Travelers and other public companies are pushing the SEC to reclassify executive security costs as necessary business expenses rather than personal perks, a change critics warn could reduce transparency in proxy filings.
Already a Subscriber? Log in
Get Instant Access to This Article
Subscribe to Hartford Business Journal and get immediate access to all of our subscriber-only content and much more.
- Critical Hartford and Connecticut business news updated daily.
- Immediate access to all subscriber-only content on our website.
- Bi-weekly print or digital editions of our award-winning publication.
- Special bonus issues like the Hartford Book of Lists.
- Exclusive ticket prize draws for our in-person events.
Click here to purchase a paywall bypass link for this article.
Since 2006, the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission has required public companies to disclose executive benefits worth more than $10,000, including security-related expenses such as home protection systems, personal security personnel and secure transportation.
Under current rules, many of those costs are treated as taxable compensation and must be disclosed in annual proxy filings.
However, as more companies expand executive protection programs, some are pushing regulators to rethink how those costs are classified and disclosed.
Janice Brunner, group general counsel of The Travelers Cos., which maintains significant operations in Hartford, argues the current framework is outdated and no longer reflects today’s security environment.
In a June 2025 comment letter submitted to the SEC during a review of executive compensation disclosure rules, Brunner argued that executive security expenses are necessary business costs tied to executives’ job responsibilities, rather than personal benefits that must be publicly disclosed.
“Executive security is critical to the ability of many executives to perform their duties,” Brunner wrote, adding that executives “face significant security threats stemming directly from their positions.”
Brunner cited prior SEC guidance supporting that interpretation. Also, during the COVID-19 pandemic, the SEC indicated that benefits previously considered perks — including enhanced home technology — might no longer qualify as such when tied to changing business conditions.
Some companies are already taking a narrower approach to what security costs they publicly disclose.
Bloomfield-based Cigna, one of the nation’s largest health insurers, does not classify executive security costs as a reportable executive benefit in its proxy filings. The company’s position is that those expenses are “integrally and directly related to the performance of their executive duties,” the legal standard that exempts certain costs from disclosure requirements.
The SEC has signaled it may revisit the issue. In a February speech, Chairman Paul Atkins said possible changes under consideration include “recategorizing some personal security as a necessity rather than an executive ‘perk,’” according to Reuters.
Critics argue that reclassifying executive security as a business expense could reduce transparency by allowing some costs to disappear from proxy disclosures altogether, making it more difficult for investors to evaluate how much companies spend protecting senior executives.
