FUND MANAGEMENT
The Board of Directors and officers of the Company, their business addresses, principal occupations for at least the past five years and years of birth are listed in the tables below. The Companys Board of Directors (i) provides broad supervision over the affairs of the Company and the Fund and (ii) elects officers who are responsible for the day-to-day operations of the Fund and the execution of policies formulated by the Board of Directors. The first table below provides information about those directors who are deemed not to be interested persons of the Company, as that term is defined in the 1940 Act (
i.e.,
non-interested directors), while the second table below provides information about the Companys interested directors and the Companys officers.
NON-INTERESTED DIRECTORS [TO BE UPDATED]
NAME, YEAR OF BIRTH AND
ADDRESS
|
|
POSITION
HELD WITH
THE COMPANY
|
|
TERM OF
OFFICE AND
LENGTH
OF TIME
SERVED*
|
|
PRINCIPAL OCCUPATION(S) DURING
PAST 5 YEARS
|
|
NUMBER OF
PORTFOLIOS
IN FUND
COMPLEX
OVERSEEN BY
DIRECTOR
|
|
OTHER DIRECTORSHIPS
FOR PUBLIC
COMPANIES AND
OTHER REGISTERED
INVESTMENT
COMPANIES HELD BY
DIRECTOR
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LYNN S. BIRDSONG
(1946)
c/o Hartford Mutual Funds
P.O. Box 2999
Hartford, CT 06104-2999
|
|
Director
|
|
Since 2003
|
|
Mr. Birdsong is a private investor. Mr. Birdsong currently serves as a Director of the Sovereign High Yield Investment Company (4/2010 to current). Mr. Birdsong currently serves as an Independent Director of Nomura Partners Funds, Inc. (formerly, The Japan Fund) (3/2003 to current). From 1979 to 2002, Mr. Birdsong was a Managing Director of Zurich Scudder Investments, an investment management firm. During his employment with Scudder, Mr. Birdsong was an Interested Director of The Japan Fund. Since 1981, Mr. Birdsong has been a partner in Birdsong Company, an advertising specialty firm.
|
|
91
|
|
Mr. Birdsong currently serves as a Director of the Sovereign High Yield Investment Company (4/2010 to current). Mr. Birdsong currently serves as an Independent Director of Nomura Partners Funds, Inc. (formerly The Japan Fund) (3/2003 to current).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ROBERT M. GAVIN
(1940)
c/o Hartford Mutual Funds
P.O. Box 2999
Hartford, CT 06104-2999
|
|
Director and Chairman of the Board
|
|
Director since 2002 Chairman of the Board for the Company since 2004
|
|
Dr. Gavin is an educational consultant. Prior to September 1, 2001, he was President of Cranbrook Education Community and prior to July 1996, he was President of Macalester College, St. Paul, Minnesota.
|
|
91
|
|
None
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DUANE E. HILL
(1945)
c/o Hartford Mutual Funds
P.O. Box 2999
Hartford, CT 06104-2999
|
|
Director
|
|
Since 2001
|
|
Mr. Hill is a Partner of TSG Ventures L.P., a private equity investment company. Mr. Hill is a former partner of TSG Capital Group, a private equity investment firm that served as sponsor and lead investor in leveraged buyouts of middle market companies.
|
|
91
|
|
None
|
30
SANDRA S. JAFFEE
(1941)
c/o Hartford Mutual Funds
P.O. Box 2999
Hartford, CT 06104-2999
|
|
Director
|
|
Since 2005
|
|
Ms. Jaffee is the founder and Chief Executive Officer of a private company, Homeworks Concierge, LLC, which provides residential property management services in Westchester County, New York (January 2012 to present). Ms. Jaffee served as Chairman (2008 to 2009) and Chief Executive Officer of Fortent (formerly Searchspace Group), a leading provider of compliance/regulatory technology to financial institutions from August 2005 to August 2009. She currently serves as a member of the Board of Directors of Broadridge Financial Solutions, as well as a Trustee of Muhlenberg College.
|
|
91
|
|
Ms. Jaffee is a member of the Board of Directors of Broadridge Financial Solutions (11/2010 to current).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WILLIAM P. JOHNSTON
(1944)
c/o Hartford Mutual Funds
P.O. Box 2999
Hartford, CT 06104-2999
|
|
Director
|
|
Since 2005
|
|
In June 2006, Mr. Johnston was appointed as Senior Advisor to The Carlyle Group, a global private equity investment firm. In July 2006, Mr. Johnston was elected to the Board of Directors of MultiPlan, Inc. and served as a Director (July 2006 to August 2010). In August 2007, Mr. Johnston was elected to the Board of Directors of LifeCare Holdings, Inc. In February 2008, Mr. Johnston was elected to the Board of Directors of HCR-ManorCare, Inc. In May 2006, Mr. Johnston was elected to the Supervisory Board of Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA, after its acquisition of Renal Care Group, Inc. in March 2006.
|
|
91
|
|
Mr. Johnston is a Member of the Supervisory Board of Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. (5/2006 to current), LifeCare Holdings, Inc. (8/2007 to current) and HCR-ManorCare, Inc. (2/2008 to current). Mr. Johnston served as a Director of MultiPlan, Inc. (7/2006 8/2010).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PHILLIP O. PETERSON
(1944)
c/o Hartford Mutual Funds
P.O. Box 2999
Hartford, CT 06104-2999
|
|
Director
|
|
Since 2002
|
|
Mr. Peterson is a mutual fund industry consultant. He was a partner of KPMG LLP (an accounting firm) until July 1999. Mr. Peterson joined the William Blair Funds in February 2007 as a member of the Board of Trustees. He also joined the Board of Trustees of Symetra Variable Mutual Funds Trust as a trustee in February 2012.
|
|
91
|
|
Mr. Peterson is a Trustee of the William Blair Funds (2/2007 to current) and Trustee of Symetra Variable Mutual Funds Trust (2/2012 to current).
|
31
LEMMA W. SENBET
(1946)
c/o Hartford Mutual Funds
P.O. Box 2999
Hartford, CT 06104-2999
|
|
Director
|
|
Since 2005
|
|
Dr. Senbet is the William E. Mayer Chair Professor of Finance and Director, Center for Financial Policy, at the University of Maryland, Robert H. Smith School of Business. He was chair of the Finance Department during 1998 to 2006. Previously he was a chaired professor of finance at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Also, he was director of the Fortis Funds from March 2000 to July 2002. Dr. Senbet served the finance profession in various capacities, including as director of the American Finance Association and President of the Western Finance Association. In 2006, Dr. Senbet was inducted Fellow of Financial Management Association International for his career-long distinguished scholarship and professional service.
|
|
91
|
|
None
|
*
Term of Office: Each director may serve until his or her successor is elected and qualifies. Length of time served refers to length of time position has been held with Hartford Series Fund, Inc.
32
OFFICERS AND INTERESTED DIRECTORS
NAME, YEAR OF BIRTH AND
ADDRESS
|
|
POSITION
HELD WITH
THE COMPANY
|
|
TERM OF
OFFICE AND
LENGTH OF
TIME SERVED*
|
|
PRINCIPAL OCCUPATION(S) DURING
PAST 5 YEARS
|
|
NUMBER OF
PORTFOLIOS
IN FUND
COMPLEX
OVERSEEN BY
DIRECTOR
|
|
OTHER DIRECTORSHIPS
HELD BY DIRECTOR
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOWNDES A. SMITH**
(1939)
c/o Hartford Mutual Funds
P.O. Box 2999
Hartford, CT 06104-2999
|
|
Director
|
|
Since 1996
|
|
Mr. Smith served as Vice Chairman of The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. (The Hartford) from February 1997 to January 2002, as President and Chief Executive Officer of Hartford Life, Inc. (HL, Inc.) from February 1997 to January 2002, and as President and Chief Operating Officer of The Hartford Life Insurance Companies from January 1989 to January 2002. Mr. Smith serves as a Director of White Mountains Insurance Group, Ltd., One Beacon Insurance, Symetra Financial and as Managing Director of Whittington Gray Associates.
|
|
91
|
|
Mr. Smith is a Director of White Mountains Insurance Group Ltd. (10/2003 to current); One Beacon Insurance (10/2006 to current); Symetra Financial (8/2007 to current) and Whittington Gray Associates (1/2007 to current).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JAMES E. DAVEY**
(1964)
c/o Hartford Mutual Funds
P.O. Box 2999
Hartford, CT 06104-2999
|
|
President and Chief Executive Officer
|
|
Since 2010
|
|
Mr. Davey serves as Executive Vice President of Hartford Life. Additionally, Mr. Davey serves as President, Chief Executive Officer and Manager of Hartford Investment Financial Services, LLC (HIFSCO) and President, Chief Executive Officer and Manager of Hartford Funds Management Company, LLC (HFMC). Mr. Davey joined The Hartford in 2002.
|
|
N/A
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MICHAEL DRESSEN
(1963)
c/o Hartford Mutual Funds
P.O. Box 2999
Hartford, CT 06104-2999
|
|
AML Compliance Officer
|
|
Since 2011
|
|
Mr. Dressen currently serves as Assistant Vice President of Hartford Life. He also serves as Chief Compliance Officer and AML Compliance Officer of Hartford Administrative Services Company (HASCO) and as Assistant Secretary and Compliance Officer of HIFSCO. Mr. Dressen joined The Hartford in 2005 from State Farm Insurance Companies where he held various positions related to mutual funds, variable products, and property casualty insurance.
|
|
N/A
|
|
N/A
|
33
TAMARA L. FAGELY
(1958)
c/o Hartford Mutual Funds
500 Bielenberg Drive
Woodbury, MN 55125
|
|
Vice President, Controller and Treasurer
|
|
Since 2002
|
|
Ms. Fagely has been a Vice President of HASCO since 1998 and Chief Financial Officer since 2006. Currently, Ms. Fagely is Chief Administrative Officer and Manager of HFMC and a Vice President of Hartford Life. She served as Assistant Vice President of Hartford Life from December 2001 through March 2005. In addition Ms. Fagely is Controller and Chief Financial Officer of HIFSCO.
|
|
N/A
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EDWARD P. MACDONALD
(1967)
c/o Hartford Mutual Funds
P.O. Box 2999
Hartford, CT 06104-2999
|
|
Vice President, Secretary and Chief Legal Officer
|
|
Since 2005
|
|
Mr. Macdonald serves as Vice President of Hartford Life and Chief Legal Officer Mutual Funds, Secretary and Vice President of HIFSCO. Mr. Macdonald also serves as Manager, Vice President, Chief Legal Officer and Secretary of HFMC. He also serves as Secretary and Vice President of HASCO, and Chief Legal Officer, Secretary and Vice President of HL Advisors. Mr. Macdonald joined The Hartford in 2005.
|
|
N/A
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JOSEPH G MELCHER
(1973)
c/o Hartford Mutual Funds
P.O. Box 2999
Hartford, CT 06104-2999
|
|
Vice President and Chief Compliance Officer
|
|
Since 2013
|
|
Mr. Melcher currently serves as Vice President of HFMC. Mr. Melcher joined The Hartford in 2012 from Touchstone Investments, a member of the Western & Southern Financial Group, where he held the position of Vice President and Chief Compliance Officer from 2010 through 2012 and Assistant Vice President, Compliance from 2005 to 2010.
|
|
N/A
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VERNON J. MEYER
(1964)
c/o Hartford Mutual Funds
P.O. Box 2999
Hartford, CT 06104-2999
|
|
Vice President
|
|
Since 2006
|
|
Mr. Meyer serves as Senior Vice President of Hartford Life. He also serves as Senior Vice President of HFMC, HIFSCO and HL Advisors. Mr. Meyer joined The Hartford in 2004.
|
|
N/A
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LAURA S. QUADE
(1969)
c/o Hartford Mutual Funds
P.O. Box 2999
Hartford, CT 06104-2999
|
|
Vice President
|
|
Since 2012
|
|
Ms. Quade currently serves as Assistant Vice President of HASCO and is a Director of Mutual Fund Service Operations. She also serves as Assistant Vice President of HIFSCO and HLIC. Ms. Quade joined The Hartford in 2001 as part of The Hartfords acquisition of Fortis.
|
|
N/A
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ELIZABETH L. SCHROEDER
(1966)
c/o Hartford Mutual Funds
P.O. Box 2999
Hartford, CT 06104-2999
|
|
Vice President
|
|
Since 2010
|
|
Ms. Schroeder currently serves as Assistant Vice President of Hartford Life. Ms. Schroeder joined Hartford Life in 1991. She is also an Assistant Vice President of HFMC, HASCO, HIFSCO and HL Advisors.
|
|
N/A
|
|
N/A
|
34
MARTIN A. SWANSON
(1962)
c/o Hartford Mutual Funds
P.O. Box 2999
Hartford, CT 06104-2999
|
|
Vice President
|
|
Since 2010
|
|
Mr. Swanson is a Vice President of Hartford Life. Mr. Swanson also serves as Vice President/Marketing for HIFSCO. Prior to joining Hartford Life in 1998, Mr. Swanson was a Vice President at PaineWebber, Inc.
|
|
N/A
|
|
N/A
|
*
Term of Office: Each officer and Director may serve until his or her successor is elected and qualifies. Length of time served refers to length of time position has been held with Hartford Series Fund, Inc.
**
Interested person, as defined in the 1940 Act, of the Company because of the persons affiliation with, or equity ownership of, HFMC, Hartford Investment Management or affiliated companies.
All directors and officers of Hartford Series Fund, Inc. also hold corresponding positions with Hartford HLS Series Fund II, Inc., The Hartford Mutual Funds, Inc., The Hartford Mutual Funds II, Inc. and The Hartford Alternative Strategies Fund.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS.
The Company has a Board of Directors. The Board is responsible for oversight of the Fund. The Board elects officers who are responsible for the day to day operations of the Fund. The Board oversees the investment manager and the other principal service providers of the Fund. The Board currently holds six regularly scheduled meetings throughout each year. In addition, the Board may hold special meetings at other times. As described in more detail below, the Board has established five standing committees that assist the Board in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities: the Audit Committee, Compliance Committee, Contracts Committee, Investment Committee and Nominating Committee (collectively, the Committees).
The Board is chaired by an Independent Director. The Independent Chairman (i) presides at Board meetings and participates in the preparation of agendas for the meetings, (ii) acts as a liaison with the Funds officers, investment manager and other directors between meetings, and (iii) coordinates Board activities and functions with the Chairmen of the Committees. The Independent Chairman may also perform such other functions as may be requested by the Board from time to time. The Board has determined that the Boards leadership and committee structure is appropriate because it provides structure for the Board to work effectively with management and service providers and facilitates the exercise of the Boards independent judgment. In addition, the committee structure permits an efficient allocation of responsibility among Directors.
The Board oversees risk as part of its general oversight of the Fund and risk is addressed as part of various Board and Committee activities. The Fund is subject to a number of risks, including investment, compliance, financial, operational and valuation risks. The Funds officers and service providers, which are responsible for the day to day operations of the Fund, implement risk management in their activities. The Board recognizes that it is not possible to identify all of the risks that may affect the Fund, and that it is not possible to develop processes and controls to eliminate all risks and their possible effects. The Audit Committee plays a lead role in receiving reports from management regarding risk assessment and management. In particular, the investment manager has established an internal committee focused on risk assessment and risk management related to the operations of the Fund and the investment manager, and the chairperson of that committee reports to the Audit Committee on a semi-annual basis (or more frequently if appropriate). Other committees also review matters relating to risk. The Compliance Committee assists the Board in overseeing the activities of the Funds CCO, and the CCO provides an annual report to the Compliance Committee and the Board regarding material compliance matters. The Compliance Committee and the Board receive and consider other reports from the CCO throughout the year. The Investment Committee assists the Board in overseeing investment matters. The Investment Committee receives reports from the investment manager relating to investment performance, including information regarding investment risk. The Audit Committee assists the Board in reviewing financial matters, including matters relating to financial reporting risks and valuation risks. The Board may, at any time and in its discretion, change the manner in which it conducts its risk oversight role.
STANDING COMMITTEES.
The Board of Directors has established an Audit Committee, a Compliance Committee, a Contracts Committee, an Investment Committee and a Nominating Committee.
The Audit Committee currently consists of the following non-interested directors: Robert M. Gavin, Sandra S. Jaffee, William P. Johnston and Phillip O. Peterson. The Audit Committee (i) oversees the Funds accounting and financial reporting policies and practices, its internal controls and, as appropriate, the internal controls of certain service providers, (ii) assists the Board of Directors in its oversight of the qualifications, independence and performance of the Funds independent registered public accounting firm; the quality, objectivity and integrity of the Funds financial statements and the independent audit thereof; and the performance of the Funds internal audit function, and (iii) acts as a liaison between the Funds independent registered public accounting firm and the full Board. The Funds independent registered accounting firm reports directly to the Audit Committee, and the Audit Committee regularly reports to the Board of Directors.
The Compliance Committee currently consists of Robert M. Gavin, Sandra S. Jaffee, William P. Johnston Phillip O. Peterson and James E. Davey. The Compliance Committee assists the Board in its oversight of the implementation by the Fund of policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to prevent the Fund from violating the Federal securities laws.
35
The Contracts Committee currently consists of all non-interested directors of the Fund: Lynn S. Birdsong, Robert M. Gavin, Duane E. Hill, Sandra S. Jaffee, William P. Johnston, Phillip O. Peterson and Lemma W. Senbet. The Contracts Committee assists the Board in its consideration and review of Fund contracts and the consideration of strategy-related matters.
The Investment Committee currently consists of Lynn S. Birdsong, Duane E. Hill, Lemma W. Senbet and Lowndes A. Smith. The Investment Committee assists the Board in its oversight of the Funds investment performance and related matters.
The Nominating Committee currently consists of all non-interested directors of the Fund: Lynn S. Birdsong, Robert M. Gavin, Duane E. Hill, Sandra S. Jaffee, William P. Johnston, Phillip O. Peterson and Lemma W. Senbet. The Nominating Committee (i) screens and selects candidates to the Board of Directors and (ii) periodically reviews and evaluates the compensation of the non-interested directors and makes recommendations to the Board of Directors regarding the compensation of, and expense reimbursement policies with respect to, non-interested directors. The Nominating Committee will consider nominees recommended by shareholders for non-interested director positions if a vacancy among the non-interested directors occurs and if the nominee meets the Committees criteria.
During the HLS Funds fiscal year ended December 31, 2012, the above referenced committees of the Company met the following number of times: Audit Committee 6 times, Investment Committee - 6 times, Nominating Committee 1 time, Contracts Committee 9 times and the Compliance Committee 4 times.
All Directors and officers of the Company are also directors and officers of four other registered investment companies in the fund complex, which is comprised of those investment companies for which HFMC serves as investment adviser.
DIRECTOR QUALIFICATIONS.
The governing documents for the Company do not set forth any specific qualifications to serve as a Director. The Charter for the Nominating Committee also does not set forth any specific qualifications, but it does set forth criteria that the Committee should consider as a minimum requirement for consideration as an independent director, including: 15 years of business or academic experience in a management, administrative or other oversight capacity; a college degree or business experience equivalent to a college degree; an ability to invest in the Fund; a person of high ethical standards; and a person able to think through and discuss complicated regulatory and financial issues and arrive at reasonable decisions on these issues on behalf of Fund shareholders.
The Board has concluded, based on each directors experience, qualifications, attributes or skills, on an individual basis and in combination with those of other directors, that each director is qualified to serve as a director for the Fund. Among the attributes and skills common to all directors are the ability to review, evaluate and discuss information and proposals provided to them regarding the Fund, the ability to interact effectively with management and service providers, and the ability to exercise independent business judgment. The Board has considered the actual service of each director in concluding that the director should continue to serve. Each directors ability to perform his or her duties effectively has been attained through the directors education and work experience, as well as service as a director for the HLS Funds and/or other entities. Set forth below is a brief description of the specific experience of each director. Additional details regarding the background of each director is included in the chart earlier in this section.
Lynn S. Birdsong
. Mr. Birdsong has served as a director of the HLS Funds since 2003. He has served as Co-Chairman of the Investment Committee since 2005. Mr. Birdsong served in senior executive and portfolio management positions for investment management firms for more than twenty-five years. He has served as a director of other mutual funds for more than ten years.
Robert M. Gavin
. Dr. Gavin has served as a director of the HLS Funds (and their predecessors) since 1986. He has served as Chairman of the Board of the HLS Funds since 2004. Dr. Gavin has more than twenty-two years of experience in leadership positions in higher education, including serving as president of Macalester College, St. Paul, Minnesota.
Duane E. Hill
. Mr. Hill has served as a director of the HLS Funds since 2001. He has served as the Chairman of the Nominating Committee since 2003. Mr. Hill has more than thirty-five years experience in senior executive positions in the banking, venture capital and private equity industries.
Sandra S. Jaffee
. Ms. Jaffee has served as a director of the HLS Funds since 2005. Ms. Jaffee has more than thirty-five years of experience as a senior executive in the financial services and technology area, including serving as chairman and CEO of a leading provider of compliance/regulatory technology to financial institutions and as president and CEO of the global securities services division of a major financial services company.
William P. Johnston
. Mr. Johnston has served as a director of the HLS Funds since 2005. He has served as Chairman of the Compliance Committee since 2005. Mr. Johnston has more than forty years of experience in senior leadership positions in the health care, investment banking and legal industries. He currently serves as a senior adviser to a global private equity investment firm and serves on other boards. He previously served as managing director and head of investment banking, CEO and vice chairman for an investment bank.
Phillip O. Peterson
. Mr. Peterson has served as a director of the HLS Funds (and their predecessors) since 2000. He has served as the Chairman of the Audit Committee since 2002. Mr. Peterson was a partner of a major accounting firm, providing services to the investment management industry. He has served as an independent president of a mutual fund complex, and he serves on another mutual fund board.
36
Lemma W. Senbet
. Dr. Senbet has served as a director of the HLS Funds (and their predecessors) since 2000. For more than thirty years, Dr. Senbet has served as a professor of finance, including serving as the Director of Center for Financial Policy and as the chair of the finance department at a major university. He has served the finance profession in various capacities, including as a director or officer of finance associations.
Lowndes A. Smith
. Mr. Smith has served as a director of the HLS Funds (and their predecessors) since 1996. He has served as Co-Chairman of the Investment Committee since 2005. Mr. Smith previously served as Vice Chairman of The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. and as President and CEO of Hartford Life Insurance Company. Mr. Smith serves on a variety of other boards.
James E. Davey.
Mr. Davey has served as a director of the Funds since 2012 and President and Chief Executive Officer of the Funds since 2010. Mr. Davey serves as Executive Vice President of HLIC and The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. Additionally, Mr. Davey serves as President, Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer and Manager of HIFSCO and President, Chief Executive Officer and Manager of HFMC. Mr. Davey joined The Hartford in 2002.
The following table discloses the dollar range of equity securities beneficially owned by each director as of December 31, 2012 (i) in the Fund and (ii) on an aggregate basis in any registered investment companies overseen by the director within the same family of investment companies.
NON-INTERESTED DIRECTORS
[TO BE UPDATED]
NAME OF DIRECTOR
|
|
DOLLAR RANGE OF EQUITY SECURITIES
IN THE FUND
|
|
AGGREGATE DOLLAR RANGE
OF EQUITY SECURITIES IN
ALL REGISTERED INVESTMENT
COMPANIES OVERSEEN
BY DIRECTOR IN FAMILY OF
INVESTMENT COMPANIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lynn S. Birdsong
|
|
None
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dr. Robert M. Gavin
|
|
None
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Duane E. Hill
|
|
None
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sandra S. Jaffee
|
|
None
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
William P. Johnston
|
|
None
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phillip O. Peterson
|
|
None
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lemma W. Senbet
|
|
None
|
|
|
37
INTERESTED DIRECTORS
[TO BE UPDATED]
NAME OF DIRECTOR
|
|
DOLLAR RANGE OF EQUITY SECURITIES
IN THE FUND
|
|
AGGREGATE DOLLAR RANGE
OF EQUITY SECURITIES IN
ALL REGISTERED INVESTMENT
COMPANIES OVERSEEN
BY DIRECTOR IN FAMILY OF
INVESTMENT COMPANIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lowndes A. Smith
|
|
None
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James E. Davey
|
|
None
|
|
|
COMPENSATION OF OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS.
The Fund pays a portion of the CCOs compensation, but otherwise does not pay salaries or compensation to any of its officers or directors who are employed by The Hartford. The chart below sets forth the compensation paid by the Company to the following directors for the HLS Funds fiscal year ended December 31, 2012 and certain other information. [TO BE UPDATED]
Name of Person,
Position
|
|
Aggregate
Compensation From
Hartford Series Fund,
Inc.
|
|
Pension Or
Retirement
Benefits
Accrued As
Part of
Hartford Series
Fund, Inc.
Expenses
|
|
Estimated Annual
Benefits Upon
Retirement
|
|
Total Compensation From
Hartford Series Fund, Inc. And
Fund Complex Paid To
Directors*
|
|
Lynn S. Birdsong,
|
|
$
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
$
|
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dr. Robert M. Gavin,
|
|
$
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
$
|
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Duane E. Hill,
|
|
$
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
$
|
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sandra S. Jaffee,
|
|
$
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
$
|
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
William P. Johnston,
|
|
$
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
$
|
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phillip O. Peterson,
|
|
$
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
$
|
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lemma W. Senbet,
|
|
$
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
$
|
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lowndes A. Smith,
|
|
$
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
$
|
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James E. Davey,
|
|
$
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
$
|
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
As of December 31, 2012, [five] registered investment companies in the fund complex paid compensation to the directors.
The Companys Articles of Incorporation provide that the Company to the full extent permitted by Maryland General Corporate Law and the Federal securities laws shall indemnify the directors and officers of the Company. The Articles of Incorporation do not authorize the Company to indemnify any director or officer against any liability to which he or she would otherwise be subject by reason of or for willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard of such persons duties.
As of [March 31, 2013], the officers and directors of the Company as a group beneficially owned less than 1% of the outstanding shares of the Fund.
38
INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS
The Company, on behalf of the Fund, has entered into an investment management agreement with HFMC. The agreement provides that HFMC, subject to the supervision and approval of the Companys Board of Directors, is responsible for the management of the Fund. HFMC is responsible for investment management supervision of all HLS Funds. The investment management agreement does not require HFMC to bear the costs of the Funds transfer agent, registrar and dividend disbursing agent. In addition, Hartford Life provides administrative services to the Fund, including personnel, services, equipment and facilities and office space for proper operation of the Fund. Administrative services provided by Hartford Life to the Fund are covered by the management fee paid by the Fund to HFMC under the investment management agreement. Although Hartford Life, or its affiliates, have agreed to arrange for the provision of additional services necessary for the proper operation of the Fund, the Fund pays for these services directly.
HFMC has entered into an investment sub-advisory agreement with Hartford Investment Management with respect to the Fund. Under the investment sub-advisory agreement, Hartford Investment Management, subject to the general supervision of the Board of Directors and HFMC, is responsible for (among other things) the day-to-day investment and reinvestment of the assets of the Fund and furnishing the Fund with advice and recommendations with respect to investments and the purchase and sale of appropriate securities for the Fund.
The Fund relies on an exemptive order from the SEC under which it uses a Manager of Managers structure. HFMC has responsibility, subject to oversight by the Board of Directors, to oversee the sub-adviser and recommend its hiring, termination and replacement. The exemptive order permits HFMC, with the approval of the Board of Directors and without obtaining approval from the Funds shareholders (or, as applicable, contract holders), to appoint a new sub-adviser not affiliated with HFMC. Within 90 days after hiring any new sub-adviser, affected shareholders/contract holders will receive information about the new sub-advisory relationship.
The specific conditions of the exemptive order are as follows:
1.
Before the Fund may rely on the exemptive order, the operation of the Fund under a Manager of Managers structure must be approved by a majority of the outstanding voting securities.
2.
The Fund must disclose in its prospectus the existence, substance and effect of the exemptive order. In addition, the Fund must hold itself out to the public as employing the Manager of Managers structure. The prospectus will prominently disclose that HFMC has ultimate responsibility (subject to oversight by the Board of Directors) to oversee any sub-advisers and recommend their hiring, termination and replacement.
3.
Within ninety (90) days of the hiring of any new sub-adviser, the shareholders/contract holders participating in the Fund will be furnished all information about the new sub-adviser that would be included in a proxy statement, except as modified by the order to permit aggregate fee disclosure. This information will include aggregate fee disclosure and any change in such disclosure caused by the addition of a new sub-adviser. HFMC will meet this condition by providing shareholders/contract holders with an information statement meeting the requirements of Regulation 14C, Schedule 14C, and Item 22 of Schedule 14A under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the 1934 Act), except as modified by the order to permit aggregate fee disclosure.
4.
HFMC will not enter into a sub-advisory agreement with any affiliated sub-adviser without that sub-advisory agreement, including the compensation to be paid thereunder, being approved by shareholders/contract holders.
5.
At all times, a majority of the Board of Directors of the Fund will be directors who are not interested persons, as that term is defined in Section 2(a)(19) of the 1940 Act, of the Company (Independent Directors), and the nomination of new or additional Independent Directors will be at the discretion of the then-existing Independent Directors.
6.
When a sub-adviser change is proposed for the Fund at a time when it has an affiliated sub-adviser, the Board of Directors, including a majority of the Independent Directors, will make a separate finding, reflected in the Board of Directors minutes, that the change is in the best interests of the Fund and the shareholders/contract holders participating in the Fund and does not involve a conflict of interest from which HFMC or the affiliated sub-adviser derives an inappropriate advantage.
7.
HFMC will provide general management services to the Fund, including overall supervisory responsibility for the general management and investment of the Funds investment portfolio, and, subject to review and approval by the Board of Directors, will: (a) set the Funds overall investment strategies; (b) evaluate, select and recommend sub-advisers to manage all or a part of the Funds assets; (c) allocate and, when appropriate, reallocate the Funds assets among multiple sub-advisers; (d) monitor and evaluate the investment performance of sub-advisers; and (e) implement procedures reasonably designed to ensure that the sub-advisers comply with the Funds investment objective, policies and restrictions.
8.
No director or officer of the Fund or directors or officers of HFMC will own directly or indirectly (other than through a pooled investment vehicle that is not controlled by such person) any interest in any sub-adviser except for (i) ownership of interests in HFMC or any entity that controls, is controlled by or is under common control with HFMC; or (ii) ownership
39
of less than 1% of the outstanding securities of any class of equity or debt of a publicly-traded company that is either a sub-adviser or any entity that controls, is controlled by or is under common control with a sub-adviser.
9.
The Fund will include in its registration statement the aggregate fee disclosure.
10.
Independent counsel knowledgeable about the 1940 Act and the duties of Independent Directors will be engaged to represent the Independent Directors of the Fund. The selection of such counsel will be within the discretion of the then-existing Independent Directors.
11.
HFMC will provide the Board of Directors, no less often than quarterly, with information about HFMC profitability on a per-Fund basis. Such information will reflect the impact on profitability of the hiring or termination of any sub-adviser during the applicable quarter.
12.
When a sub-adviser is hired or terminated, HFMC will provide the Board of Directors with information showing the expected impact on HFMC profitability.
As provided by the investment management agreement, the Fund pays a monthly management fee to HFMC (which covers, in addition to investment management services, certain administrative services, which are provided by Hartford Life). The fee is accrued daily and paid monthly, equal on an annual basis to a stated percentage of the Funds average daily net assets. HFMC (not the Fund) pays the sub-advisory fees to the sub-adviser.
MANAGEMENT FEE
The Fund pays a monthly management fee to HFMC based on a stated percentage of the Funds average daily net asset value as follows:
Average Daily Net Assets
|
|
Annual Rate
|
|
First $500 million
|
|
0.60
|
%
|
Next $500 million
|
|
0.55
|
%
|
Next $4 billion
|
|
0.50
|
%
|
Next $5 billion
|
|
0.48
|
%
|
Amount Over $10 billion
|
|
0.47
|
%
|
ADVISORY FEE PAYMENT HISTORY
The following chart shows, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012 and for the period from June 6, 2011 through December 31, 2011, (i) the amount of advisory fees paid by the Fund to HL Investment Advisors, LLC (HL Advisors), the HLS Funds investment manager through December 31, 2012; and (ii) the aggregate amount of sub-advisory fees, if any, paid by HL Advisors to any sub-advisers with which HL Advisors is affiliated (Affiliated Managers). No fees were paid to any sub-advisers with which HL Advisors is not affiliated. The fees paid to Affiliated Managers are shown both in dollars and as a percentage of the Funds average daily net assets during the applicable period.
No advisory fees were paid to HFMC nor were any sub-advisory fees paid by HFMC for any of the past three fiscal years.
[TO BE UPDATED]
Gross Fees
Payable to
HL Advisors
2012
|
|
HL Advisors
Advisory Fee
Waiver
2012
|
|
Net Fees
Paid to
HL Advisors
2012
|
|
Net
Aggregate
Subadvisory
Fees Paid to
Affiliated
Managers
(at cost)
2012
|
|
% Net
Aggregate
Subadvisory
Fees Paid to
Affiliated
Managers
(at cost)
2012
|
|
$
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Fees
Payable to
HL Advisors
2011
|
|
HL Advisors
Advisory Fee
Waiver
2011
|
|
Net Fees
Paid to
HL Advisors
2011
|
|
Net
Aggregate
Subadvisory
Fees Paid to
Affiliated
Managers
(at cost)
2011
|
|
% Net
Aggregate
Subadvisory
Fees Paid to
Affiliated
Managers
(at cost)
2011
|
|
$
|
255,599
|
|
$
|
|
|
$
|
255,599
|
|
$
|
33,000
|
|
0.04
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40
Pursuant to the investment management agreement and investment sub-advisory agreement, neither HFMC nor the sub-adviser is liable to the Fund or its shareholders for an error of judgment or mistake of law or for a loss suffered by the Fund in connection with the matters to which their respective agreements relate, except a loss resulting from willful misfeasance, bad faith or gross negligence (willful misfeasance, bad faith, or negligence with respect to Hartford Investment Management and, while Hartford Investment Management serves as sub-adviser to the Fund, HFMC) in the performance of their duties or from their reckless disregard of the obligations and duties under the applicable agreement. The sub-adviser has agreed to indemnify HFMC to the fullest extent permitted by law against any and all loss, damage, judgment, fine, or award paid in settlement and attorneys fees incurred by HFMC, which result in whole or in part from the sub-advisers willful misfeasance, bad faith, negligence or reckless disregard of its obligations and duties as specifically set forth in the sub-advisory agreement.
HFMC, whose principal business address is at 100 Matsonford Road Radnor, PA ,19087 was organized in 2012. As of December 31, 2012, HFMC had approximately $91.4 billion in assets under management.
Hartford Investment Management is located at 55 Farmington Avenue, Hartford, Connecticut 06105, was organized in 1996 and is a wholly owned subsidiary of The Hartford. Hartford Investment Management is a professional money management firm that provides services to investment companies, employee benefit plans, its affiliated insurance companies and other institutional accounts. As of December 31, 2012, Hartford Investment Management had investment management authority over approximately $144.1 billion in assets.
HFMC, and its affiliates, may make payments from time to time from their own resources, which may include the management fees paid by the Fund, to compensate broker dealers, financial institutions, and other persons for providing distribution assistance and administrative services and to otherwise indirectly promote the sale of shares of the Fund by promoting the sale of variable contracts including paying for the preparation, printing and distribution of prospectuses and sales literature or other promotional activities.
41
PORTFOLIO MANAGERS
Other Accounts Managed by the Funds Portfolio Managers
The following table lists the number and types of other accounts managed by the Funds portfolio managers and assets under management in those accounts as of December 31, 2012: [TO BE UPDATED]
PORTFOLIO MANAGER
|
|
REGISTERED
INVESTMENT
COMPANY
ACCOUNTS
|
|
ASSETS
MANAGED
(in
millions)
|
|
POOLED
ACCOUNTS
|
|
ASSETS
MANAGED
(in millions)
|
|
OTHER
ACCOUNTS
|
|
ASSETS
MANAGED
(in millions)
|
|
Paul Bukowski
|
|
(1
|
)
|
$
|
|
|
0
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
James Ong
|
|
0
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
0
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Conflicts of Interest between the Fund and Other Accounts
In managing other portfolios (including affiliated accounts), certain potential conflicts of interest may arise. Portfolio managers, including assistant portfolio managers, at Hartford Investment Management manage multiple portfolios for multiple clients. These accounts may include mutual funds, separate accounts (assets managed on behalf of institutions such as pension funds, insurance companies, foundations), commingled trust accounts, and other types of funds. The portfolios managed by portfolio managers may have investment objectives, strategies and risk profiles that differ from those of the Fund. Portfolio managers make investment decisions for each portfolio, including the Fund, based on the investment objectives, policies, practices and other relevant investment considerations applicable to that portfolio. Consequently, the portfolio managers may purchase securities for one portfolio and not another portfolio. Securities purchased in one portfolio may perform better than the securities purchased for another portfolio, and vice versa. A portfolio manager or other investment professional at Hartford Investment Management may place transactions on behalf of other accounts that are directly or indirectly contrary to investment decisions made on behalf of the Fund, or make investment decisions that are similar to those made for the Fund, both of which have the potential to adversely impact the Fund depending on market conditions. In addition, some of these portfolios have fee structures that are or have the potential to be higher, in some cases significantly higher, than the fees paid by the Fund to Hartford Investment Management. Because a portfolio managers compensation is affected by revenues earned by Hartford Investment Management, the incentives associated with the Fund may be significantly higher or lower than those associated with other accounts managed by a given portfolio manager.
Hartford Investment Managements goal is to provide high quality investment services to all of its clients, while meeting its fiduciary obligation to treat all clients fairly. Hartford Investment Management has adopted and implemented policies and procedures, including brokerage and trade allocation policies and procedures, that it believes address the conflicts associated with managing multiple accounts for multiple clients. In addition, Hartford Investment Management monitors a variety of areas, including compliance with the Funds primary guidelines, the allocation of securities, and compliance with Hartford Investment Managements Code of Ethics. Furthermore, senior investment and business personnel at Hartford Investment Management periodically review the performance of Hartford Investment Managements portfolio managers. Although Hartford Investment Management does not track the time a portfolio manager spends on a single portfolio, Hartford Investment Management does periodically assess whether a portfolio manager has adequate time and resources to effectively manage the portfolio managers overall book of business.
Material conflicts of interest may arise when allocating and/or aggregating trades. Hartford Investment Management may aggregate into a single trade order several individual contemporaneous client trade orders for a single security, absent specific client directions to the contrary. It is the policy of Hartford Investment Management that when a decision is made to aggregate transactions on behalf of more than one account (including the Fund or other accounts over which it has discretionary authority), such transactions will be allocated to all participating client accounts in a fair and equitable manner in accordance with Hartford Investment Managements trade allocation policy. The trade allocation policy is described in Hartford Investment Managements Form ADV. Hartford Investment Managements compliance unit monitors block transactions to assure adherence to the trade allocation policy.
Compensation of the Funds Portfolio Managers
Hartford Investment Managements portfolio managers are generally responsible for multiple accounts with similar investment strategies. Portfolio managers are compensated on the performance of the aggregate group of similar accounts rather than for a specific fund.
The compensation package for portfolio managers consists of three components, which are fixed base pay, annual incentive and long-term incentive. The base pay program provides a level of base pay that is competitive with the marketplace and reflects a portfolio managers contribution to Hartford Investment Managements success.
42
The annual incentive plan provides cash bonuses dependent on both Hartford Investment Managements overall performance and individual contributions. A portion of the bonus pool is determined based on the aggregate portfolio gross performance results over three years relative to peer groups and benchmarks, and the remaining portion is based on a variety of other factors, such as overall achievements relative to targets.
Bonuses for portfolio managers vary depending on the scope of accountability and experience level of the individual portfolio manager. An individuals award is based upon qualitative and quantitative factors including the relative performance of their assigned portfolios compared to a peer group and benchmark. With respect to the Fund, three benchmarks are used to measure the performance of the portfolio managers: the Delta target of the Portfolio Diversifier Index (used to measure the performance of the overall portfolio and of the Derivative Sleeve); the Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index (used to measure the performance of the Bond Sleeve); and the S&P 500 Index (used to measure the performance of the Equity Sleeve). Performance of the Derivative Sleeve will be measured for consistency with the Portfolio Diversifier Index on a rolling 200-day basis. Performance of the overall portfolio, the Bond Sleeve and the Equity Sleeve will be measured for consistency with the relevant index on a trailing three-year basis. Individual performance is dollar weighted (based on assets under management). Qualitative factors such as leadership, teamwork and overall contribution made during the year are also considered.
The long-term incentive plan provides an opportunity for portfolio managers and other key contributors to Hartford Investment Management to be rewarded in the future based on the performance of Hartford Investment Management. A designated portion of Hartford Investment Managements net operating income will be allocated to long-term incentive awards each year. The size of actual individual awards will vary greatly. The awards granted in 2008 and prior years will vest over three years for most participants and five years for Hartford Investment Managements Managing Directors and will be paid in cash at the end of the vesting period. The awards granted in 2009 and following years will vest over three years for all participants and will be paid in a combination of cash and restricted units whose value tracks the market price of shares of The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. at the end of the vesting period.
All portfolio managers are eligible to participate in The Hartfords standard employee health and welfare programs, including retirement.
Equity Securities Beneficially Owned by the Funds Portfolio Managers [TO BE UPDATED]
As of December 31, 2012, the portfolio managers did not own any shares of the Fund.
PORTFOLIO TRANSACTIONS AND BROKERAGE
The Company has no obligation to deal with any dealer or group of dealers in the execution of transactions in portfolio securities. Subject to any policy established by the Companys Board of Directors and HFMC, the sub-adviser is primarily responsible for the investment decisions of the Fund and the placing of its portfolio transactions. In placing brokerage orders, it is the policy of the Fund to obtain the most favorable net results, taking into account various factors, including price, dealer spread or commission, if any, size of the transaction and difficulty of execution. While the sub-adviser generally seeks reasonably competitive spreads or commissions, the Fund does not necessarily pay the lowest possible spread or commission. HFMC may instruct the sub-adviser to direct certain brokerage transactions, using best efforts, subject to obtaining best execution, to broker/dealers in connection with a commission recapture program used to defray fund expenses for the Fund.
The sub-adviser generally deals directly with the dealers who make a market in the securities involved (unless better prices and execution are available elsewhere) if the securities are traded primarily in the over-the-counter market. Such dealers usually act as principals for their own account. On occasion, securities may be purchased directly from the issuer. In addition, the sub-adviser may effect certain riskless principal transactions through certain dealers in the over-the-counter market under which commissions are paid on such transactions. Bonds and money market securities are generally traded on a net basis and do not normally involve either brokerage commissions or transfer taxes.
While the sub-adviser seeks to obtain the most favorable net results in effecting transactions in the Funds portfolio securities, broker-dealers who provide investment research to the sub-adviser may receive orders for transactions from the sub-adviser. Such research services ordinarily consist of assessments and analyses of or affecting the business or prospects of a company, industry, economic sector or financial market. To the extent consistent with Section 28(e) of the 1934 Act, the sub-adviser may cause the Fund to pay a broker-dealer that provides brokerage and research services (as defined in the 1934 Act) to the sub-adviser an amount in respect of securities transactions for the Fund in excess of the amount that another broker-dealer would have charged in respect of that transaction. Information so received is in addition to and not in lieu of the services required that the sub-adviser must perform under the investment sub-advisory agreement. In circumstances where two or more broker-dealers are equally capable of providing best execution, the sub-adviser may, but is under no obligation to, choose the broker-dealer that provides superior research or analysis as determined by the sub-adviser in its sole discretion. The management fee paid by the Fund is not reduced because the sub-adviser, or its affiliates, receives these services even though it might otherwise be required to purchase some of these services for cash. Some of these services are of value to the sub-adviser, or its affiliates, in advising various of its clients (including the Fund), although not all of these services are necessarily useful and of value in managing the Fund.
43
To the extent that accounts managed by the sub-adviser are simultaneously engaged in the purchase of the same security as the Fund then, as authorized by the Companys Board of Directors, available securities may be allocated to the Fund and another client account and may be averaged as to price in a manner determined by the sub-adviser to be fair and equitable. Such allocation and pricing may affect the amount of brokerage commissions paid by the Fund. In some cases, this system might adversely affect the price paid by the Fund (for example, during periods of rapidly rising or falling interest rates) or limit the size of the position obtainable for the Fund (for example, in the case of a small issue).
Accounts managed by the sub-adviser (or its affiliates) may hold securities held by the Fund. Because of different investment objectives or other factors, a particular security may be purchased by the sub-adviser for one or more clients when one or more other clients are selling the same security.
Hartford Investment Management has determined that at present it will utilize soft dollars to obtain only: (i) brokerage services; (ii) research created and provided by a broker-dealer involved in effecting a trade (i.e., research provided by a full service broker-dealer, or provided by a broker-dealer to which a portion of a trade is directed for the purpose of obtaining access to the research, in either case on a bundled basis); and (iii) access to management personnel. Hartford Investment Management will not at present utilize soft dollars to obtain research from parties who have no role in effecting a trade.
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012, the Fund paid brokerage commissions of $ .
The following table identifies the Funds regular brokers or dealers (as defined under Rule 10b-1 of the 1940 Act) whose securities the Fund has acquired during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012 and the value of the Funds aggregate holdings of each such issuer as of December 31, 2012. [TO BE UPDATED]
Regular Broker or Dealer
|
|
Aggregate
Value(in
Thousands)
|
|
Banc of America Securities LLC
|
|
$
|
|
|
Barclay Investments, Inc.
|
|
$
|
|
|
Citigroup Global Markets, Inc.
|
|
$
|
|
|
Credit Suisse Capital LLC
|
|
$
|
|
|
Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc.
|
|
$
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs & Co.
|
|
$
|
|
|
HSBC Securities, Inc.
|
|
$
|
|
|
JP Morgan Securities, Inc.
|
|
$
|
|
|
Lehman Brothers, Inc.
|
|
$
|
|
|
Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc.
|
|
$
|
|
|
Prudential Securities, Inc.
|
|
$
|
|
|
RBC Capital Markets
|
|
$
|
|
|
RBS Greenwich Capital Markets
|
|
$
|
|
|
State Street Global Markets LLC
|
|
$
|
|
|
UBS Securities LLC
|
|
$
|
|
|
Wachovia Securities LLC
|
|
$
|
|
|
Wells Fargo & Co.
|
|
$
|
|
|
FUND EXPENSES
The Fund pays its own expenses including, without limitation: (1) expenses of maintaining the Fund and continuing its existence; (2) registration of the Fund under the 1940 Act; (3) auditing, accounting and legal expenses; (4) taxes and interest; (5) governmental fees; (6) expenses of issue, sale, repurchase and redemption of Fund shares; (7) expenses of registering and qualifying the Fund and its shares under federal and state securities laws and of preparing and printing prospectuses for such purposes and for distributing the same to shareholders and investors, and fees and expenses of registering and maintaining registrations of the Fund and of the Funds principal underwriter, if any, as broker-dealer or agent under state securities laws; (8) expenses of reports and notices to shareholders and of meetings of shareholders and proxy solicitations thereof; (9) expenses of reports to governmental officers and commissions; (10) insurance expenses; (11) fees, expenses and disbursements of custodians for all services to the Fund; (12) fees, expenses and disbursements of transfer agents, dividend disbursing agents, shareholder servicing agents and registrars for all services to the Fund; (13) expenses for servicing shareholder accounts; (14) any direct charges to shareholders approved by the directors of the Fund; (15) compensation and expenses of directors of the Fund, other than those who are also officers of The Hartford; and (16) such nonrecurring items as may arise, including expenses incurred in connection with litigation, proceedings and claims and the obligation of the Fund to indemnify its directors and officers with respect thereto.
FUND ADMINISTRATION
The management fee paid by the Fund to HFMC covers, in addition to investment advisory services, certain administrative services that are provided to the Fund. Pursuant to an agreement between HFMC and Hartford Life (an affiliate of HFMC), Hartford Life manages the business affairs of the Fund and provides administrative personnel, services, equipment
44
and facilities and office space for the proper operation of the Fund. In return for these administrative services, HFMC pays Hartford Life a monthly fee at the annual rate of 0.25% of the average daily net assets of the Fund. This fee is paid out of the management fee and not by the Fund.
HFMC also provides fund accounting services to the Fund pursuant to a fund accounting agreement by and between Hartford Series Fund, Inc., on behalf of the Fund, and HFMC, dated January 1, 2013. Such fund accounting services include, but are not limited to: (i) daily pricing of portfolio securities; (ii) computation of the net asset value and the net income of the Fund in accordance with the Funds prospectus and statement of additional information; (iii) calculation of dividend and capital gain distributions, if any; (iv) calculation of yields on the Fund and all classes thereof, as applicable; (v) preparation of various reports; and (vi) such other similar services with respect to the Fund as may be reasonably requested by the Fund. HFMC is compensated for such fund accounting services at a competitive market rate.
In consideration of services rendered and expenses assumed pursuant to this agreement, the Fund pays HFMC a fee calculated at the following annual rate based on the Funds aggregate net assets shown below.
Average Daily Net Assets
|
|
Annual Fee
|
|
First $5 billion
|
|
0.018
|
%
|
Next $5 billion
|
|
0.016
|
%
|
Amount Over $10 billion
|
|
0.014
|
%
|
Prior to January 1, 2013, fund accounting services were provided by Hartford Life. For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012, the Fund paid $ to Hartford Life for such fund accounting services.
DISTRIBUTION ARRANGEMENTS
The Funds shares are sold by Hartford Investment Financial Services, LLC (the distributor) on a continuous basis to separate accounts sponsored by The Hartford and its affiliates. The Funds shares may also be sold by the distributor on a continuous basis to separate accounts sponsored by other insurance companies.
The Company, on behalf of the Fund, has adopted a distribution plan (the Plan) for its Class IB shares pursuant to the approval of the Board of Directors of the Company in accordance with the requirements of Rule 12b-1 under the 1940 Act and the requirements of the applicable market conduct rules of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) concerning asset based sales charges.
The distributor is authorized by the Company to receive purchase and redemption orders on behalf of the Fund. The distributor has authorized one or more financial services institutions to receive purchase and redemption orders on behalf of the Fund, subject to the Funds policies and procedures with respect to frequent purchases and redemptions of Fund shares and applicable law. In these circumstances, the Fund will be deemed to have received a purchase or redemption order when an authorized financial services institution receives the order. Orders will be priced at the Funds next net asset value computed after the orders are received by an authorized financial services institution and accepted by the Fund. The Funds net asset value is determined in the manner described in the Funds prospectus.
Pursuant to the Plan, the Fund may compensate the distributor for its expenditures in financing any activity primarily intended to result in the sale of Fund shares. The expenses of the Fund pursuant to the Plan are accrued on a fiscal year basis and may not exceed the annual rate of 0.25% of the Funds average daily net assets. All or any portion of this fee may be remitted to dealers who provide distribution or shareholder account services.
Distribution fees paid to the distributor may be spent on any activities or expenses primarily intended to result in the sale of the Funds shares including but not limited to (a) compensation to and expenses, including overhead and telephone expenses, of employees of the distributor engaged in the distribution of the Class IB shares of the Fund; (b) printing and mailing of prospectuses, statements of additional information, and reports for prospective purchasers of variable annuity contracts (Variable Contracts) investing indirectly in Class IB shares of the Fund; (c) compensation to financial intermediaries and broker-dealers to pay or reimburse them for their services or expenses in connection with the distribution of Variable Contracts investing indirectly in Class IB shares of the Fund; (d) expenses relating to the development, preparation, printing, and mailing of Fund advertisements, sales literature, and other promotional materials describing and/or relating to the Class IB shares of the Fund; (e) expenses of holding seminars and sales meetings designed to promote the distribution of the Class IB shares of the Fund; (f) expenses of obtaining information and providing explanations to variable contract owners regarding the Funds investment objective and policies and other information about the Fund, including performance; (g) expenses of training sales personnel regarding the Class IB shares of the Fund; (h) expenses of compensating sales personnel in connection with the allocation of cash values and premiums of the Variable Contracts to the Class IB shares of the Fund; and (i) expenses of personal services and/or maintenance of Variable Contract accounts with respect to Class IB shares attributable to such accounts. The Plan is considered a compensation type plan, which means the distributor is paid the agreed upon fee regardless of the distributors expenditures.
45
In accordance with the terms of the Plan, the distributor provides to the Fund, for review by the Funds Board of Directors, a quarterly written report of the amounts expended under the Plan and the purpose for which such expenditures were made. In the Board of Directors quarterly review of the Plan, they review the level of compensation the Plan provides.
The Plan was adopted by a majority vote of the Board of Directors of the Company, including at least a majority of directors who are not, and were not at the time they voted, interested persons of the Fund as defined in the 1940 Act and do not and did not have any direct or indirect financial interest in the operation of the Plan, cast in person at a meeting called for the purpose of voting on the Plan. Potential benefits which the Plan may provide to the Fund include shareholder servicing, the potential to increase assets and possibly benefit from economies of scale, the potential to avoid a decrease in assets and portfolio liquidations through redemption activity and the ability to sell shares of the Fund through adviser and broker distribution channels. The Board of Directors of the Company believes that there is a reasonable likelihood that the Plan will benefit the Class IB shareholders of the Fund. Under its terms, the Plan remains in effect from year to year provided such continuance is approved annually by vote of the directors in the manner described above. The Plan may not be amended to increase materially the amount to be spent for distribution without approval of the shareholders of the Fund affected thereby, and material amendments to the Plan must also be approved by the Board of Directors in the manner described above. The Plan may be terminated at any time, without payment of any penalty, by vote of the majority of the directors who are not interested persons of the Fund and have no direct or indirect financial interest in the operations of the Plan, or by a vote of a majority of the outstanding voting securities of the Fund affected thereby. The Plan will automatically terminate in the event of its assignment.
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012, Class IB shares of the Fund paid $ in 12b-1 fees. The entire amount of 12b-1 fees was paid as compensation to the distributor, which remitted the entire amount, either directly or indirectly through affiliated insurance companies, to dealers as compensation.
The distributor and its affiliates may pay, out of their own assets, compensation to brokers, financial institutions and other persons for the sale and distribution of the Funds shares and/or for the servicing of those shares.
PURCHASE AND REDEMPTION OF SHARES
For information regarding the purchase or sale (redemption) of Fund shares, see Purchase and Redemption of the Funds Shares in the Funds prospectus.
SUSPENSION OF REDEMPTIONS
The Fund may not suspend a shareholders right of redemption, or postpone payment for a redemption for more than seven days, unless permitted by law, the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) is closed for other than customary weekends or holidays, or trading on the NYSE is restricted, or for any period during which an emergency exists as a result of which (1) disposal by the Fund of securities owned by it is not reasonably practicable, or (2) it is not reasonably practicable for the Fund to fairly determine the value of its assets, or for such other periods as the SEC may permit for the protection of investors.
MANDATORY REDEMPTION OF SHARES
There may be instances in which the Fund determines that it is appropriate to require that your interest in the Fund be redeemed. Your shares could be redeemed if: (i) your transactions in Fund shares raise suspicions of money laundering, fraud or other illegal conduct; (ii) maintenance of your investment in the Fund jeopardizes the tax status or qualifications of the Fund; or (iii) redemption of your shares is determined to be in the best interests of the Fund. The terms of the variable annuity contract through which you invest in the Fund may specify additional circumstances under which your shares may be redeemed.
DETERMINATION OF NET ASSET VALUE
The net asset value per share (NAV) is determined for each class of the Funds shares as of the close of regular trading on the New York Stock Exchange (the Exchange) (normally 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time, the Valuation Time on each day that the Exchange is open. The Fund is closed for business and does not price its shares on the following business holidays: New Years Day, Martin Luther King Day, Presidents Day, Good Friday, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Day and other holidays observed by the Exchange. The net asset value of the Funds shares is determined by dividing the value of the Funds net assets by the number of shares outstanding. Information that becomes known to the Fund after the NAV has been calculated on a particular day will not generally be used to retroactively adjust the NAV determined earlier that day.
For purposes of calculating the NAV, portfolio securities and other assets held in the Funds portfolio for which market quotes are readily available are valued at market value. The Fund generally uses market prices in valuing portfolio securities. If market quotes are not readily available or are deemed unreliable, the Fund will use the fair value of the security as determined in good faith under policies and procedures established by and under the supervision of the Companys Board of Directors.
46
Market quotes are considered not readily available where there is an absence of current or reliable market-based data (e.g., trade information or broker quotes), including where events occur after the close of the relevant market, but prior to the NYSE Close that materially affect the values of the Funds portfolio securities or assets. In addition, market quotes are considered not readily available when, due to extraordinary circumstances, the exchanges or markets on which the securities trade, do not open for trading for the entire day and no other market prices are available. Fair value pricing is subjective in nature and the use of fair value pricing by the Fund may cause the NAV of its shares to differ significantly from the NAV that would have been calculated using market prices at the close of the exchange on which a portfolio security is primarily traded but before the Valuation Time. There can be no assurance that the Fund could obtain the fair value assigned to a security if the Fund were to sell the security at approximately the time at which the Fund determines its NAV.
Fixed income securities (other than short-term obligations and senior floating rate interests) and non-exchange traded derivatives held by the Fund are normally valued on the basis of quotes obtained from brokers and dealers or independent pricing services in accordance with procedures established by the Companys Board of Directors. Prices obtained from independent pricing services use information provided by market makers or estimates of market values obtained from yield data relating to investments or securities with similar characteristics. Senior floating rate interests generally trade in over-the-counter (OTC) markets and are priced through an independent pricing service utilizing independent market quotations from loan dealers or financial institutions. Generally, the Fund may use fair valuation in regards to fixed income securities when the Fund holds defaulted or distressed securities or securities in a company in which a reorganization is pending. Short term investments with a maturity of more than 60 days when purchased are valued based on market quotations until the remaining days to maturity become less than 61 days.
Investments of the Fund that mature in 60 days or less are generally valued at amortized cost, which approximates market value. Under the amortized cost method of valuation, an instrument is valued at acquisition cost adjusted by the daily accretion of discount or amortization of premium. The interest payable at maturity is accrued as income, on a daily basis, over the remaining life of the instrument. Neither the amount of daily income nor the net asset value is affected by unrealized appreciation or depreciation of the portfolios investments assuming the instruments obligation is paid in full at maturity.
Exchange traded equity securities shall be valued at the last reported sale price on the exchange on which the security is primarily traded (the Primary Market) at the Valuation Time. If the security did not trade on the Primary Market, it may be valued at the Valuation Time at the last reported sale price on another exchange where it trades at the Valuation Time. The value of an equity security not traded on any exchange but traded on the Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. System (Nasdaq) or another OTC market shall be valued at the last reported sale price or official closing price on the exchange or market on which the security is traded as of the Valuation Time. For securities traded on the Nasdaq, the Fund utilizes the Nasdaq Official Closing Price, which compares the last trade to the bid/ask range of a security. If the last trade falls within the bid/ask range, then that price will be the closing price. If the last trade is outside the bid/ask range, and falls above the ask, the ask will be the closing price. If the last price is below the bid, the bid will be the closing price. If it is not possible to determine the last reported sale price or official closing price on the relevant exchange or market at the Valuation Time, the value of the security shall be taken to be the most recent mean between bid and asked prices on such exchange or market at the Valuation Time.
Investments valued in currencies other than U.S. dollars are converted to U.S. dollars using exchange rates obtained from independent pricing services for calculation of the NAV. As a result, the NAV of the Funds shares may be affected by changes in the value of currencies in relation to the U.S. dollar. The value of securities traded in markets outside the United States or denominated in currencies other than the U.S. dollar may be affected significantly on a day that the NYSE is closed and the market value may change on days when an investor is not able to purchase, redeem or exchange shares of the Fund.
Exchange traded options contracts on securities, currencies, indices, futures contracts, commodities and other instruments shall be valued at their last reported sales price at the Valuation Time on the Primary Market on which the instrument is traded. If the instrument did not trade on the Primary Market, it may be valued at the last reported sales price at the Valuation Time on another exchange or market where it did trade. If it is not possible to determine the last reported sale price on the Primary Market or another exchange or market at the Valuation Time, the value of the instrument shall be taken to be the mean between the most recent bid and asked prices on such exchange or market at the Valuation Time. Absent both bid and asked prices on such exchange, the bid price may be used. In the case of OTC options that do not trade on an exchange, values may be supplied by a pricing service using a formula or other objective method that may take into consideration the style, direction, expiration, strike price, notional and volatility or other special adjustments.
Futures contracts are valued at the most recent settlement price reported by an exchange on which, over time, they are traded most extensively. If a settlement price is not available, the futures contracts will be valued at the most recent trade price as of the Valuation Time. If there were no trades on the valuation day, the contract shall be valued at the mean of the closing bid/ask prices as of the Valuation Time. Absent both bid and asked prices on such exchange, the bid price may be used.
A forward currency contract shall be valued based on the price of the underlying currency at the prevailing interpolated exchange rate, which is a combination of the foreign currency exchange rate and the forward currency rate. Foreign currency exchange rates and forward currency rates are obtained from an independent pricing service on the valuation date.
Swaps shall be valued using a custom interface from an independent pricing service. If a swap cannot be valued through an independent pricing service, Bloomberg will be used to calculate a value based upon inputs from the terms of the
47
deal. Swaps for which prices are not available from an independent pricing service are valued in accordance with procedures established by the Companys Board of Directors.
Other derivative or contractual type instruments shall be valued using market prices if such instruments trade on an exchange or market. If such instruments do not trade on an exchange or market, such instruments shall be valued at a price at which the counterparty to such contract would repurchase the instrument. In the event that the counterparty cannot provide a price, such valuation may be determined in accordance with procedures established by the Companys Board of Directors.
Investments in open-end mutual funds are valued at the respective NAV of each open-end mutual fund on the valuation date.
Financial instruments for which prices are not available from an independent pricing service, but where an active market exists, are valued using market quotations obtained from one or more dealers that make markets in securities in accordance with procedures established by the Companys Board of Directors.
OWNERSHIP AND CAPITALIZATION OF THE FUND
Capital Stock
The Board of Directors for the Company is authorized, without further shareholder approval, to authorize additional shares and to classify and reclassify shares of the Fund into one or more classes. The directors have authorized the issuance of one class of shares of the Fund designated as Class IB shares. Pursuant to state insurance law, Hartford Life, or its affiliates, is the owner of all Fund shares held in separate accounts of Hartford Life or its affiliates (such shares are held for the benefit of contract holders and policy owners). As of March 31, 2013, Hartford Life (or its affiliates) owned [100]% of the outstanding shares of the Fund.
Voting
Each shareholder is entitled to one vote for each share of the Fund held upon all matters submitted to the shareholders generally. All of the shares of the Fund will be held of record by insurance companies. The insurance companies will generally vote Fund shares pro rata according to the written instructions of the owners of Variable Contracts indirectly invested in the Fund. It is expected that such insurance companies will vote shares for which no instructions are received for or against, or in abstention, with respect to any proposals in the same proportion as the shares for which instructions are received.
Matters in which the interests of all the HLS Funds in the Company are substantially identical (such as the election of directors or the ratification of the selection of the independent registered public accounting firm) are voted on by all shareholders of the Company without regard to the separate HLS Funds. Matters that affect all or several HLS Funds in the Company, but where the interests of the HLS Funds are not substantially identical (such as approval of an investment management agreement) are voted on separately by the shareholders of each HLS Fund for their HLS Fund. Matters that affect only one HLS Fund (such as a change in its fundamental policies) are voted on separately for the HLS Fund by the shareholders of that HLS Fund.
Other Rights
Each share of Fund stock, when issued and paid for in accordance with the terms of the offering, will be fully paid and non-assessable. Shares of Fund stock have no pre-emptive, subscription or conversion rights. Upon liquidation of the Fund, the shareholders of the Fund shall be entitled to share, pro rata, in any assets of the Fund after discharge of all liabilities and payment of the expenses of liquidation.
48
TAXES [TO BE UPDATED]
Federal Tax Status of the Fund
The following discussion of the federal tax status of the Fund is a general and abbreviated summary based on tax laws and regulations in effect on the date of this SAI. Tax law is subject to change by legislative, administrative or judicial action.
The Fund is treated as a separate taxpayer for federal income tax purposes. The Company intends for the Fund to elect to be treated as a regulated investment company under Subchapter M of Chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code) and to qualify as a regulated investment company each year. If the Fund: (1) continues to qualify as a regulated investment company, and (2) distributes to its shareholders at least 90% of its investment company taxable income (including for this purpose its net ordinary investment income and net realized short-term capital gains) and 90% of its tax-exempt interest income (reduced by certain expenses) (the 90% distribution requirement) (which the Company intends the Fund to do), then under the provisions of Subchapter M, the Fund should have little or no income taxable to it under the Code. In particular, the Fund generally is not subject to federal income tax on the portion of its investment company taxable income and net capital gain (i.e., net long-term capital gain in excess of short-term capital loss) it distributes to shareholders (or treats as having been distributed to shareholders).
The Fund must meet several requirements to maintain its status as a regulated investment company. These requirements include the following: (1) at least 90% of the Funds gross income for each taxable year must be derived from dividends, interest, payments with respect to loaned securities, gains from the sale or disposition of securities (including gains from related investments in foreign currencies), or other income (including gains from options, futures or forward contracts) derived with respect to its business of investing in such securities or currencies, as well as net income from interests in certain publicly traded partnerships; and (2) at the close of each quarter of the Funds taxable year, (a) at least 50% of the value of the Funds total assets must consist of cash, cash items, securities of other regulated investment companies, U.S. Government securities and other securities which, with respect to any one issuer, do not represent more than 5% of all of the Funds assets nor more than 10% of the outstanding voting securities of such issuer, and (b) the Fund must not invest more than 25% of its total assets in the securities of any one issuer (other than U.S. Government securities or the securities of other regulated investment companies), or of any two or more issuers that are controlled by the Fund and that are engaged in the same or similar trades or businesses or related trades or businesses, or of one or more qualified publicly traded partnerships.
The Fund generally will endeavor to distribute (or treat as deemed distributed) to its shareholders all of its investment company taxable income and its net capital gain, if any, for each taxable year so that it will not incur federal income or excise taxes on its earnings.
Unless seed capital exceeds the amounts specified in the Internal Revenue Code, the Fund should not be subject to the 4% federal excise tax imposed on regulated investment companies that do not distribute substantially all their income and gains each calendar year, if the Funds only shareholders are segregated asset accounts of life insurance companies supporting variable annuity contracts. If the Fund is subject to the 4% federal excise tax, the Fund generally must distribute in a timely manner the sum of (1) 98% of its ordinary income for each calendar year, (2) 98.2% of its capital gain net income for the one-year period ending October 31 in that calendar year, and (3) any income not distributed in prior years (the excise tax avoidance requirements).
The Fund also intends to comply with Section 817(h) of the Code and the regulations issued thereunder, which impose certain investment diversification requirements on life insurance companies separate accounts that are used to support variable annuity contracts. Such separate accounts may meet these requirements by investing solely in the shares of a mutual fund registered under the 1940 Act as an open-end management investment company such as the Fund which meets certain additional requirements. These requirements are in addition to the diversification requirements of Subchapter M and of the 1940 Act, and may affect the securities in which the Fund may invest. In order to comply with future requirements of Section 817(h) (or related provisions of the Code), the Fund may be required, for example, to alter its investment objective.
The 817(h) requirements place certain limitations on the percentage of assets of each separate account (or underlying mutual fund) that may be invested in securities of a single issuer. These limitations apply to how much of the Funds assets may be invested in securities of a single issuer. Specifically, the regulations provide that, except as permitted by a safe harbor described below, as of the end of each calendar quarter, or within 30 days thereafter:
no more than 55% of the Funds total assets may be represented by any one investment;
no more than 70% by any two investments;
no more than 80% by any three investments; and
no more than 90% by any four investments.
Section 817(h) provides, as a safe harbor, that a separate account will be treated as being adequately diversified if the diversification requirements under Subchapter M are satisfied and no more than 55% of the value of the accounts total assets are cash and cash items, government securities, and securities of other regulated investment companies. For purposes of Section 817(h), all securities of the same issuer, all interests in the same real property project, and all interests in the same commodity are treated as a single investment. In addition, each U.S. Government agency or instrumentality is treated as a
49
separate issuer, while the securities of a particular foreign government and its agencies, instrumentalities, and political subdivisions are considered securities issued by the same issuer.
Investment income received from sources within foreign countries, or capital gains earned by the Fund from investing in securities of foreign issuers, may be subject to foreign income taxes withheld at the source. In this regard, withholding tax rates in countries with which the United States does not have a tax treaty are often as high as 35% or more. The United States has entered into tax treaties with many foreign countries that may entitle the Fund to a reduced rate of tax or exemption from tax on this related income and gains. The effective rate of foreign tax cannot be determined at this time since the amount of the Funds assets to be invested within various countries is not now known. The Company intends that the Fund will seek to operate so as to qualify for treaty-reduced rates of tax when applicable. Owners of variable annuity contracts investing in the Fund bear the costs of any foreign tax, but are not able to claim a foreign tax credit or deduction for these foreign taxes.
Any gains derived from short sales will generally be taxed as short-term capital gains that would be taxed to shareholders on distributions as ordinary income.
The Funds transactions in options contracts and futures contracts are subject to special provisions of the Code that, among other things, may affect the character of gains and losses realized by the Fund (that is, may affect whether gains or losses are ordinary or capital), accelerate recognition of income to the Fund and defer losses of the Fund. These rules: (1) could affect the character, amount and timing of distributions to shareholders of the Fund, (2) could require the Fund to mark to market certain types of the positions in its portfolio (that is, treat them as if they were closed out), and (3) may cause the Fund to recognize income without receiving cash with which to make distributions in amounts necessary to satisfy the distribution requirements for avoiding income and excise taxes described above. The Company seeks to monitor transactions of the Fund, seeks to make the appropriate tax elections on behalf of the Fund and seeks to make the appropriate entries in the Funds books and records when the Fund acquires any option, futures contract or hedged investment, to mitigate the effect of these rules.
If for any taxable year the Fund fails to qualify as a regulated investment company, all of its taxable income becomes subject to federal, and possibly state and local, income tax at the regular corporate rates (without any deduction for distributions to its shareholders). In addition, if for any taxable year the Fund fails to qualify as a regulated investment company, owners of variable annuity contracts who have indirectly invested in the Fund might be taxed currently on the investment earnings under their contracts and thereby lose the benefit of tax deferral. Likewise, if the Fund fails to comply with the diversification requirements of section 817(h) of the Code and the regulations thereunder, owners of variable annuity contracts who have indirectly invested in the Fund would be taxed on the investment earnings under their contracts and thereby lose the benefit of tax deferral. Accordingly, compliance with the above rules is carefully monitored by the Funds investment adviser and the Fund intends to comply with these rules as they exist or as they may be modified from time to time. Compliance with the tax requirements described above may result in lower total return for the Fund than would otherwise be the case, since, to comply with the above rules, the investments utilized (and the time at which such investments are entered into and closed out) may be different from what the Funds investment sub-adviser might otherwise select.
If the Fund acquires stock in certain foreign corporations that receive at least 75% of their annual gross income from passive sources (such as interest, dividends, rents, royalties or capital gain) or hold at least 50% of their total assets in investments producing such passive income (passive foreign investment companies), the Fund could be subject to federal income tax and additional interest charges on excess distributions received from such companies or gain from the sale of stock in such companies, even if all income or gain actually received by the Fund is timely distributed to its shareholders. The Fund would not be able to pass through to its shareholders any credit or deduction for such a tax. As a result, owners of variable annuity contracts investing in the Fund would bear the cost of these taxes and interest charges. Certain elections may, if available, ameliorate these adverse tax consequences, but any such election requires the Fund to recognize taxable income or gain without the concurrent receipt of cash. The Fund may limit and/or manage its holdings in passive foreign investment companies to minimize its tax liability.
Foreign exchange gains and losses realized by the Fund in connection with certain transactions involving non-dollar debt securities, certain foreign currency futures contracts, foreign currency option contracts, foreign currency forward contracts, foreign currencies, or payables or receivables denominated in a foreign currency are subject to Code provisions which generally treat such gains and losses as ordinary income and losses and may affect the amount, timing and character of distributions to shareholders. Any such transactions that are not directly related to the Funds investment in securities (possibly including speculative currency positions or currency derivatives not used for hedging purposes) could, under future Treasury regulations, produce income not among the types of qualifying income from which the Fund must derive at least 90% of its annual gross income.
Pay-in-kind instruments (PIKs) are securities that pay interest in either cash or additional securities, at the issuers option, for a specified period. PIKs, like zero-coupon bonds, are designed to give an issuer flexibility in managing cash flow. PIK bonds can be either senior or subordinated debt and trade flat (i.e., without accrued interest). The price of PIK bonds is expected to reflect the market value of the underlying debt plus an amount representing accrued interest since the last payment. PIKs are usually less volatile than zero-coupon bonds, but more volatile than cash pay securities.
50
If the Fund invests in certain PIKs, zero coupon securities or certain deferred interest securities (and, in general, any other securities with original issue discount or with market discount if the Fund elects to include market discount in current income), it must accrue income on such investments prior to the receipt of the corresponding cash. However, because the Fund must meet the 90% distribution requirement to qualify as a regulated investment company, it may have to dispose of its portfolio investments under disadvantageous circumstances to generate cash, or may have to leverage itself by borrowing the cash, to satisfy the applicable distribution requirements.
The federal income tax rules applicable to interest rate swaps, caps and floors are unclear in certain respects, and the Fund may be required to account for these transactions in a manner that, in certain circumstances, may limit the degree to which it may utilize these transactions.
Investor Taxation
Under current law, owners of variable annuity contracts who are indirectly invested in the Fund generally are not subject to federal income tax on Fund earnings or distributions or on gains realized upon the sale or redemption of Fund shares until they are withdrawn from the contract.
For information concerning the federal income tax consequences to the owners of variable annuity contracts, see the prospectuses for such contracts.
CUSTODIAN
Portfolio securities of the Fund are held pursuant to a separate Master Custody Contract between each Company and JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., 4 New York Plaza, Floor 12, New York, NY, 10004-2413. Certain portfolio securities of the Fund are held pursuant to a separate Custodian Agreement between the Company and State Street Bank and Trust Company, 500 Pennsylvania Avenue, Kansas City, Missouri 64105.
TRANSFER AGENT
Hartford Administrative Services Company, 500 Bielenberg Drive, Woodbury, Minnesota 55125, an affiliate of HFMC, serves as Transfer and Dividend Disbursing Agent for the Fund. The transfer agent issues and redeems shares of the Fund and disburses any dividends declared by the Fund. For its services, the transfer agent is reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses and other costs associated with the services it provides to the Fund, including costs invoiced by sub-contractors. HFMC and its affiliates may pay, out of their own assets, compensation to third-party administrators for recordkeeping and other administrative services.
DISTRIBUTOR
Hartford Investment Financial Services, LLC, 100 Matsonford Road, Radnor, Pennsylvania 19087, an affiliate of HFMC, acts as the Funds distributor.
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
served as the Companies Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012. is principally located at .
OTHER INFORMATION
The Fund seeks to approximate the performance of the Standard & Poors 500 Index with respect to a portion of its assets. Standard & Poors®, S&P®, S&P 500®, Standard & Poors 500, and 500 are trademarks of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. and have been licensed for use by Hartford Life Insurance Company. The Fund is not sponsored, endorsed, sold or promoted by S&P. S&P makes no representation or warranty, express or implied, to the shareholders of the Fund regarding the advisability of investing in securities generally or in the Fund particularly or the ability of the S&P 500 Index to track general stock market performance. S&Ps only relationship to Hartford Life Insurance Company is the licensing of certain trademarks and trade names of S&P and of the S&P 500 Index which is determined, composed and calculated by S&P without regard to the Fund or Hartford Life Insurance Company. S&P has no obligation to take the needs of the Fund or its shareholders, or Hartford Life Insurance Company, into consideration in determining, composing or calculating the S&P 500 Index. S&P is not responsible for and has not participated in the determination of the net asset value of the Fund or the timing of the issuance or sale of shares in the Fund. S&P has no obligation or liability in connection with the administration, marketing or trading of the Fund.
In addition, S&P does not guarantee the accuracy and/or the completeness of the S&P 500 Index or any data included therein and S&P shall have no liability for any errors, omissions, or interruptions therein. S&P makes no warranty, express or implied, as to results to be obtained by the Fund, its shareholders or any other person or entity from the use of the S&P 500 Index or any data included therein. S&P makes no express or implied warranties, and expressly disclaims all warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose or use with respect to the S&P 500 Index or any data included therein.
51
Without limiting any of the foregoing, in no event shall S&P have any liability for any special, punitive, indirect, or consequential damages (including lost profits), even if notified of the possibility of such damages.
CODE OF ETHICS
The Fund, HFMC, Hartford Investment Financial Services, LLC and the sub-adviser have each adopted a code of ethics designed to protect the interests of the Funds shareholders. Under each code of ethics, investment personnel are permitted to trade securities for their own account, including securities that may be purchased or held by the Fund, subject to certain restrictions. Each code of ethics has been filed with the SEC and may be viewed by the public.
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The Funds audited financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012, together with the notes thereto, and the report of , the Companys Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm, are incorporated by reference from the Funds Annual Report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012 into this SAI (meaning such documents are legally a part of this SAI) and are on file with the SEC.
The Funds Annual Report is available without charge by calling the Fund at 1-800-862-6668 or by visiting the Funds website at www.hlsfunds.com/prospectus or on the SECs website at www.sec.gov.
PROXY VOTING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
The Board of Directors believes that the voting of proxies with respect to securities held by the Fund is an important element of the overall investment process.
Pursuant to the Funds Policy Related to Proxy Voting, as approved by the Board of Directors of the Company, HFMC has delegated to the sub-adviser the authority to vote all proxies relating to the Funds portfolio securities. The sub-advisers exercise of this delegated proxy voting authority is subject to oversight by the Funds investment manager. The sub-adviser has a duty to vote or not vote such proxies in the best interests of the Fund and its shareholders, and to avoid the influence of conflicts of interest.
The policies and procedures used by the sub-adviser to determine how to vote certain proxies relating to portfolio securities are described below. In addition to a summary description of such policies and procedures, included below are descriptions of how such policies and procedures apply to various topics. However, the following are descriptions only and more complete information should be obtained by reviewing the sub-advisers policies and procedures as well as the Funds voting records. For a complete copy of the sub-advisers proxy voting policies and procedures, as well as any separate guidelines it utilizes, please refer to www.hartfordinvestor.com. Information on how the Fund voted proxies relating to portfolio securities during the most recent twelve-month period ended June 30 is available (1) without charge, upon request, by calling 1-888-843-7824 and (2) on the SECs website at www.sec.gov.
If a security has not been restricted from securities lending and the security is on loan over a record date, the Funds sub-adviser may not be able to vote any proxies for that security. For more information about the impact of lending securities on proxy voting, see Lending Portfolio Securities.
Hartford Investment Management Company
The Fund has granted to Hartford Investment Management Company (Hartford Investment Management) the authority to vote proxies on its behalf with respect to the assets it manages. The goal of Hartford Investment Management is to vote proxies in what it believes are the best economic interests of its clients, free from conflicts of interest. The Proxy Voting Committee of Hartford Investment Management has determined that this goal is best achieved by retaining the services of Glass Lewis & Co., LLC, an independent research firm that provides proxy voting services to more than 100 institutional clients and has developed best practices in corporate governance consistent with the best interest of investors (Glass Lewis).
In general, all proxies received from issuers of securities held in client accounts are referred to Glass Lewis for its analysis and recommendation as to each matter being submitted for a vote. Glass Lewis reviews such proxy proposals and makes voting recommendations in accordance with its proxy voting guidelines. These guidelines address a wide variety of topics, including among others, shareholder voting rights, anti-takeover defenses, board structures, the election of directors, executive and director compensation, reorganizations, mergers and various shareholder proposals. Hartford Investment Management has concluded that the Glass Lewis guidelines are substantially in accord with Hartford Investment Managements own philosophy regarding appropriate corporate governance and conduct. In most cases, securities will be voted in accordance with Glass Lewis voting recommendations, but Hartford Investment Management may deviate from Glass Lewiss recommendations on specific proxy proposals. To ensure that no voting decision is influenced by a conflict of interest, a portfolio manager who intends to vote contrary to a Glass Lewis recommendation must notify Hartford Investment Managements Proxy Committee of such intent, and obtain its approval before voting.
52
The Proxy Voting Committee evaluates the performance of Glass Lewis at least annually.
Hartford Investment Management votes proxies solicited by an affiliated investment company in the same proportion as the vote of the investment companys other shareholders (sometimes called mirror or echo voting).
Material Conflict of Interest Identification and Resolution Processes
The use of Glass Lewis minimizes the number of potential conflicts of interest Hartford Investment Management faces in voting proxies, but Hartford Investment Management does maintain procedures designed to identify and address those conflicts that do arise. Proxy votes with respect to which an apparent conflict of interest is identified are referred to the Proxy Committee to resolve. Any Proxy Committee member who is himself or herself subject to the identified conflict will not participate in the Proxy Committees vote on the matter in question. Investment Compliance will record and maintain minutes for the Proxy Committee meetings to document the factors that were considered to evidence that there was a reasonable basis for the Proxy Committees decision. Potential conflicts of interest may include:
·
The issuer that is soliciting Hartford Investment Managements proxy vote is also a client of Hartford Investment Management or an affiliate;
·
A Hartford Investment Management employee has acquired non-public information about an issuer that is soliciting proxies;
·
A Hartford Investment Management employee has a business or personal relationship with, or financial interest in, the issuer or officer or Board member of the issuer; or
·
A Hartford Investment Management employee is contacted by management or board member of a company regarding an upcoming proxy vote.
Situations in which Hartford Investment Management might not vote a proxy
It may not be possible to cast an informed vote in certain circumstances due to lack of information in the proxy statement. Hartford Investment Management and/or Glass Lewis may abstain from voting in those instances. Proxy materials not being delivered in a timely fashion also may prevent analysis or entry of a vote by voting deadlines. In some cases Hartford Investment Management may determine that it is in the best economic interests of its clients not to vote certain proxies. For example, Hartford Investment Management generally does not vote proxies of issuers subject to shareblocking provisions or in jurisdictions that impose restrictions upon selling shares after proxies are voted. Similarly, votes are generally not cast in those foreign jurisdictions which require that a power of attorney be filed. Mutual fund and third party client accounts may have a securities lending program. In such a case, Hartford Investment Management may be unable to vote proxies when the underlying securities have been loaned (loan termination is often the only way to vote proxies on the loaned securities). In general, Hartford Investment Management does not know when securities have been loaned.
Glass Lewis Proxy Voting Guidelines Summary
Anti-Takeover Measures
Poison Pills (Shareholder Rights Plans
).
Typically Glass Lewis recommends that shareholders vote against these plans to protect their financial interests and ensure that they have an opportunity to consider any offer for their shares, especially those at a premium. In certain limited circumstances, Glass Lewis will support a limited poison pill to accomplish a particular objective, such as the closing of an important merger, or a pill that contains what Glass Lewis believes to be a reasonable qualifying offer clause.
Right of Shareholders to Call a Special Meeting.
In order to prevent abuse and waste of corporate resources by a minority of shareholders, Glass Lewis believes this right should be limited to holders representing a minimum of 10-15% of the issued shares.
Advance Notice Requirements for Shareholder Ballot Proposals.
Glass Lewis typically recommends that shareholders vote against these proposals.
Cumulative Voting.
Glass Lewis reviews these proposals on a case-by-case basis, factoring in the independence of the board and the status of the companys governance structure. However, Glass Lewis typically finds that these proposals are on ballots at companies where independence is lacking and where the appropriate checks and balances that favor shareholders are not in place. In those instances Glass Lewis typically recommends in favor of cumulative voting.
Supermajority Vote Requirements.
Glass Lewis believes that supermajority vote requirements impede shareholder action on ballot items critical to shareholder interests.
Election of Directors
Voting Recommendation on the Basis of Independence:
Glass Lewis looks at each director nominee and examines the directors relationships with the company, the companys executives and other directors. Glass Lewis does this to find personal, familial, or financial relationships (not including director compensation) that may impact the directors decisions. Glass Lewis believes that such relationships makes it difficult for a director to put shareholders interests above the directors or the related
53
partys interests. Glass Lewis also believes that a director who owns more than 20% of a company can exert disproportionate influence on the board and, in particular, the audit committee.
In general, Glass Lewis believes a board will be most effective in protecting shareholders interests if it is at least two-thirds independent. In the event that more than one third of the members are affiliated or inside directors, Glass Lewis typically(1) recommends withholding votes from some of the inside and/or affiliated directors in order to satisfy the two-thirds threshold.
Glass Lewis believes that
only
independent directors should serve on a companys audit, compensation, nominating and governance committees.(2) Glass Lewis typically recommends that shareholders withhold their votes for any affiliated or inside director seeking appointment to an audit, compensation, nominating or governance committee, or who has served in that capacity in the past year.
Voting Recommendation on the Basis of Performance
: Glass Lewis disfavors directors who have a record of not fulfilling their responsibilities to shareholders at any company where they have held a board or executive position. See full guidelines for criteria.
Voting Recommendation on the Basis of Experience:
Glass Lewis typically recommends that shareholders withhold votes from directors who have served on boards or as executives of companies with records of poor performance, overcompensation, audit- or accounting-related issues and/or other indicators of mismanagement or actions against the interests of shareholders.
Voting Recommendation on the Basis of Other Considerations:
Glass Lewis recommends shareholders withhold votes from certain types of affiliated or inside directors under nearly all circumstances.
Appointment of Auditors
Glass Lewis generally supports managements choice of auditor except when Glass Lewis believes the auditors independent or audit integrity has been compromised. Where a board has not allowed shareholders to review and ratify an auditor, Glass Lewis typically recommends withholding votes from the audit committee chairman. When there have been material restatements of annual financial statements or material weakness in internal controls, Glass Lewis usually recommends withholding votes from the entire committee.
Glass Lewis typically supports audit-related proposals regarding mandatory auditor rotation when the proposal uses a reasonable period of time (usually not less than 5-7 years).
Changes to Capital Structure
When analyzing a request for additional shares, Glass Lewis typically reviews four common reasons why a company might need additional capital stock beyond what is currently available:
·
Stock Split Glass Lewis typically considers three metrics when evaluating whether Glass Lewis thinks a stock split is likely or necessary: the historical stock pre-split price, if any; the current price relative to the Companys most common trading price over the past 52 weeks; and some absolute limits on stock price that in Glass Lewis view either always make a stock split appropriate if desired by management or would almost never be a reasonable price at which to split a stock.
·
Shareholder Defenses Additional authorized shares could be used to bolster takeover defenses such as a poison pill. Proxy filings often discuss the usefulness of additional shares in defending against or discouraging a hostile takeover as a reason for a requested increase. Glass Lewis is typically against such defenses and will oppose actions intended to bolster such defenses.
·
Financing for Acquisitions Glass Lewis looks at whether the company has a history of using stock for acquisitions and attempts to determine what levels of stock have typically been required to accomplish such transactions. Likewise, Glass Lewis looks to see whether this is discussed as a reason for additional shares in the proxy.
·
Financing for Operations Glass Lewis reviews the companys cash position and its ability to secure financing through borrowing or other means. Glass Lewis looks at the companys history of capitalization and whether the company has had to use stock in the recent past as a means of raising capital.
Issuing additional shares can dilute existing holders in limited circumstances. Further, the availability of additional shares, where the board has discretion to implement a poison pill, can often serve as a deterrent to interested suitors. Accordingly, where Glass Lewis finds that the company has not detailed a plan for use of the proposed shares, or where the number of
(1) In the case of a staggered board, if the affiliates or insiders that we believe should not be on the board are not standing for election, Glass Lewis will express its concern regarding those directors, but Glass Lewis will not recommend withholding from the affiliates or insiders who are up for election just to achieve two-thirds
independence.
(2) Glass Lewis will recommend withholding votes from any member of the audit committee who owns 20% or more of the companys stock, and Glass Lewis believes that there should be a maximum of one director (or no directors if the committee is comprised of less than three directors) who owns 20% or more of the companys stock on the compensation, nominating and governance committees.
54
shares far exceeds those needed to accomplish a detailed plan, Glass Lewis typically recommends against the authorization of additional shares. While Glass Lewis thinks that having adequate shares to allow management to make quick decisions and effectively operate the business is critical, Glass Lewis prefers that, for significant transactions, management come to shareholders to justify their use of additional shares rather than providing a blank check in the form of a large pool of unallocated shares available for any purpose.
Equity Based Compensation Plans
Glass Lewis evaluates option- and other equity-based compensation plans using a detailed model and analyst review. Glass Lewis believes that equity compensation awards are useful, when not abused, for retaining employees and providing an incentive for them to act in a way that will improve company performance.
Glass Lewis analysis is quantitative and focused on the plans cost as compared with the businesss operating metrics. Glass Lewis runs twenty different analyses, comparing the program with absolute limits Glass Lewis believes are key to equity value creation and with a carefully chosen peer group. In general, Glass Lewis model seeks to determine whether the proposed plan is either absolutely excessive or is more than one standard deviation away from the average plan for the peer group on a range of criteria, including dilution to shareholders and the projected annual cost relative to the companys financial performance. Each of the twenty analyses (and their constituent parts) is weighted and the plan is scored in accordance with that weight.
Option Exchanges.
Glass Lewis views option repricing plans and option exchange programs with great skepticism. Shareholders have substantial risk in owning stock and, as a general matter, Glass Lewis believes that the employees, officers and directors who receive stock options should be similarly situated to align their interests with shareholder interests.
Performance Based Options.
Glass Lewis believes in performance-based equity compensation plans for senior executives. Glass Lewis feels that executives should be compensated with equity when their performance and the companys performance warrants such rewards. While Glass Lewis does not believe that equity-based compensation plans for all employees should be based on overall company performance, Glass Lewis does support such limitations for equity grants to senior executives (although some equity-based compensation of senior executives without performance criteria is acceptable, such as in the case of moderate incentive grants made in an initial offer of employment or in emerging industries). Glass Lewis generally recommends that shareholders vote in favor of performance-based option requirements.
Linking Pay with Performance.
Glass Lewis strongly believes executive compensation should be linked directly with the performance of the business the executive is charged with managing. Glass Lewis has a proprietary pay-for-performance model that evaluates compensation of the top five executives at every company in the Russell 3000. Glass Lewis model benchmarks these executives pay against their performance using three peer groups for each company: an industry peer group, a smaller sector peer group and a geographic peer group. Using a forced curve and a school letter-grade system, Glass Lewis ranks companies according to their pay-for-performance. Glass Lewis uses this analysis to inform Glass Lewis voting decisions on each of the compensation issues that arise on the ballot. Likewise, Glass Lewis uses this analysis in Glass Lewis evaluation of the compensation committees performance.
162(m) Plans.
Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code allows companies to deduct compensation in excess of $1 million for the CEO and the next four most highly compensated executive officers upon shareholder approval of the excess compensation. Glass Lewis recognizes the value of executive incentive programs and the tax benefit of shareholder-approved incentive plans. Glass Lewis believes the best practice for companies is to provide reasonable disclosure to shareholders so that they can make sound judgments about the reasonableness of the proposed compensation plan. To allow for meaningful shareholder review, Glass Lewis prefers that these proposals include: specific performance goals, a maximum award pool and a maximum award amount per employee. Glass Lewis also believes it is important to analyze the estimated grants to see if they are reasonable and in line with the companys peers. Glass Lewis typically recommends against a 162(m) plan where: a company fails to provide at least a list of performance targets; a company fails to provide one of either a total pool or an individual maximum; or the proposed plan is excessive when compared with the plans of the companys peers. However, where a company has a record of reasonable pay relative to business performance, Glass Lewis is not typically inclined to recommend against a plan even if the plan caps seem large relative to peers because they recognize the value in special pay arrangements for continued exceptional performance.
Director Compensation Plans.
Glass Lewis believes that non-employee directors should receive compensation for the time and effort they spend serving on the board and its committees. In particular, Glass Lewis supports compensation plans that include option grants or other equity-based awards, which help to align the interests of outside directors with those of shareholders. Director fees should be competitive in order to retain and attract qualified individuals. However, excessive fees represent a financial cost to the company and threaten to compromise the objectivity and independence of non-employee directors. Therefore, a balance is required.
Limits on Executive Compensation.
As a general rule, Glass Lewis believes shareholders should not be directly involved in setting executive compensation. Such matters should be left to the compensation committee. Glass Lewis views the election of compensation committee members as the appropriate mechanism for shareholders to express their disapproval or support of board policy on executive pay. Further, Glass Lewis believes that companies whose pay-for-performance is in line with its peers
55
should be able to compensate their executives in a manner that drives growth and profit without destroying ethical values, giving consideration to their peers comparable size and performance. However, Glass Lewis favors performance-based compensation as an effective means of motivating executives to act in the best interests of shareholders. Performance-based compensation may be limited if CEO pay is capped at a low level rather than flexibly tied to company performance.
Limits on Executive Stock Options.
Glass Lewis typically recommends that Glass Lewis clients oppose caps on executive stock options.
Linking Pay to Social Criteria.
Glass Lewis believes that ethical behavior is an important part of executive performance and should be taken into account when evaluating performance and determining compensation. Glass Lewis also believes, however, that the compensation committee is in the best position to set policy on management compensation. Shareholders can hold the compensation committee accountable for pay awarded.
Full Disclosure of Executive Compensation.
Glass Lewis believes that complete, timely and transparent disclosure of executive pay is critical to allowing shareholders to evaluate the extent to which the pay is keeping pace with company performance. However, Glass Lewis is concerned when a proposal goes too far in the level of detail that it requests for executives other than the most high-ranking leaders of the company. While Glass Lewis is in favor of full disclosure for senior executives and Glass Lewis views pay disclosure at the aggregate level (e.g., the number of employees being paid over a certain amount or in certain categories) as potentially very useful, Glass Lewis does not believe that shareholders need or will benefit from detailed reports about individual management employees other than the most senior executives.
Social and Corporate Responsibility
Glass Lewis believes that disclosure regarding how a company uses its funds is an important component of corporate accountability to shareholders. Some campaign contributions are heavily regulated by federal, state and local laws. Most jurisdictions have detailed disclosure laws so that information on some contributions is publicly available. Other than where a company does not adequately disclose information about its contributions to shareholders or where a company has a history of abuse in the donation process, Glass Lewis believes that the mechanism for disclosure and the standards for giving are best left to the board. However, Glass Lewis will consider supporting shareholder proposals seeking greater disclosures of political giving in cases where additional company disclosure is nonexistent or limited and there is some evidence or credible allegation that the company is mismanaging corporate funds through political donations or has a record of doing so.
In general, Glass Lewis believes that labor and human resource policies are typically best left to management and the board, absent a showing of egregious or illegal conduct that might threaten shareholder value. It is Glass Lewis opinion that management is in the best position to determine appropriate practices in the context of its business. Glass Lewis will hold directors accountable for company decisions related to labor and employment problems. However, in situations where there is clear evidence of practices resulting in significant economic exposure to the company, Glass Lewis will support shareholders proposals that seek to address labor policies.
Non-Discrimination Policies.
Glass Lewis believes that human resource policies are best left to management and the board, absent a showing of egregious or illegal conduct that might threaten shareholder value. Management is in the best position to determine which policies will promote the interests of the firm across its various businesses.
Military and US Government Business Policies.
Glass Lewis believes that disclosure to shareholders of information on key company endeavors is important. However, Glass Lewis generally does not support resolutions that call for shareholder approval of policy statements for or against government programs that are subject to thorough review by the Federal Government and elected officials at the national level.
Foreign Government Business Policies.
Glass Lewis believes that business policies regarding foreign operations are best left to management and the board, absent a showing of egregious or illegal conduct that might threaten shareholder value. Glass Lewis believes that shareholders should hold board members accountable for these issues when they face re-election.
Environmental Policies.
Glass Lewis believes that when management and the board have displayed disregard for environmental risks, have engaged in egregious or illegal conduct, or have failed to adequately respond to current or imminent environmental risks that threaten shareholder value, shareholders should hold directors accountable when they face reelection. Glass Lewis believes that part of the boards role is to ensure that management conducts a complete risk analysis of company operations, including those that have environmental implications, and that directors should monitor managements performance in mitigating the environmental risks attendant with relevant operations in order to eliminate or minimize the risks to the company and shareholders. Glass Lewis may recommend that votes be withheld from responsible members of the governance committee when a substantial environmental risk has been ignored or inadequately addressed, and may in some cases recommend that votes be withheld from all directors who were on the board when the substantial risk arose, was ignored or was not mitigated.
56