock option awards.

Director Stock Ownership Requirements

The Board has adopted stock ownership requirements for the directors of the Company to further the alignment of shareholders and directors.  Directors are required to own common stock having a value of at least $100,000,$200,000, computed as of each regularly scheduled Board meeting, based on the average closing price of our common stock as of the last day of the then-most recently completed 12 full calendar months. For purposes of such calculation, the following shares are included: shares held by directors individually, shares held by their spouses or other family members residing in their same households, shares held in trust for their economic benefit or the economic benefit of their spouses or family members residing in their same households, and shares held in a retirement plan or deferred compensation plan for their benefit. The value of “in-the-money” vested stock options is also included, but the value of unvested stock options and unvested restricted stock is not.

TheFor directors who were first appointed or elected less than four years ago, the minimum ownership level must be achieved by the later of (A) December 31, 2015, for any director who held such position as of December 31, 2011, or (B)date which is four years after such individual was first appointed or elected.  The Compensation Committee is responsible for reviewing any non-compliance with the stock ownership requirements and recommending to the Board any actions necessary to remedy such non-compliance.  As of the date hereof, all directors heldsubject to the above minimum ownership levels hold common stock having a value in excess of $100,000.$200,000.

Our Chief Executive Officer is subject to the same stock ownership requirements as our non-employee directors.directors, regardless as to whether our Chief Executive Officer is also a director.  See “Compensation Discussion and Analysis – Other Equity-Related Policies – Executive Stock Ownership Requirements” for further information.

Shareholder Communication with the Board

Shareholders wishing to send communications directly to the Board or to a specific director are asked to send such communications to Corporate Secretary, Gentherm Incorporated, 21680 Haggerty Road, Suite 101, Northville, MI 48167.  Shareholders sending such communications should clearly mark them as intended for delivery to the Board or to a specific director.  Our corporate secretary has been instructed by the Board to screen each communication so received only for the limited purposes of ascertaining (A) whether such communication is indeed from a shareholder and (B) whether such communication relates to the Company.  Our corporate secretary will promptly forward copies of all such communications that pass such limited screening to each director, in the case of

communications to the entire Board, or to the particular director addressee. Delivery by our corporate secretary will be completed by mail, facsimile or e-mail, as our corporate secretary determines appropriate.

If a shareholder’s communication to the Board involves or concerns our corporate secretary, or if a shareholder has another appropriate reason for communicating to the Board through a means other than through our corporate secretary, such shareholder is asked to send such communication to the attention of either the Company’s President or the Chairman of the Board, in either case at the address above.  Any such communication should clearly state that it is a shareholder communication and should clearly state the reason it was not delivered to our corporate secretary for further delivery to the Board.

COMPENSATION DISCUSSIONDISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

This section of the proxy statement explains our compensation philosophy, objectives and design, our compensation-setting process and our executive compensation program components, as well as the decisions made for 20142016 with respect to each of our named executive officers.  This section also provides certain other information as additional context for the “Named Executive Officer Compensation Tables” that follow.

Our named executive officers for 20142016 were Daniel R. Coker, President and Chief Executive Officer; Barry G. Steele, Vice-President of Finance, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer; Frithjof R. Oldorff, President of the Automotive Business Unit; Thomas H. Liedl, formerDarren Schumacher, President of the Gentherm Technologies Business Unit; Darren Schumacher, Vice-President of Product Development; and Kenneth J. Phillips, Vice-President, General Counsel and Secretary (collectively, the “named executive officers” or the “NEOs”).  Messrs. Coker, Steele, Schumacher and Phillips are referred to as our “U.S. NEOs.”  During 2014,In August 2015, Mr. Oldorff relocated from Germany to the United States and became employed by the Company.  Prior to his move, Mr. Liedl were compensatedOldorff was employed by the Company’s German subsidiary, Gentherm GmbH (successor by merger to W.E.T. Automotive Systems AG) (our “German Subsidiary”) and are referred to as our “non-U.S. NEOs.”  Mr. Liedl separated from the Company effective August 31, 2014.  In 2014 theGmbH.  The Company and its German Subsidiary wereare operated as essentially one company, so the compensation arrangementsarrangement of the non-U.S. NEOs wereMr. Oldorff while employed by Gentherm GmbH was substantially similar to those of the U.S. NEOs, except as noted below.  Key differences between such arrangements are explained in greater detail throughout this section of the proxy statement, as well as in the “Named Executive Officer Compensation Tables” that follow:

Executive Compensation and Governance Practices

Say-On-Pay Vote at 20142016 Annual Meeting of Shareholders

The Company’s say-on-pay proposal was approved by approximately 94%93% of the votes cast at the 20142016 annual meeting. Given the high level of shareholder support, the Committee did not revise the Company’s compensation policies and decisions relating to the named executive officers directly as a result of such vote.  The Committee will continue to consider the outcome of shareholder votes and other shareholder feedback in making future compensation decisions for the named executive officers.

Compensation Philosophy, Program Objectives, and Key Features

The compensation program for named executive officers is designed to attract, motivate and retain qualified executives and to provide them incentives to achieve or exceed the Company’s annual operational and financial goals and increase long-term shareholder value.  Under this program, our named executive officers are rewarded for their service to the Company, the achievement of performance goals and the realization of increased shareholder value. We believe our NEO compensation program is structured appropriately to support our business objectives, as well as our culture. The Committee regularly reviews the Company’s NEO compensation program to ensure the fulfillment of our compensation philosophy and goals.

The following table sets forth the primary purpose and key features of each component of our NEO compensation program in 2014.2016.

Process for Making Compensation Determinations

Advisors Utilized in Determination of Executive Compensation

Management.    In determining the compensation of executive officers, the Committee receives significant input from Mr. Coker, who has more than 10 years’ experience in his executive officer role with the Company and has the most involvement in, and knowledge of, the Company’s business goals, strategies and performance, the overall effectiveness of the management team and each person’s individual contribution to the Company’s performance. For each named executive officer, Mr. Coker makes a compensation recommendation, which is reviewed by the Chairman of the Board before it is presented to the Committee.  Mr. Coker does not provide input with respect to his own compensation.  Management also provides the Committee with information regarding the individual’s experience, current performance, potential for advancement and other subjective factors. The Committee retains the discretion to modify the recommendations of Mr. Coker and reviews such recommendations for their reasonableness based on individual and Company performance as well as market information.

The Committee works with management to set the agenda for Committee meetings, and Mr. Coker is invited regularly to attend such meetings. The Committee also meets regularly in executive session to discuss compensation issues generally outside the presence of management, as well as to review the performance and determine the compensation of Mr. Coker.

Third-Party Consultants. The Committee did not engage a compensation consultant to perform a comprehensive executive compensation review with respect to the Company’s 2014 executive compensation program.

Comparability

In evaluating management’s recommendations regarding the compensation of executive officers, the Committee considers the compensation offered by other similarly-situated companies, based on its review of information from various publications, its extensive experience with compensation practices in other businesses, information included in proxy statements of similar companies with comparable market capitalization and comparable revenues, its engagement of compensation consultants in prior years, and its members’ subjective review of the reasonableness and fairness of proposed compensation in light of all relevant circumstances.  The companies which the Committee considers to be comparable for purposes of the above analysis (based on revenue, market capitalization and industry), and for which the Committee has been provided data, include: American Axle & Manufacturing Holdings, Inc., CTS Corporation, Dorman Products, Inc., Drew Industries Incorporated, Gentex Corp., Leggett & Platt, Inc., Littlefuse, Inc., Measurement Specialties, Inc., Methode Electronics, Inc., Modine Manufacturing Company, Remy International, Inc., Shiloh Industries, Inc., Standard Motor Products, Inc. and Stoneridge, Inc.

2014 Compensation Determinations

Base Salary

In 2014, each named executive officer received•    Retains and attracts employees in a competitive market

•    Preserves an annual base salary paidemployee’s commitment during downturns in cash.  The initialour industry and/or equity markets generally

•    Initial base salaries of the U.S. NEOs were negotiated in connection with their hiring and the initial

•    Initial base salariessalary of the non-U.S. NEOs wereMr. Oldorff set forth in their respective Service Agreements.Employment Agreements

The Committee reviews the•    Based on experience, responsibilities, anticipated individual growth, internal equity pay and other subjective factors

•    Subject to annual review and increase

Bonus

•    Motivates and rewards achievement of individual performance and Company financial and operational goals

•    Retains and attracts employees for short term

•    Bonus plan provides for a cash bonus up to a predetermined amount, as a percentage of base salaries of the named executive officers on an annual basis and generally grants salary increases following such reviews.  Historically,salary; bonus potential tied to base salary increases have been between 3-6% and represented a combinationadjustments

•    Initial percentages of a cost of living / inflation adjustment and a merit raise.

Consistent with prior years, in determining base salaries for 2014, the Committee considered an individual’s performance, position, experience and current salary, as well as the Company’s financial resources, the salaries of other executive officers and employees of the Company, and the base salaries paid by similarly-situated companies to individuals having similar job responsibilities as further discussed under “–Process for Making Compensation Determinations – Comparability.”  In determining Mr. Coker’s base salary for 2014, the Committee also considered his demonstration of leadership and abilitybonus purposes are negotiated in connection with hiring; these percentages are subject to manage the Company’s growing business.

For 2014, the Committee concluded that a market rate adjustment in base salaries for the named executive officers of 3% to 6% was appropriateperiodic review based on a review of theexperience, responsibilities, anticipated individual growth, internal equity pay and other subjective factors described above.

Bonus

Prior Bonus Plan.  In prior years, the U.S. NEOs participated in a

•    Earned bonus plan (the “Prior Bonus Plan”), pursuant to which eligible employees earned cash bonuses up to pre-determined amounts (as percentages of their respective base salaries),is based on the Committee’s evaluation of individual performance against individual performance goals approved by the Committee, together with management, in advance of the applicable performance period.  The goals are aligned with overall Company objectives and were broad-ranging, depended on the individual’s position, and included items such as eliminating or reducing specific expenses, completing engineering objectives, developing new business, streamlining operations, completing other specific projects and other similar types of goals. The performance goals were intended to be subjective, or have overriding subjective elements to them, and the Committee had full discretion to determine whether the performance goals had been met.

In addition, in prior years, the non-U.S. NEOs had a separate bonus plan that provided for annual bonuses in amounts dependent on the achievement of the target enterprise value of our German Subsidiary (the “W.E.T. Bonus Plan”).  For further information regarding the W.E.T. Bonus Plan, see “Named Executive Officer Compensation Tables – Summary Compensation Table for 2014 – Narrative Discussion of Summary Compensation Table.”

2014 Bonus Plan.  Following the February 2013 actions that enabled us to operate the Company and its German Subsidiary essentially as one company, the Committee undertook a detailed review of the Prior Bonus Plan.  Following such review, the Committee adopted the 2014 bonus plan (the “2014 Bonus Plan”).  The 2014 Bonus Plan is similar to the Prior Bonus Plan, except that bonus payouts are conditioned on the satisfaction of minimum threshold Company financial metrics (the “Minimum Metrics”).  Regardless of the Committee’s subjective evaluation of individual performance if the Minimum Metrics are not met no bonuses are payable under the 2014 Bonus Plan.  In addition, in 2014 the non-U.S. NEOs participated in the 2014 Bonus Planand conditioned on the same basis as the U.S. NEOs for the first time.  For 2014, the Committee used the Company’s earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, deferred financing cost amortization, transaction expenses, debt retirement expenses, unrealized currency gain or loss and unrealized revaluationsatisfaction of derivatives (“Adjusted EBITDA”) as the sole Minimum Metric and set such metric at $84 million (Adjusted EBITDA for 2013 was $81.5 million).  The Committee considers Adjusted EBITDA as an appropriate measure of the Company’s overall operational performance.

The 2014 Bonus Plan also provides that if certainapplicable threshold Company financial metrics

•    Bonuses are exceeded for the full calendar year (the “Stretch Metrics”), then the total amount of discretionary bonus earned by each participant for the year will be increased ratably by an amount determined by the Committee, up to 20% (the “Formula Performance Adjustment”).  For 2014, the Committee used Adjusted EBITDA as the sole Stretch Metriccomputated and set such metric at $126 million.  Actual Adjusted EBITDA for 2014 was $131.4 million.  For each reporting period in 2014, the Committee determined that each named executive officer achieved most or all of his performance goals and, in several cases, substantially surpassed expectations.  For the calendar year 2014, the Committee approved a Formula Performance Adjustment of 20% for all employees of the Company eligible to receive a bonus, including each named executive officer.

Similar to the Prior Bonus Plan, the 2014 Bonus Plan was divided into two distinct performance periods, the first half of the year (January 1^st through June 30^th), and the second half of the year (July 1^st through December 31^st); however, the Company must bepaid bi-annually based on track (based on estimated projections for the full year) to meet the full year Minimum Metrics for the first half bonus to be paid, and the Formula Performance Adjustment is only computed after the end of the full calendar year and any related adjustment paid with the bonus for the second half of the year.  The achievement or failure to achieve the applicable individual criteria for the first performance period did not impact the achievement or failure to achieve the applicable individual criteria for the second performance period.  If earned, bonuses are paid within two months of the end of the applicable performance period.half-year results

Unless an exception is granted by the Committee, a participant must be employed on the bonus payment date to be eligible to receive a bonus under the 2014 Bonus Plan.  Mr. Liedl was an employee as of the date the first half 2014 bonus payment was made, but had separated from the Company prior to the date of the second half 2014 bonus payment and no exception was granted.

The Committee does not have a formal written policy regarding adjustment of bonus payments if the relevant performance measures or underlying facts upon which they are based are restated or otherwise adjusted in a manner that would materially increase or reduce the size of the incentive payment.

Equity Awards

Equity awards in the form•    Provide incentives to increase long-term shareholder value

•    Retain and attract employees for long term due to vesting requirements

•    Consist of restricted stock and stock options and cash-settled SARs represented a significant portion of NEO compensation in 2014, as the Committee continues to regard increasing long-term shareholder value as senior management’s primary objective.  In February 2014, the Committee granted equity awards to the named executive officers pursuant to the 2013 Equity Incentive Plan.  Consistent with prior years, the size of the awards depended

•    Based on the executive’s position, and current salary, as well as management’s recommendations,and competitiveness in the market and other subjective factors deemed relevant by the Committee. The Committee fixed the exercise price of stock options and the

•    Exercise/ base price of cash-settled SARsoption awards fixed at the fair market value of the underlying sharesour common stock on the grant date such that grantees only benefit to the extent the price of our common stock increases

•    Generally vest pro rata over time.

U.S. NEOs. The U.S. NEOs received restricted stock and stock options in 2014.  The Committee believes restricted stock aligns interests with shareholders in a manner similar to stock options and cash-settled SARs, as described above, but also has underlying value on3-4 years from the grant date that might otherwise be paid in cash as an additional bonus.

In 2014, the restricted stock awards granted vest in three equal annual installments and the stock option awards granted vest in four equal annual installments, in each case commencing on the first anniversary of the date of grant.  See “Named Executive Officer Compensation Tables – Grants of Plan-Based Awards in 2014” for further information.

Non-U.S. NEOs. In 2014, the non-U.S. NEOs received cash-settled SARs in lieu of stock options, and received no full-value shares such as restricted stock or phantom stock, due in part to complex and disadvantageous tax and securities law implications of stock-settled awards for employees of a foreign subsidiary.  The Committee believes cash-settled SARs offer economic benefits, incentivize retention and align interests with shareholders, in a manner comparable to stock-settled awards, such as restricted stock and stock options, because they provide no realizable value in the absence of stock price appreciation after the grant date.

In 2014, cash-settled SARs granted vest in four equal annual installments commencing on the first anniversary of the date of grant.  See “Named Executive Officer Compensation Tables – Grants of Plan-Based Awards in 2014” for further information.

Defined Benefit Plans

U.S. NEOs

During 2008, in recognition of the Company’s need for•    Maintains stability and competencecompetency at the executive level the Committee recommended, and the independent directors at such time subsequently approved, The Executive Nonqualified Defined Benefit Plan of Gentherm Incorporated effective April 1, 2008 (the “U.S. Defined Benefit Plan”).  Mr. Coker has been the only participant in the U.S. Defined Benefit Plan.

The•    U.S. Defined Benefit Plan more fully described in Note 12 to the audited financial statements included in our annual report on Form 10-K(as defined below, for the year ended December 31, 2014, hasMr. Coker only) vested over a six-year vesting period, that began onbeginning April 1, 2011.  Once2011; now fully vested, the U.S. Defined Benefit Planplan provides for 15 annual benefit payments to Mr. Coker each in the amount of $300,000, beginning January 1, 2018.  The Committee has reviewed the benefits offered to presidents and chief executive officers of similarly situated companies, and continues to believe that the U.S. Defined Benefit Plan is fair and reasonable.

The Company has also established a corporate-owned life insurance policy (“COLI”) on the life of Mr. Marx, Chairman of the Board.  The COLI is held by a trust established for payment of benefits under the U.S. Defined Benefit Plan.

Non U.S. NEOs

Our German Subsidiary maintains a defined benefit plan for former and current members of its management team (the “German Defined Benefit Plan”).  The•    German Defined Benefit Plan (as defined below) is expected to be funded, exclusivelyin significant part, by participants’ pre-tax contributionscontributions; current and the earnings on those contributions.  However, the amount of future benefits to which a participant is entitled, while based on the amount of such participant’s contributions to the plan, is subject to minimum future guaranteed returns on those contributions.  As a result, the German Subsidiary records a liability for the amount that projected future benefit payments exceed projected future defined benefit plan assets.  For the year ended December 31, 2014, both Mr. Liedl and Mr. Oldorff both participated in the German Defined Benefit Plan; however, as required by the plan all of the voluntary contributions they made came from their personal funds; furthermore, the projected future benefits on such contributions did not exceed the related projected future assets and so no service cost was recognized.  Mr. Oldorff is expected to be the only NEO participant in the German Defined Benefit Plan in future years.  Mr. Liedl, as well as other former members of the Gentherm Subsidiary’sGmbH management will continue to beare eligible to receive benefits under the German Defined Benefit Plan but are no longer permitted to make additional contributions.participate

The German Defined Benefit Plan is further described in Note 12 to the audited financial statements included in our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014.

Other Benefits and Perquisites

U.S. NEOs

Process for Making Compensation Determinations

Advisors Utilized in Determination of Executive Compensation

Management.    In determining the compensation of executive officers, the Compensation Committee receives significant input from Ms. Erin Ascher, the Company’s Vice-President of Talent Development and Chief Human Resources Officer, and Mr. Coker, who has more than 13 years’ experience in his executive officer role with the Company.  Ms. Ascher and Mr. Coker have the most involvement in, and knowledge of, the Company’s business goals, strategies and performance, the overall effectiveness of the management team and each person’s individual contribution to the Company’s performance. For each named executive officer, Ms. Ascher and Mr. Coker make a compensation recommendation, which is reviewed by the Chairman of the Board and presented to the Committee.  Mr. Coker does not provide input with respect to his own compensation.  Management also provides the Committee with information regarding the individual’s experience, current performance, potential for advancement and other subjective factors. The Committee retains the discretion to modify the recommendations of Mr. Coker and reviews such recommendations for their reasonableness based on individual and Company performance as well as market information.  It is not uncommon for the Committee to modify the initial executive compensation recommendations made by management following due inquiry.

The Compensation Committee works with management to set the agenda for Committee meetings, and Mr. Coker is invited regularly to attend such meetings. The Committee also meets regularly in executive session to discuss compensation issues generally outside the presence of management, as well as to review the performance and determine the compensation of Mr. Coker.

Third-Party Consultants.  During 2016, the Compensation Committee engaged a compensation consultant, Mercer, to provide general market and peer group information for all executive officers.  However, this information was not requested and received until the last quarter of 2016 and was not used with respect to 2016 compensation, but will be used as part of the Committee’s review of 2017 compensation.  

Comparability

In evaluating management’s recommendations regarding the compensation of executive officers, the Compensation Committee considers the compensation offered by other similarly-situated companies, based on its review of information from various publications, its extensive experience with compensation practices in other businesses, information included in proxy statements of similar companies with comparable market capitalization and comparable revenues, its engagement of compensation consultants in prior years (a compensation consultant was engaged by the Compensation Committee as recently as 2015 to do a market survey), and its members’ subjective review of the reasonableness and fairness of proposed compensation in light of all relevant circumstances.  The companies which the Committee considers to be comparable for purposes of the above analysis (based on revenue, market capitalization and industry), and for which the Committee has been provided data, include the following (ticker symbols in parentheses): CTS Corporation (CTS), Dorman Products, Inc. (DORM), Drew Industries Incorporated (DW), Fabrinet (FN), Gentex Corp. (GNTX), Kimball Electronics, Inc. (KE), Littlefuse, Inc. (LFUS), Methode Electronics, Inc. (MEI), Modine Manufacturing Company (MOD), Shiloh Industries, Inc. (SHLO), Standard Motor Products, Inc. (SMP), Stoneridge, Inc. (SRI) and Superior Industries International, Inc. (SUP).

2016 Compensation Determinations

Base Salary

In 2016, each named executive officer received an annual base salary paid in cash.  The initial base salaries of the U.S. NEOs were negotiated in connection with their hiring, and the initial base salary of Mr. Oldorff was set forth in his Employment Agreements.

The Compensation Committee reviews the base salaries of the named executive officers on an annual basis and generally grants salary increases following such reviews.  Historically, base salary increases have been between 3-6% and represented a combination of a cost of living / inflation adjustment and a merit raise.  However, larger base salary increases are considered where market information indicates that an adjustment is appropriate.

Consistent with prior years, in determining base salaries for 2016, the Compensation Committee considered an individual’s performance, position, experience and current salary, as well as the Company’s financial resources, the salaries of other executive officers and employees of the Company, and the base salaries paid by similarly-situated companies to individuals having similar job responsibilities as further discussed under “–Process for Making Compensation Determinations – Comparability.”  In determining Mr. Coker’s base salary for 2016, the Committee also considered his demonstration of leadership and ability to manage the Company’s growing business.

For 2016, the Compensation Committee concluded that a market adjustment in base salaries for several of the NEOs was appropriate based on a review of the factors described above.  The Compensation Committee concluded to increase the base salaries for several executive officers in 2016 to reflect individual performance, additional duties and market levels.

Bonus

2016 Bonus Plan.  The 2016 Bonus Plan was substantially similar to the 2015 Bonus Plan. Under the 2016 Bonus Plan, the NEOs and other eligible employees earned cash bonuses up to pre-determined amounts (as percentages of their respective base salaries), based on the Compensation Committee’s evaluation of individual performance against individual performance goals approved by the Committee, together with management, in advance of the applicable performance period.  The goals are aligned with overall Company objectives and were broad-ranging, depended on the individual’s position, and included items such as eliminating or reducing specific expenses, completing engineering objectives, developing new business, streamlining operations, completing other specific projects and other similar types of goals. The performance goals were intended to be subjective, or have overriding subjective elements to them.  The Committee had full discretion to determine whether the performance goals had been met, except that bonus payouts are conditioned on the satisfaction of minimum threshold Company financial metrics (the “Minimum Metrics”).  Regardless of the Committee’s subjective evaluation of individual performance, if the Minimum Metrics are not met no bonuses are payable under the 2016 Bonus Plan.  For 2016, the Committee used the Company’s earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, deferred financing cost amortization, transaction expenses, debt retirement expenses, unrealized currency gain or loss, unrealized revaluation of derivatives (“Adjusted EBITDA”) as the sole Minimum Metric and set such metric at $144 million (Adjusted EBITDA was $152 million for 2015, $134 million for 2014 and $81.5 million for 2013).  The Committee considers Adjusted EBITDA as an appropriate supplemental measure of the Company’s overall operational performance.

The 2016 Bonus Plan also provides that if certain Company financial metrics are exceeded for the full calendar year (the “Stretch Metrics”), then the total amount of discretionary bonus earned by each participant for the year will be increased ratably by an amount determined by the Compensation Committee, up to 20% (the “Formula Performance Adjustment”).  For 2016, the Committee used Adjusted EBITDA as the sole Stretch Metric and set such metric at $209 million. Actual Adjusted EBITDA for 2016 was $146 million.  

For each reporting period in 2016, the Committee determined that each named executive officer achieved most or all of his performance goals and, in some cases, surpassed expectations.  For the calendar year 2016, the Committee did not approve a Formula Performance Adjustment for the named executive officers or any other employees because actual Adjusted EBITDA did not exceed the Stretch Metrics.

The 2016 Bonus Plan was divided into two distinct performance periods, the first half of the year (January 1^st through June 30^th), and the second half of the year (July 1^st through December 31^st); however, the Company must be on track (based on estimated projections for the full year) to meet the full year Minimum Metrics for the first half bonus to be paid, and the Formula Performance Adjustment is only computed after the end of the full calendar year and any related adjustment paid with the bonus for the second half of the year.  The achievement or failure to achieve the applicable individual criteria for the first performance period did not impact the achievement or failure to achieve the applicable individual criteria for the second performance period.  If earned, bonuses are paid approximately two months of the end of the applicable performance period.

Unless an exception is granted by the Compensation Committee, a participant must be employed on the bonus payment date to be eligible to receive a bonus under the 2016 Bonus Plan.  

For 2016, the Compensation Committee did not have a formal written policy regarding adjustment of bonus payments if the relevant performance measures or underlying facts upon which they are based are restated or otherwise adjusted in a manner that would materially increase or reduce the size of the incentive payment.  Effective January 1, 2017, the Compensation Committee adopted the Gentherm Compensation Clawback Policy.  See “–Other Equity-Related Policies – Clawback Policy” for further information.

Beginning in 2017, bonuses to NEOs and other eligible employees will be governed by the Gentherm Incorporated Performance Bonus Plan (the “New Bonus Plan”).  The New Bonus Plan differs from the 2016 Bonus Plan in the following material ways: (1) the financial performance of the Company is not only used for determining the Minimum Metric and the Stretch Metric, but will be used to modify every bonus payment by either increasing or decreasing such payment based on the Company’s actual financial results as a percentage of the Company financial performance targets and (2) every participant’s overall performance during the period will be ranked on a scale from “unacceptable” to “breakthrough performer” and the bonus payment will be adjusted according to a stated formula.  Otherwise, the New Bonus Plan is substantially similar to the 2016 Bonus Plan.  A copy of the New Bonus Plan was filed as Exhibit 10.2 to the Form 8-K filed by the Company on December 16, 2016.

Equity Awards

Equity awards in the form of restricted stock and stock options represented a significant portion of NEO compensation in 2016, as the Compensation Committee continues to regard increasing long-term shareholder value as senior management’s primary objective.  In February 2016, the Committee granted equity awards to the named executive officers pursuant to the 2013 Equity Incentive Plan.  Consistent with prior years, the size of the awards depended on the executive’s position and current salary, as well as management’s recommendations, competitiveness in the market, and other subjective factors deemed relevant by the Committee. The Committee fixed the exercise price of stock options at the fair market value of the underlying shares on the grant date, such that grantees only benefit to the extent the price of our common stock increases between the grant date and the exercise date.  

All of the NEOs received restricted stock and stock options in 2016.  The Compensation Committee believes restricted stock aligns interests with shareholders in a manner similar to stock options, as described above, but also has underlying value on the grant date that might otherwise be paid in cash as an additional bonus.

In 2016, the restricted stock awards granted vest in three equal annual installments and the stock option awards granted vest in four equal annual installments, in each case commencing on the first anniversary of the date of grant.  See “Named Executive Officer Compensation Tables – Grants of Plan-Based Awards in 2016” for further information.

The Compensation Committee also considers using equity awards to reward unique achievements by the NEOs.  On April 2, 2016 a small amount of restricted stock was awarded to several NEOs in connection with the acquisition of Cincinnati Sub-Zero Products, LLC in special recognition of the efforts of the recipients in connection with such acquisition.  This one-time award of restricted stock vested in full on April 1, 2017.

Defined Benefit Plans

U.S. NEOs

During 2008, in recognition of the Company’s need for stability and competence at the executive level, the Compensation Committee recommended, and the independent directors at such time subsequently approved, The Executive Nonqualified Defined Benefit Plan of Gentherm Incorporated effective April 1, 2008 (the “U.S. Defined Benefit Plan”).  Mr. Coker has been the only participant in the U.S. Defined Benefit Plan.

The U.S. Defined Benefit Plan, more fully described in Note 12 to the audited financial statements included in our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016, had a six-year vesting period that began on April 1, 2011.  Now fully vested, the U.S. Defined Benefit Plan provides for 15 annual benefit payments to Mr. Coker, each in the amount of $300,000, beginning January 1, 2018.  The Committee has reviewed the benefits offered to presidents and chief executive officers of similarly situated companies, and continues to believe that the U.S. Defined Benefit Plan is fair and reasonable.

The Company has also established a corporate-owned life insurance policy (“COLI”) on the life of Mr. Marx, Chairman of the Board.  The COLI is held by a trust established for payment of benefits under the U.S. Defined Benefit Plan.

Mr. Oldorff

Our German Subsidiary maintains a defined benefit plan for former and current members of its management team (the “German Defined Benefit Plan”).  The German Defined Benefit Plan is expected to be funded exclusively by participants’ pre-tax contributions and the earnings on those contributions.  However, the amount of future benefits to which a participant is entitled, while based on the amount of such participant’s contributions to the plan, is subject to minimum future guaranteed returns on those contributions.  As a result, the German Subsidiary records a liability for the amount that projected future benefit payments exceed projected future defined benefit plan assets.  For the year ended December 31, 2016, Mr. Oldorff was eligible to participate in the German Defined Benefit Plan; however, he did not make any voluntary contributions to the German Defined Benefit Plan in 2016.

The German Defined Benefit Plan is further described in Note 12 to the audited financial statements included in our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016.

Other Benefits and Perquisites

Non-U.S. NEOs

Severance and Change in Control Benefits

U.S. NEOs. Other than the U.S. Defined Benefit Plan and the 401(k) plan described above, the Company does not provide or maintain any post-retirement medical benefits, non-qualified deferred compensation plans or retirement or pension plans for U.S. employees, including the U.S. NEOs.  However, certainNEOs, receive lump-sum payments for accumulated vacation time in excess of the Company’s equity compensation plans contemplate acceleration of vesting upon, and exercisability of awards following, a termination of employment.  See “Named Executive Officer Compensation Tables – Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control” for further information.

Non-U.S. NEOs. Other than the German Defined Benefit Plan and the German Defined Contribution Plan described above, the non-U.S. NEOs were not eligible to receive or participate in any post-retirement medical benefits, non-qualified deferred compensation plans or retirement or pension plans.  See “Named Executive Officer Compensation Tables – Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control” for information regarding the potential payments and benefits payable tospecified amounts.  Mr. Oldorff following a termination of employment underreceives vacation pay in accordance with the terms of his Service Agreement and certain of the Company’s equity compensation plans, as well as information regarding the payments and benefits paid to Mr. Liedl following his separation from the Company in 2014.Employment Agreement.

Other Equity-Related Policies

Executive Stock Ownership Requirements

Our Chief Executive Officer is subject to the same stock ownership requirements as our non-employee directors.  Our Chief Executive Officer must own common stock having a value of at least $100,000 by December 31, 2015.  See “Board Matters – Director Compensation – Director Stock Ownership Requirements” for further information.  The other named executive officers are not subject to stock ownership requirements.

Timing and Pricing of Equity Grants

The Committee does not coordinate the timing of equity grants with the release of material non-public information. The Committee usually considers equity awards for executive officers on an annual basis at regularly scheduled meetings of the Committee, which are generally scheduled a year in advance, and for new hires as applicable.

In accordance with the 2013 Equity Incentive Plan, the exercise or base price of stock option or SAR awards is at least 100% of the fair market value of our common stock on the date of grant (which date is not earlier than the date the Committee approves such award).  The Committee is authorized to modify, extend or renew outstanding stock options or SARs or accept the cancellation or surrender of such awards.  However, except in connection with a corporate transaction involving the Company (including, without limitation, any stock dividend, stock split, extraordinary cash dividend, recapitalization, reorganization, merger, consolidation, split-up, spin-off, combination, or exchange of shares), the Committee may not take actions that would constitute a repricing of stock options or SARs without satisfying the applicable shareholder approval requirements of Nasdaq.  In particular, the 2013 Equity Incentive Plan prohibits direct repricings (lowering the exercise price of a stock option or the base price of a SAR) and indirect repricings (cancelling an outstanding stock option or SAR and granting a replacement or substitute stock option or SAR with a lower exercise or base price, or otherwise exchanging such awards for cash, stock options, SARs or other awards).

Policy on Pledging and Hedging Company Securities

In addition to the restrictions set forth in SEC regulations, the Board has adopted a Statement of Policy for Securities Trading by Company Personnel which prohibits the hedging of Company securities and significantly limits any pledging of Company securities.  In particular, the policy prohibits employees, officers and directors from making trades while in possession of material, non-public information.  Specified restricted persons, including our officers and directors, are also prohibited from trading on a short-term basis of less than six months, short sales and derivative trading generally.  In addition, the policy prohibits pledging of Company securities or holding Company securities in a margin account, except in situations and on conditions pre-approved by our Chief Financial Officer.  At a minimum, such person must demonstrate the financial capacity to repay the applicable loan without resort to the margin or pledged securities.  No Company securities beneficially owned by a director or executive officer were pledged or subject to a margin account at any time during 2014.

Tax and Accounting Implications

Deductibility of Executive Compensation

Section 162(m) of the Code provides that annual compensation in excess of $1 million paid to a company’s chief executive officer and the three other highest compensated executive officers (excluding the chief financial officer) is not deductible by the company for federal income tax purposes, subject to specified exemptions (the most significant of which is certain performance-based compensation).  The Committee intends to continue to review the application of Section 162(m) of the Code with respect to any future compensation arrangements considered by the Company. However, to maintain flexibility in compensating the Company’s executive officers to meet a variety of objectives, the Committee reserves the right to compensate Company executes in amounts deemed appropriate, regardless of whether such compensation is deductible for federal income tax purposes.  Section 162(m) of the Code may prevent the Company from deducting a portion of the compensation paid to Mr. Coker, the Company’s President and Chief Executive Officer, in 2014.

Severance and Change in Control Benefits

U.S. NEOs.  Other than the U.S. Defined Benefit Plan and the 401(k) plan described above, the Company does not provide or maintain any post-retirement medical benefits, non-qualified deferred compensation plans or retirement or pension plans for U.S. employees, including the U.S. NEOs.  However, certain of the Company’s equity compensation plans contemplate acceleration of vesting upon, and exercisability of awards following, a termination of employment.  See “Named Executive Officer Compensation Tables – Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control” for further information.

Mr. Oldorff.  Other than the German Defined Benefit Plan and the German Defined Contribution Plan described above, Mr. Oldorff was not eligible to receive or participate in any post-retirement medical benefits, non-qualified deferred compensation plans or retirement or pension plans.  See “Named Executive Officer Compensation Tables – Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control” for information regarding the potential payments and benefits payable to Mr. Oldorff following a termination of employment under the terms of his Employment Agreement and certain of the Company’s equity compensation plans.

Other Equity-Related Policies

Executive Stock Ownership Requirements

Our Chief Executive Officer is subject to the same stock ownership requirements as our non-employee directors.  Our Chief Executive Officer must own common stock having a value of at least $200,000.  See “Board Matters – Director Compensation – Director Stock Ownership Requirements” for further information.  The other named executive officers are not subject to stock ownership requirements. Our Chief Executive Officer was in compliance with the stock ownership requirements at all times during 2016.

Timing and Pricing of Equity Grants

The Compensation Committee does not coordinate the timing of equity grants with the release of material non-public information. The Committee usually considers equity awards for executive officers on an annual basis at regularly scheduled meetings of the Committee, which are generally scheduled a year or more in advance, and for new hires as applicable.

In accordance with the 2013 Equity Incentive Plan, the exercise or base price of stock option or SAR awards is at least 100% of the fair market value of our common stock on the date of grant (which date is not earlier than the date the Compensation Committee approves such award).  The Committee is authorized to modify, extend or renew outstanding stock options or SARs or accept the cancellation or surrender of such awards.  However, except in connection with a corporate transaction involving the Company (including, without limitation, any stock dividend, stock split, extraordinary cash dividend, recapitalization, reorganization, merger, consolidation, split-up, spin-off, combination, or exchange of shares), the Committee may not take actions that would constitute a repricing of stock options or SARs without satisfying the applicable shareholder approval requirements of Nasdaq.  In particular, the 2013 Equity Incentive Plan prohibits direct repricings (lowering the exercise price of a stock option or the base price of a SAR) and indirect repricings (cancelling an outstanding stock option or SAR and granting a replacement or substitute stock option or SAR with a lower exercise or base price, or otherwise exchanging such awards for cash, stock options, SARs or other awards).

Policy on Pledging and Hedging Company Securities

In addition to the restrictions set forth in SEC regulations, the Board has adopted a Statement of Policy for Securities Trading by Company Personnel which prohibits the hedging of Company securities and significantly limits any pledging of Company securities.  In particular, the policy prohibits employees, officers and directors from making trades while in possession of material, non-public information.  Specified restricted persons, including our officers and directors, are also prohibited from trading on a short-term basis of less than six months, short sales and derivative trading generally.  In addition, the policy prohibits pledging of Company securities or holding Company securities in a margin account, except in situations and on conditions pre-approved by our Chief Financial

Officer.  At a minimum, such person must demonstrate the financial capacity to repay the applicable loan without resort to the margin or pledged securities.  No Company securities beneficially owned by a director or executive officer were pledged or subject to a margin account at any time during 2016.

Clawback Policy

The Compensation Committee adopted the Gentherm Incorporated Compensation Clawback Policy (the “Clawback Policy”), effective January 1, 2017.  Under the Clawback Policy, in the event the Company is required to make an accounting restatement to correct an error that is material to its previously issued financial statements under applicable securities laws, and the Compensation Committee has determined that any bonus, retention award, or incentive compensation has, based on the erroneous financial statements, been paid to any executive officer who knowingly or through gross negligence engaged in the activity that caused such restatement to be necessary, or who knowingly or through gross negligence failed to prevent such activity, the Committee shall have the discretion to take such action as it deems necessary to recover the compensation so paid, remedy the misconduct, and prevent its recurrence.  The Clawback Policy gives the Compensation Committee authority to seek reimbursement of bonuses, retention awards, or incentive compensation paid to an affected executive officer, cancellation of any equity awards granted to such officer, and reimbursement of any gains realized by such officer on the exercise of rights attributable to such awards. The amount recoverable in each case is limited to the extent to which such bonus, retention award, or amount of incentive compensation was calculated based upon the achievement of certain financial results that were subsequently reduced due to a restatement.  The recovery period under the Clawback Policy is three full years preceding and including the date the Board concludes, or reasonably should have concluded based on evidence available to it, that the Company’s financial statements contained a material error.  

Tax and Accounting Implications

Deductibility of Executive Compensation

Section 162(m) of the Code provides that annual compensation in excess of $1 million paid to a company’s chief executive officer and the three other highest compensated executive officers (excluding the chief financial officer) is not deductible by the company for federal income tax purposes, subject to specified exemptions (the most significant of which is certain performance-based compensation).  The Committee intends to continue to review the application of Section 162(m) of the Code with respect to any future compensation arrangements considered by the Company. However, to maintain flexibility in compensating the Company’s executive officers to meet a variety of objectives, the Committee reserves the right to compensate Company executes in amounts deemed appropriate, regardless of whether such compensation is deductible for federal income tax purposes.  Section 162(m) of the Code is expected to prevent the Company from deducting a portion of the compensation paid to Mr. Coker, the Company’s President and Chief Executive Officer, in 2016.

Nonqualified Deferred Compensation

Section 409A of the Code provides that amounts deferred under nonqualified deferred compensation arrangements will be included in an employee’s income when vested, as well as be subject to additional taxes, penalties and interest, unless certain requirements are complied with. The Company believes that its compensation arrangements satisfy, or are exempt from, the requirements of Section 409A.

Change in Control Payments

Section 280G of the Code disallows a company’s tax deduction for “excess parachute payments.” For this purpose, parachute payments generally are defined as payments to specified persons that are contingent upon a change in control in an amount equal to or greater than three times the person’s base amount (i.e. the five-year average Form W-2 compensation). The excess parachute payments, which are nondeductible, equal the amount of the parachute payments less the base amount. Additionally, Section 4999 of the Code imposes a 20% excise tax on any person who receives excess parachute payments.

The Company’s equity incentive plans may entitle participants to receive payments in connection with a change in control that may result in excess parachute payments.  The Company does not pay tax gross-ups including with respect to the excise tax imposed on any person who receives excess parachute payments.

COMPENSATION COMMITTEECOMMITTEE REPORT

The Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed the Compensation Discussion and Analysis (CD&A)(“CD&A”) in this proxy statement with management, including Messrs. Coker and Steele. Based on such review and discussion, the Committee recommended to the Board that the CD&A be included in the Company’s annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 20142016 and the proxy statement for the 20152017 annual meeting.

The Compensation Committee

Maurice Gunderson, Chairman

Sophie Desormière

Carlos MazzorinYvonne Hao

COMPENSATION COMMITTEE INTERLOCKS AND INSIDER PARTICIPATION

During 2014,From January 2016 to the 2016 Annual Meeting held on May 26, 2016, the Compensation Committee consisted of Mr. Gunderson, Ms. Desormière and Carlos Mazzorin.  Mr. Mazzorin declined to stand for re-election at the 2016 Annual Meeting.  From the 2016 Annual Meeting until the end of 2016, the Compensation Committee consisted of Messrs. Gunderson and MazzorinMses. Desormière and Ms. Desormière.Hao.  All members of the Compensation Committee during 20142016 were independent directors and none of them is or has been an employee or officer of ours. During 2014,2016, none of our executive officers served on the compensation committee (or equivalent) or the board of directors of another entity whose executive officer(s) served on the Compensation Committee or the Board.

NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICEROFFICER COMPENSATION TABLES

Summary Compensation Table for 20142016

The table below summarizes the total compensation paid or earned by the named executive officers in 2014, 20132016, 2015 and 2012.2014.