Proxy voting options

Your vote is important!

All shareholders are cordially invited to attend the Annual Meeting in person. However, in order to assure your representation at the Annual Meeting, you are urged to vote promptly. You may vote your shares via a toll-free telephone number or over the Internet or by completing, signing and mailing a proxy card or voting instruction card. Please follow the instructions on the enclosed proxy card or voting instruction form. If you received a paper copy of the proxy card by mail, you may sign, date and mail the proxy card in the envelope provided.

Proxies submitted by mail, the Internet or telephone must be received by 11:59 p.m., Eastern Time, on April 28, 2014.

Vote by Internet

www.envisionreports.com/HLF

24 hours a day / 7 days a week

Instructions:

Vote by telephone

1.800.652.VOTE (8683) via touch tone phone

toll-free 24 hours a day / 7 days a week

Instructions:

Place, time and date of meeting.    This Proxy Statement is being furnished to the Company’s shareholders in connection with the solicitation of proxies on behalf of our Board of Directors for use at the Meeting to be held on Tuesday, April 29, 2014, at 10:30 a.m., Pacific Daylight Time, and at any subsequent adjournment(s) or postponement(s) thereof, for the purposes set forth herein and in the accompanying Notice of Annual General Meeting of Shareholders. The Meeting will be held at 800 W. Olympic Blvd., Suite 406, Los Angeles, California, 90015. Our telephone number is (213) 745-0500.

Record date and voting securities.    Only shareholders of record at the close of business on February 28, 2014, or the Record Date, or duly authorized proxy holders of such shareholders of record, are entitled to notice of and to vote at the Meeting. The Company has one series of Common Shares outstanding. As of the Record Date 101,320,167 Common Shares were issued and outstanding and held of record by 695 registered holders.

Voting.    Each shareholder is entitled to one vote for each Common Share held on the Record Date on all matters submitted for consideration at the Meeting. A quorum, representing the holders of not less than a majority of the issued and outstanding Common Shares entitled to vote at the Meeting, must be present in person or by proxy at the Meeting for the transaction of business. Common Shares that reflect abstentions are treated as Common Shares that are present and entitled to vote for the purposes of establishing a quorum and for purposes of determining the outcome of any matter submitted to the shareholders for a vote. However, abstentions do not constitute a vote “for” or “against” any matter and thus will be disregarded in the calculation of a plurality.

“Broker non-votes” are Common Shares held in “street name” through a broker or other nominee over which the broker or nominee lacks discretionary power to vote and for which the broker or nominee has not received specific voting instructions. Thus, if you do not give your broker or nominee specific instructions, your Common Shares may not be voted on certain matters. Common Shares that reflect “broker non-votes” are treated as Common Shares that are present and entitled to vote for the purposes of

establishing a quorum. However, for the purposes of determining the outcome of any matter as to which the broker or nominee has indicated on the proxy that it does not have discretionary authority to vote, those Common Shares will be treated as not present and not entitled to vote with respect to that matter, even though those Common Shares are considered present and entitled to vote for the purposes of establishing a quorum and may be entitled to vote on other matters.

If you are a beneficial shareholder and your broker or nominee holds your Common Shares in its name, the broker or nominee is permitted to vote your Common Shares on matters such as the ratification of the appointment of independent registered public accountants, even if the broker or nominee does not receive voting instructions from you.

Directors are elected by a plurality, and the five nominees who receive the most votes will be elected. Abstentions and “broker non-votes” will not affect the outcome of the election. In respect of all other proposals, to be approved, any such proposal must receive the affirmative vote of a majority of the Common Shares present or represented by proxy and entitled to vote on such matter. In determining the outcome of such proposals, abstentions have the effect of a negative vote. “Broker non-votes” will not affect the outcome of any such proposals.

Majority vote policy.    Pursuant to our Principles of Corporate Governance, any current member of our Board of Directors that is a nominee in an uncontested election who does not receive a majority of votes cast “for” his or her election is required to tender his or her resignation promptly following the failure to receive the required vote. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee of the Board is then required to make a recommendation to the Board as to whether the Board should accept the resignation, and the Board is required to decide whether to accept the resignation and to disclose its decision-making process.

The results of the advisory vote on the Company’s executive compensation are not binding on the Board of Directors.

Revocability of proxies.    Any proxy given pursuant to this solicitation may be revoked by the person giving it at any time before its use by either (a) delivering to the Corporate Secretary of the Company a written notice of revocation or a duly executed proxy bearing a later date, (b) granting a subsequent proxy through the Internet or telephone or (c) if you are a shareholder at the Record Date, by attending the Meeting and voting in person.

Proxy solicitation.    Proxies may be solicited by certain of our directors, officers, and regular employees, without additional compensation, in person, by telephone, facsimile, or electronic mail. We will, upon request, reimburse brokerage firms and others for their reasonable expenses in forwarding solicitation material to the beneficial owners of Common Shares.

Meeting attendance.    Only shareholders of record as of February 28, 2014, authorized proxy holders of such shareholders, and invited guests of the Board may attend the Meeting.

If you are a shareholder of record, in order to be admitted to the meeting, you will need to produce picture identification (such as a valid driver’s license or passport) as well as copy of a form of proxy or voting instruction form or a Notice showing your name and address. If you are an authorized proxy holder of a shareholder of record, in order to attend the meeting, you will need both an admission ticket and picture identification (such as a valid driver’s license or passport). To obtain an admission ticket to the Meeting, please send your written request to Assistant Corporate Secretary, Herbalife International of America, Inc., 800 W. Olympic Boulevard, Suite 406, Los Angeles, California 90015. Your request must be received on or before April 17, 2014 and include a copy of a form of proxy or voting instruction form confirming your appointment as a proxy holder. In your request, please include the address where your admission ticket should be mailed, and any special assistance needs. The Board requests that persons attending the Meeting observe a professional business dress code.

Meaning of shareholder of record.    You will only be a shareholder of record if your name is recorded on the Company’s register of members. If your name is not recorded on the Company’s register of members, any shares you hold in the Company will be held beneficially. In this case you may still be entitled to direct the holder of your shares as to who should be appointed as proxy in respect of those shares and/or as to how to vote those shares on your behalf. If your shares are held beneficially and you wish to attend and vote at the meeting in person, you will need to attend as a proxy holder of the shareholder of record.

Shareholders who have purchased their shares on an exchange may hold those shares through a depository, in which case they will be beneficial shareholders and will not be shareholders of record. If you hold your shares in “street name” you will not be a shareholder of record.

If you wish to enquire as to whether or not you are a shareholder of record, please contact our Assistant Corporate Secretary at c/o Herbalife International of America, Inc., 800 W. Olympic Boulevard, Suite 406, Los Angeles, California 90015.

Additional information.    This Proxy Statement contains summaries of certain documents, but you are urged to read the documents themselves for the complete information. The summaries are qualified in their entirety by reference to the complete text of the document. In the event that any of the terms, conditions or other provisions of any such document is inconsistent with or contrary to the description or terms in this Proxy Statement, such document will control. Each of these documents, as well as those documents referenced in this Proxy Statement as being available in print upon request, are available upon request to the Company by following the procedures described under Part 7 —”Annual report, financial and additional information.”

Our Board of Directors has affirmatively determined that each of Messrs. Barnes, Bermingham, Carmona, Christodoro, Cozza, Dunn, Gary, Levitt, Lynn and Nelson and Mmes. Black, Nicholas and Otero is or was independent under section 303A.02 of the New York Stock Exchange, or the NYSE, Listed Company Manual and the Company’s Categorical Standards of Independence, which are included as part of our Principles of Corporate Governance that are available on our website at www.herbalife.com by following the links through “Investor Relations” to “Corporate

Governance.” The NYSE’s independence guidelines and the Company’s Categorical Standards include a series of objective tests, such as the person is not an employee of the Company and has not engaged in various types of business dealings involving the Company that would prevent the person from being an independent director. The Board of Directors has affirmatively determined that none of the foregoing directors had any relationship with the Company that would compromise his or her independence.

The Board of Directors met 15 times during 2013. All Board members attended at least 75% of the aggregate number of Board meetings and applicable committee meetings held while such individuals were serving on such committees. Each director is expected to dedicate sufficient time, energy and attention to ensure the diligent performance of his or her duties, including attending meetings of the shareholders of the Company, the Board of Directors and committees of which he or she is a member. All then-current members of the Board attended the 2013 Annual Meeting.

It is the policy of the Board of Directors to hold four regularly scheduled meetings, each of which includes an executive session of non-management directors without the presence of management as well as a session of only the independent directors. Additional meetings of the Board of Directors, executive sessions of non-management directors and sessions of independent directors may be held from time to time as required or determined to be necessary.

Currently Mr. Johnson serves as our Chairman and CEO. The Board has determined that a board leadership structure featuring a single leader as Chairman and CEO combined with a Lead Director best serves the interests of the Company and its shareholders. Combining the roles of Chairman and CEO makes clear that the individual serving in these roles has primary responsibility for managing the Company’s business, under the oversight and review of the Board. Under this structure, the Chairman and CEO chairs Board meetings, where the Board discusses strategic and business issues. The Board believes that this approach is appropriate because the CEO is the individual with primary responsibility for implementing the Company’s strategy, directing the work of other executive officers and leading implementation of the Company’s

strategic plans as approved by the Board. This structure results in a single leader being directly accountable to the Board and, through the Board, to shareholders, and enables the CEO to act as the key link between the Board and other members of management.

In addition, the Board believes this structure is appropriate for the Company as the CEO is the person most knowledgeable about the Company and its business and is therefore the individual best able to provide guidance for productive Board meetings. The unique nature of the Company’s direct selling business model requires that the Chairman and CEO forge a close relationship with, and obtain and maintain the trust of, the Company’s independent members.

Because the Board also believes that strong, independent Board leadership is a critical aspect of effective corporate governance, the Board has established the position of Lead Director. The Lead Director is an independent director elected for a two year term by the independent directors. The Lead Director chairs the Board meetings during all executive sessions and when the Chairman and CEO is unable to participate in Board meetings, and is a contact point for major shareholders and third parties who may desire to contact the Board independently of the Chairman and CEO. Mr. Bermingham served as Lead Director during 2012 and until February 24, 2013. Mr. Levitt was elected Lead Director effective February 24, 2013. With Mr. Levitt’s Board service coming to an end, the independent directors will elect the next Lead Director prior to the Meeting. The responsibilities of the Lead Director include:

The Board periodically reviews the structure of Board and Company leadership as part of the succession planning process.

The full Board of Directors has the ultimate responsibility for risk oversight regarding the Company. The Board oversees a Company-wide approach to risk management, designed to enhance shareholder value and to support the achievement of strategic objectives and to improve long-term organizational performance. The first aspect of the Board’s approach to risk management is to determine the appropriate level of risk for the Company generally, followed by an assessment of the specific risks the Company faces and the steps management is taking to manage those risks. The full Board’s involvement in setting the Company’s business strategy facilitates those assessments, culminating in the development of a strategic plan that reflects the Board’s and management’s consensus as to appropriate levels of risk as to specific aspects of the Company’s business and the appropriate measures to manage those risks. Additionally, the full Board of Directors participates in a periodic enterprise risk management assessment during its quarterly meetings. In this process, risk is assessed throughout the business, focusing on risks arising out of various aspects of the Company’s strategic plan and its implementation, including financial, legal/compliance, operational/strategic and compensation risks. The Board also assesses its role in

risk oversight throughout our business. In addition to the discussion of risk with the full Board at least once a year, the independent directors discuss risk management during executive sessions without management present with the Lead Director presiding.

While the full Board of Directors has the ultimate oversight responsibility for the risk management process, various Board committees also have responsibility for risk management in certain areas. In particular, the audit committee focuses on financial risk, including internal controls, and assesses the Company’s risk profile with the Company’s internal auditors. The internal controls risk profile drives the internal audit plan for the coming year. The audit committee also handles violations of the Company’s Code of Ethics and related corporate policies. Finally, the compensation committee periodically reviews compensation practices and policies to confirm that they do not encourage excessive risk taking. Management regularly reports on each such risk to the relevant committee or the full Board, as appropriate, and additional review or reporting on enterprise risks is conducted as needed or as requested by the Board or the relevant committee.

Each non-management director receives (i) $70,000 per year for services as a director and $5,000 for each Board committee on which the director served, an additional $20,000 per year for the Lead Director, an additional $15,000 per year for the chair of the audit committee, an additional $10,000 per year for the chair of the compensation committee and an additional $10,000 per year for the chair of the nominating and corporate governance committee, (ii) $1,500 for each Board meeting attended by the director in person or $1,000 per Board meeting attended telephonically, (iii) $2,500 for each audit committee meeting attended either in person or telephonically and (iv) $1,500 for each compensation committee and for each nominating and corporate governance committee meeting attended either in person or telephonically. Cash fees with respect to Board or committee membership or service as the Lead Director or a committee chair are paid ratably assuming twelve consecutive months of service from the date the particular membership or service commences. Cash fees for attending Board or committee meetings are paid in the month following the meeting date. Non-management directors also receive an annual equity grant pursuant to the Company’s Amended and Restated Non-Management Directors Compensation Plan, which is part of the Herbalife Ltd. Amended and Restated 2005 Stock Incentive Plan, in the form of stock-settled stock appreciation rights, or SARs, with a grant date fair value

(as determined for financial reporting purposes) of $110,000 (rounded down to the nearest whole unit).

In 2013, in recognition of the fact that the amount of time and effort required of our Lead Director had increased significantly, the Board increased the compensation payable to our Lead Director by an additional $125,000 per year paid in the form of an award of restricted stock units, or RSUs, that vest on continuation of service as Lead Director in ratable amounts over each quarter over the life of the award. Our Lead Director typically serves for a two-year term and the appointment is reconsidered biannually concurrently with our annual general meeting of shareholders. When Mr. Levitt was appointed our Lead Director on February 24, 2013, his award had a grant date fair value of $270,859, covering his incremental compensation for serving as Lead Director from February 2013 through the Meeting and for the normal two-year term that follows.

The Company has adopted stock ownership guidelines applicable to each non-management director. Specifically, each non-management director is encouraged to hold Common Shares and/or vested equity awards with a value equal to five times such director’s annual retainer within two years of such director’s appointment or election to the Board of Directors. As of the date of this Proxy Statement, all Board members who have served for two or more years are in compliance with our guidelines.

Shareholders and other parties interested in communicating directly with the Board of Directors, non-management directors as a group or individual directors, including Michael Levitt in his capacity as the Lead Director, may do so by writing to Herbalife Ltd., c/o Assistant Corporate Secretary, 800 W. Olympic Blvd, Suite 406, Los Angeles, CA 90015, or by email at corpsec@herbalife.com, indicating to whose attention the communication should be directed. Under a process approved by the Board of Directors for handling communications received by the Company and addressed to non-management directors, the Corporate Secretary of the Company reviews all such correspondence and forwards to members of the audit committee a summary

and/or copies of any such correspondence that, in the opinion of the Corporate Secretary, deal with the functions of the Board of Directors or committees thereof, or that he otherwise determines requires their attention. Directors may at any time review a log of all communications received by the Company and addressed to members of the Board of Directors and request copies of any such correspondence. Concern relating to accounting, internal controls or auditing matters are immediately brought to the attention of the Company’s internal audit department and handled in accordance with procedures established by the audit committee with respect to such matters.

Our Board of Directors has a standing audit committee, nominating and corporate governance committee, and compensation committee.

Audit committee

During 2013 the audit committee consisted of Messrs. Barnes, Bermingham and Levitt. Each director who served on the audit committee in 2013 is independent as discussed above under “— Director Independence.” As required by Rule 303A.07 of the NYSE Listed Company Manual, the Board of Directors has affirmatively determined that each of Messrs. Barnes, Bermingham and Levitt is financially literate, and that Mr. Bermingham is an “audit committee financial expert,” as defined in Item 407(d)(5) of Regulation S-K. Mr. Barnes currently serves on the audit committee of four public companies. As required by Rule 303A.07 of the NYSE Listed Company Manual, the Board of Directors has affirmatively determined that Mr. Barnes’ simultaneous services on the audit committees of more than three public companies would not impair his ability to effectively serve on the Company’s audit committee.

The principal duties of the audit committee are as follows:

Our Board of Directors has adopted a written charter for the audit committee which is available on the Company’s website at www.herbalife.com by following the links through “Investor Relations” to “Corporate Governance,” and in print to any shareholder who requests it as set forth under Part 7 — ”Annual report, financial and additional information.” In 2013, the audit committee met eleven times.

Nominating and corporate governance committee

During 2013, the nominating and corporate governance committee consisted of Mme. Nicholas and Messrs. Barnes and Dunn. Each director who served on the nominating and corporate governance committee in 2013 is independent as discussed above under “— Director Independence.” The principal duties of the nominating and corporate governance committee are as follows:

In identifying candidates to serve on the Board, the nominating and corporate governance committee first determines the evolving needs of the Board taking into account such factors as it deems appropriate, including, among others, the current composition of the Board of Directors, the range of talents, experiences and skills that would best complement those already represented on the Board of Directors, the balance of management and independent directors and the need for financial or other specialized expertise, as discussed in greater detail below under Part 3 — “Proposal 1: The Election of Directors —Director Qualifications.” Applying these criteria, the nominating and corporate governance committee considers candidates for director suggested by its members and other directors, as well as by management and shareholders. The nominating and corporate governance committee also retains a third-party executive search firm on an ad-hoc basis to identify and review candidates upon request of the committee from time to time.

If the nominating and corporate governance committee decides, on the basis of its preliminary review, to proceed with further consideration, the committee members, as well as other directors as appropriate, interview the nominee. After completing this evaluation and interview, the nominating and corporate governance committee makes a recommendation to the full Board of Directors, which makes the final determination whether to nominate the candidate after considering the nominating and corporate governance committee’s report.

A shareholder who wishes to recommend a prospective nominee for the Board of Directors pursuant to the provisions of the Amended and Restated Memorandum and Articles of Association, or the Memorandum and Articles of Association, should notify the Corporate Secretary in writing with the appropriate supporting materials, as more fully described under Part 7 — “Shareholder nominations.”

The Board of Directors has adopted a written charter for the nominating and corporate governance committee, which is available on the Company’s website at www.herbalife.com by following the links through “Investor Relations” to “Corporate Governance” or in print to any shareholder who requests it as set forth under Part 7 — “Annual report, financial and additional information.” In 2013, the nominating and corporate governance committee met six times.

Compensation committee

From January 1, 2013 through July 27, 2013, the compensation committee consisted of Mme. Black and Messrs. Bermingham and Dunn. Since July 27, 2013, the compensation committee has consisted of Mme. Black and Messrs. Bermingham, Christodoro and Dunn. Each director who served on the compensation committee in 2013 is independent as discussed above under “— Director Independence.” The principal duties of the compensation committee are as follows:

Among other duties, the compensation committee is responsible for making the initial risk assessment of the Company’s compensation programs and determining whether those programs require modification to remain consistent with the Board’s determinations as to the levels of risk that are appropriate for the Company. In its assessment, the compensation committee reviewed the Company’s compensation structure and noted numerous ways in which risk is potentially mitigated by practices and policies that include: the balanced mix between short- and long-term incentives; the use of multiple performance measures for the CEO’s annual incentive awards; strong internal controls; the use of stock ownership guidelines; and the existence of an anti-hedging policy. In light of its analysis, the committee believes that the architecture of the Company’s compensation programs provide various safeguards to protect against undue risk-taking.

Our Board of Directors has adopted a written charter for the compensation committee which is available on the Company’s website at www.herbalife.com by following the links through “Investor Relations” to “Corporate

Governance” or in print to any shareholder who requests it as set forth under Part 7 — “Annual report, financial and additional information.” In 2013, the compensation committee met seven times.

During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013, Mme. Black and Messrs. Bermingham, Christodoro and Dunn served on the compensation committee of the Board of Directors. During the fiscal year ended December 31,

2013, there were no relationships or transactions between the Company and any member of the compensation committee requiring disclosure hereunder.

Generally

Our Memorandum and Articles of Association presently provide for not less than one nor more than fifteen directors. The Board of Directors has, by resolution, presently fixed the number of directors at thirteen. The Memorandum and Articles of Association divide the Board of Directors into three classes, with the terms of office of each class of directors currently ending in different years. Currently the Board consists of four directors in Class I, four in Class II and five in Class III. The current terms of office of Class I directors end at the Meeting. The current terms of office of Class II and Class III directors end at the Company’s annual general meetings of shareholders in 2015 and 2016, respectively. The term of office of the Class I directors elected at the Meeting will end at the annual general meeting in 2016. Effective in 2016, and pursuant to an amendment to the Memorandum and Articles of Association approved at the 2013 annual general meeting, all Board members will serve one-year terms and these three classes will be consolidated into a single class.

On March 22, 2014, each of Mr. Levitt and Ms. Black informed the Board that they would decline to stand for re-election at the Meeting and Ms. Nicholas informed the Board that she would resign from her Class II directorship effective as of the Meeting. The Board has nominated each of Michael Johnson, John Tartol, Hunter Gary and Jesse Lynn for election as Class I directors to serve two year terms expiring at the 2016 annual general meeting. In addition, the Board has nominated Mr. James L. Nelson as a Class II director to serve the remainder of the term of the directorship vacated by Ms. Nicholas. The nominations of Messrs. Gary, Lynn and Nelson were made pursuant to that certain Amended and Restated Support Agreement, or the Support Agreement, dated March 23, 2014, by and between the Company and Carl C. Icahn, Icahn Partners Master Fund LP, Icahn Offshore LP, Icahn Partners LP, Icahn Onshore LP, Beckton Corp., Hopper Investments LLC, Barberry Corp., High River Limited Partnership, Icahn Capital LP, IPH GP LLC, Icahn Enterprises Holdings L.P. and Icahn Enterprises G.P. Inc., or collectively, the Icahn Parties. A copy of the Support Agreement was filed by the Company on Form 8-K on March 24, 2014. The Support

Agreement provides that, among other things, the Company will nominate two designees of the Icahn Parties (Messrs. Gary and Lynn) for election to Class I directorships at the Meeting and one designee of the Icahn Parties (Mr. Nelson) to serve the remainder of the term of the Class II directorship being vacated. In consideration of these nominations, the Icahn Parties have agreed to vote their common shares in favor of the Board’s nominees for director at the Meeting and thereafter for so long as any Icahn Party designee is a member of the Board. The Icahn Parties beneficially own approximately 16.8% of our common shares. The Support Agreement also includes standstill and voting provisions applicable to the Icahn Parties’ ownership of Company common shares. The Company did not receive any shareholder nominations for director.

The persons named as proxies on the accompanying proxy card intend to vote the Common Shares as to which they are granted authority to vote for the election of the nominees listed above. The form of proxy card does not permit shareholders to vote for a greater number of nominees than five. Although the Board of Directors does not know of any reason why any nominee will be unavailable for election, in the event any nominee should be unavailable at the time of the Meeting, the proxies may be voted for a substitute nominee as selected by the Board of Directors.

Director qualifications

The Board believes that the Board, as a whole, should possess a combination of skills, professional experience and diversity of backgrounds necessary to oversee the Company’s business. In addition, the Board believes that there are certain attributes that every director should possess, as reflected in the Board’s membership criteria discussed below. Accordingly, the Board and the nominating and corporate governance committee consider the qualifications of directors and director candidates individually and in the broader context of the Board’s overall composition and the Company’s current and future needs.

The nominating and corporate governance committee is responsible for developing and recommending Board membership criteria to the Board for approval. The criteria, which are set forth in the Company’s Principles of Corporate Governance, are available on the Company’s website, www.herbalife.com, by following the links through “Investor Relations” to “Corporate Governance,” and include business experience and skills, independence, judgment, integrity, the ability to commit sufficient time and attention to Board activities and the absence of potential conflicts with the Company’s interests. In addition, the nominating and corporate governance committee periodically evaluates the composition of the Board to assess the skills and experience that are currently represented on the Board, as well as the skills and experience that the Board will find valuable in the future, given the Company’s current situation and strategic plans. The nominating and corporate governance committee seeks a variety of occupational, educational and personal backgrounds on the Board in order to obtain a range of viewpoints and perspectives and to enhance the diversity of the Board in such areas as professional experience, geography, race, gender, ethnicity and age. While the nominating and corporate governance committee does not have a formal policy with respect to diversity, the nominating and corporate governance committee

believes that it is essential that Board members represent diverse viewpoints. This periodic assessment enables the Board to update the skills and experience it seeks in the Board as a whole, and in individual directors, as the Company’s needs evolve and change over time and to assess effectiveness of efforts at pursuing diversity. In identifying director candidates from time to time, the nominating and corporate governance committee may establish specific skills and experience that it believes the Company should seek in order to constitute a balanced and effective Board.

In evaluating director candidates, and considering incumbent directors for renomination to the Board, the nominating and corporate governance committee has considered a variety of factors. These include each nominee’s independence, financial literacy, personal and professional accomplishments and experience, each in light of the composition of the Board as a whole and the needs of the Company in general, and for incumbent directors, past performance on the Board. The process undertaken by the nominating and corporate governance committee in recommending qualified director candidates is described above under Part 2 — “Committees of the board — Nominating and corporate governance committee.”

		Michael O. Johnson Age 59   Class I Director since 2003

Mr. Johnson is Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company. Mr. Johnson joined the Company in April 2003 as Chief Executive Officer and became Chairman of the Board in May 2007. Mr. Johnson spent 17 years with The Walt Disney Company, where he most recently served as President of Walt Disney International, and also served as President of Asia Pacific for The Walt Disney Company and President of Buena Vista Home Entertainment. Mr. Johnson has also previously served as a publisher of Audio Times magazine, and has directed the regional sales efforts of Warner Amex Satellite Entertainment Company for three of its television channels, including MTV, Nickelodeon and The Movie Channel. Mr. Johnson formerly served as a director of Univision Communications, Inc., a television company serving Spanish-speaking Americans until March 2007, and on the Board of Regents for Loyola High School of Los Angeles. Mr. Johnson received his Bachelor of Arts in Political Science from Western State College.

Mr. Johnson’s qualifications to serve on our Board include his ten years of experience as our Chief Executive Officer, his six years of experience as our Chairman, and his significant experience in international business matters.

		John Tartol Age 62   Class I Director since 2005

Mr. Tartol has been an independent Herbalife Member for 31 years and a member of the Company’s Chairman’s Club since 2000. He is active in training other Herbalife members all over the world and has served on various strategy and planning groups for Herbalife. He is also active on behalf of various charities in his community and worldwide on behalf of the Herbalife Family Foundation. He has a Bachelor’s degree in finance from the University of Illinois.

Mr. Tartol’s qualifications to serve on our Board include his 31 years of experience as an Herbalife Member, which brings a first-hand understanding of the function and specific needs of our independent Members, the ultimate drivers of our business, to the Board. His tenure as a Member also provides valuable insight into the Company’s growth and development over the 31-year period.

Hunter C. Gary, age 39, has been a director of Cadus, a company focused on licensing yeast-based and other drug discovery technologies to third parties, since February 2014 and as President and Chief Executive Officer since March, 2014. He has served as Senior Vice President of Icahn Enterprises L.P. (a diversified holding company engaged in a variety of businesses, including investment, automotive, energy, gaming, railcar, food packaging, metals, real estate and home fashion) since November 2010. Prior to that time, Mr. Gary has been employed by Icahn Associates Corporation, an affiliate of Icahn Enterprises L.P., in various roles since June 2003, most recently as the Chief Operating Officer of Icahn Sourcing LLC. From 1997 to 2002, Mr. Gary worked at Kaufhof Warenhaus AG, a subsidiary of the Metro Group AG, most recently as a Managing Director. Mr. Gary has been a director of: Federal-Mogul Corporation, a supplier of automotive powertrain and safety components, since October 2012; Viskase Companies Inc., a meat casing company, since August 2012; PSC Metals Inc., a metal recycling company, since May 2012; XO Holdings, a competitive provider of telecom services, since September 2011; Tropicana Entertainment Inc., a company that is primarily engaged in the business of owning and operating casinos and resorts, since March 2010; Tropicana Entertainment Cayman Holdings Co. Ltd. since January 2011; American Railcar Industries, Inc., a railcar manufacturing company, since January 2008; Voltari Corporation, a mobile data services provider, since October 2007; and WestPoint Home LLC, a home textiles manufacturer, since June 2007. Federal-Mogul, Viskase Companies, PSC Metals, XO Holdings, Tropicana Entertainment, American Railcar Industries and WestPoint Home each are indirectly controlled by Carl C. Icahn. Mr. Icahn also has a non-controlling interest in Voltari through the ownership of securities. Mr. Gary is married to Mr. Carl Icahn’s wife’s daughter. Mr. Gary received his B.S. with senior honors from Georgetown University as well as a certificate of executive development from Columbia Graduate School of Business. Mr. Gary’s qualifications to serve on our Board include his experience in corporate finance and his experience as a director of various public companies. Mr. Gary was recommended by the Icahn Parties pursuant to the Support Agreement.

Jesse A. Lynn, age 43, has been Assistant General Counsel of Icahn Enterprises L.P. (a diversified holding company engaged in a variety of businesses, including investment, automotive, energy, gaming, railcar, food packaging, metals, real estate and home fashion) since September 2004. From February 2000 until September 2004, Mr. Lynn worked as an associate in the New York office of Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C. in its business and finance department. From September 1996 until February 2000, Mr. Lynn was an associate in the corporate group at Gordon Altman Butowsky Weitzen Shalov & Wein. Mr. Lynn received a B.A. in 1992 from the University of Michigan and a J.D. in 1996 from the Boston University School of Law. Mr. Lynn was recommended by the Icahn Parties pursuant to the Support Agreement.

Class II Nominee

		James L. Nelson   Class II Proposed New Director

James L. Nelson has served as a director and member of the audit committee of Icahn Enterprises GP (IEP) since June 2001. Mr. Nelson has served as a director and member of audit committees of the Viskase Companies, Inc. from April 2003 through April 2010, American Entertainment Properties Corp. from May 2005 until November 2007, and Atlantic Coast Entertainment Holdings, Inc. from May 2005 until November 2007. Mr. Nelson has been a director of Tropicana Entertainment Inc. since March 2010 and was a member of the audit committee from March 2010 until December 2013. Mr. Nelson was Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Eaglescliff Corporation, a specialty investment banking, consulting and wealth management company from 1986 until 2009. From March 1998 through 2003, Mr. Nelson was Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Orbit Aviation, Inc., a company engaged in the acquisition and completion of Boeing Business Jets for private and corporate clients. From August 1995 until July 1999, Mr. Nelson was Chief Executive Officer and Co-Chairman of Orbitex Management, Inc., a financial services company the mutual fund sector. From August 1995 until March 2001, he was on the Board of Orbitex Financial Services Group. From January 2008 through June 2008, Mr. Nelson served as a director and member of the audit committee of Shuffle Master, Inc., a gaming manufacturing company. From March 2008 until March 2010, Mr. Nelson was a director and served on the audit committee of Pacific Energy Resources Ltd., an energy producer. From April 2008 to November 2012, Mr. Nelson served as a director and as Chairman of the audit committee of the board of directors of Cequel Communications, an owner and operator of a large cable television system. From April 2010 through November 2013, Mr. Nelson served as a director and member of the audit committee of Take Two Interactive Software, Inc. a publisher, developer, and distributor of video games and video game peripherals. Since June 2011,. Mr. Nelson has served as a director and member of the compensation, governance and strategic alternatives committees of Voltari Corporation (f/k/a Motricity Inc.) and since January 2012, Chairman of its board of directors. Since May 2013, Mr. Nelson has served as a director of Single Touch Systems, Inc., a mobile media solutions provider. Since November 2013, Mr. Nelson has served as a director of VII Peaks Co-Optivist Income BDC II, Inc., an externally managed, closed-end

management investment company. Mr. Nelson brings to his service as a director his significant experience in leadership roles serving as Chief Executive Officer, Director and Chairman of audit committee’s. Mr. Nelson was recommended by the Icahn Parties pursuant to the Support Agreement.

		Pedro Cardoso Age 47   Class II Director since 2009

Mr. Cardoso has been an independent Herbalife Member for 22 years and a member of the Company’s Chairman’s Club since 2005. Mr. Cardoso has built a successful organization of Herbalife independent Members in several countries. He has been active in training Herbalife Members around the world, and is a member of various strategy and planning groups for Herbalife. He is also an active volunteer for the Herbalife Family Foundation. Prior to joining Herbalife, Mr. Cardoso served as the Transportation Supervisor of the Avon Company from 1990 to 1992. He received his degree in applied mathematics from the Autonomous University of Lisbon.

Mr. Cardoso’s qualifications to serve on our Board include his 22 years of experience as an Herbalife Member, which brings a first-hand understanding of the function and specific needs of our independent Members, the ultimate drivers of our business, to the Board. His tenure as a Member also provides valuable insight into the Company’s growth and development over the 22-year period.

Jonathan Christodoro has served as a Managing Director of Icahn Capital LP, the entity through which Carl C. Icahn manages investment funds, since July 2012. Mr. Christodoro is responsible for identifying, analyzing and monitoring investment opportunities and portfolio companies for Icahn Capital. Prior to joining Icahn Capital LP, from 2007-2012, Mr. Christodoro served in various investment and research roles at P2 Capital Partners, LLC, a privately owned hedge fund sponsor, and at Prentice Capital Management, LP and S.A.C Capital Advisors, LP. Mr. Christodoro began his career as an investment banking analyst at Morgan Stanley, where he focused on merger and acquisition transactions across a variety of industries. Mr. Christodoro has been a director of: Hologic, Inc., a supplier of diagnostic, medical imaging and surgical products, since December 2013; and Talisman Energy Inc., an independent oil and gas exploration and production company, since December 2013; Enzon Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a biotechnology company, since October 2013 (and has been Chairman of the Board of Enzon since November 2013). Carl C. Icahn has a non-controlling interest in Herbalife through the ownership of securities. Mr. Christodoro received an M.B.A from the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School of Business with Distinction, majoring in Finance and Entrepreneurial Management. Mr. Christodoro received a B.S. in Applied Economics and Management Magna Cum Laude with Honors Distinction in Research from Cornell University. Mr. Christodoro also served in the United States Marine Corps.

Mr. Christodoro’s qualifications to serve on our Board include his service on other boards as well as his extensive investment, research and investment banking experience in a variety of industries.

Keith Cozza has been the President and Chief Executive Officer of Icahn Enterprises L.P., a diversified holding company engaged in a variety of businesses, including investment, automotive, energy, gaming, railcar, food packaging, metals, real estate and home fashion, since February 2014. Mr. Cozza has served as Chief Operating Officer of Icahn Capital LP, the subsidiary of Icahn Enterprises through which Carl C. Icahn manages investment funds, since February 2013. From February 2013 to February 2014, Mr. Cozza served as Executive Vice President of Icahn Enterprises. Mr. Cozza is also the Chief Financial Officer of Icahn Associates Holding LLC, a position he has held since 2006. Mr. Cozza served as Controller at Icahn Associates Holding LLC from 2004 to 2006. Prior to that Mr. Cozza was a senior assurance associate at Grant Thornton LLP. Mr. Cozza has been a director of: Tropicana Entertainment Inc., a company that is primarily engaged in the business of owning and operating casinos and resorts, since February 2014; PSC Metals Inc., a metal recycling company, since February 2014; Icahn Enterprises L.P., since September 2012; and XO Holdings, a competitive provider of telecom services, since August 2011. Mr. Cozza was previously a director of CVR Refining, LP, an independent downstream energy limited partnership, from January 2013 to February 2014; and MGM Holdings Inc., an entertainment company focused on the production and distribution of film and television content, from April 2012 to August 2012. CVR Refining, Icahn Enterprises, PSC Metals, Tropicana and XO Holdings are indirectly controlled by Carl C. Icahn. Mr. Icahn also has or previously had a non-controlling interest in Herbalife and MGM Holdings through the ownership of securities. Mr. Cozza holds a B.S. in Accounting from the University of Dayton.

Mr. Cozza’s qualifications to serve on our Board include his service on other public company boards as well as his significant corporate, finance, accounting and investment experience.

Mr. Barnes is the retired Vice President and Treasurer of PG&E Corporation, a position he held from 2001 to 2005. From 1997 to 2001, Mr. Barnes was Vice President and Treasurer of Gap, Inc. Prior to that, Mr. Barnes held various executive positions with Pacific Telesis Group/SBC Communications. Earlier in his career, Mr. Barnes was a consultant at Touche, Ross & Co., a predecessor of Deloitte & Touche. Mr. Barnes received his Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees from Stanford University, and his MBA from Stanford Business School. Mr. Barnes is a member of the boards of directors of Principal Funds, Inc., Principal Variable Contracts, Inc., The McClatchy Company, a newspaper and Internet publisher, and Frontier Communications Corporation, a telecommunications-focused company, and was a member of the board of directors of Longs Drug Stores Corporation from February 2002 through October 2008.

Mr. Barnes’ qualifications to serve on our Board include his past professional financial experience, which provides the Board with valuable knowledge of financial matters, as well as his experience serving on other public company boards, which adds a depth of knowledge to our Board as to best practices in corporate governance.

Mr. Bermingham is currently retired, and has over 40 years of business experience. From 1994 to 1997, Mr. Bermingham was the Vice Chairman of the Board of American Golf. Mr. Bermingham worked for Collins Food International, which was acquired by Sizzler International, Inc., from 1967 to 1994. He served as the Chief Executive Officer and a member of the board of directors of this publicly traded company for the period from 1987 to 1994. Mr. Bermingham currently serves on the board of Special Value Expansion Fund, LLC. Additionally, Mr. Bermingham served on the board of Ignite Restaurant Group, Inc. until December 31, 2013, the board of Interactive Health, Inc. until May 2011 and the board of EaglePicher Corp. until 2012. Mr. Bermingham was a certified public accountant and received his Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Colorado.

Mr. Bermingham’s qualifications to serve on our Board include his significant consumer marketing experience, which is relevant to the Company’s business operations in selling and manufacturing packaged food and nutritional supplement products; his past professional financial experience, which provides the Board with important knowledge regarding financial reporting rules; his prior service as a chief executive officer, which helps the Board better understand management’s day-to-day actions and responsibilities; and his service on other public company boards, which adds a depth of knowledge to our Board as to best practices in corporate governance.

		Dr. Richard Carmona Age 64   Class III Director since 2013

Dr. Carmona has been Vice Chairman of Canyon Ranch, a life-enhancement company, since October 2006. He also serves as Chief Executive Officer of the Canyon Ranch Health division and president of the nonprofit Canyon Ranch Institute. He is also the first Distinguished Professor of Public Health at the Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health at the University of Arizona. Prior to joining Canyon Ranch, Dr. Carmona served as the 17th Surgeon General of the United States from August 2002 through July 2006. Previously, he was Chairman of the State of Arizona Southern Regional Emergency Medical System; a professor of surgery, public health, and family and community medicine at the University of Arizona; and surgeon and deputy sheriff of the Pima County, Arizona, Sheriff’s Department. Dr. Carmona served in the U.S. Army and the Army’s Special Forces. Dr. Carmona is a director of Taser International Healthline Networks, and Clorox.

Dr. Carmona’s qualifications include his extensive experience in public health and clinical sciences. His commitment to prevention as an effective means to improve public health and reduce health care costs brings valuable and significant insight to the Board, and his experience serving on other public company boards adds a depth of knowledge as to best practices in corporate governance.

		Jeffrey T. Dunn Age 56   Class III Director since 2009

Mr. Dunn has served as the President and Chief Executive Officer of Bolthouse Farms, a premier health and wellness company located in Bakersfield, California, since May 2008. Bolthouse Farms is the North American leader in growing/processing of fresh carrots as well as a growing national brand of super-premium juices and smoothies. From January 2006 through December 2007, Mr. Dunn served as the President and Chief Executive Officer of Ubiquity Brands, Inc., the parent company of Jay Foods, Inc., a Midwestern manufacturer and marketer of snacks, and prior to Ubiquity was the Managing Partner of Grassy Lakes Partners, an investment and consulting firm. From 1985 to 2004, Mr. Dunn held a variety of senior executive positions with The Coca-Cola Company, serving most recently as Executive Vice President, President and Chief Operating Officer of Coca-Cola North America and previously serving as President and Chief Operating Officer of Coca-Cola Americas. Mr. Dunn received his Bacherlor’s degree in business administration from the University of Georgia and his MBA from Pepperdine University. In 2010, Mr. Dunn was appointed to the advisory board of the U.S. Food Day Initiative for the Center for Science in the Public Interest.

Mr. Dunn’s qualifications to serve on our Board include his significant consumer marketing experience, which is relevant to the Company’s business operations in selling and manufacturing packaged food and nutritional supplement products; his significant knowledge and experience regarding international business matters, which is relevant to the Company in light of its operations across 91 countries worldwide; and his service as a chief executive officer, which helps the Board better understand management’s day-to-day actions and responsibilities.

		Maria Otero Age 63   Class III Director since 2013

Maria Otero, age 63, currently serves on the Council on Foreign Relations and serves on the boards of Kresge Foundation, Public Welfare Foundation and Development Alternatives Inc. She has chaired the board of Bread for the World, and also served on the boards of the Calvert Foundation, U.S. Institute for Peace, the Inter-American Foundation and BRAC in Bangladesh. Ms. Otero also worked as an economist for Latin America and the Caribbean in the Women in Development Office of USAID. In 1986, Ms. Otero joined Accion, one of the first micro lending organizations in the world, as country director in Honduras. In 2000, President Clinton appointed Otero to the board of the United States Institute of Peace, where she served for eight years. In 2006 she was appointed by Secretary General Kofi Annan to the U.N. Advisors Group on Inclusive Financial Sectors. In June 2009, Otero was nominated to serve as undersecretary for Democracy and Global Affairs, which made her the highest ranking Hispanic official at the State Department, and the first Latina undersecretary in its history. On January 17, 2012, Secretary Clinton named Maria Otero as undersecretary for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights, a newly created office and position at the State Department. During her time at the Department of State, Under Secretary Otero also served as the President’s Special Coordinator for Tibetan Issues. Otero holds an M.A. in literature from the University of Maryland; an M.A. in international relations from the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS), at the Johns Hopkins University; and an honorary Doctorate of Humane Letters from Dartmouth College.

Ms. Otero’s qualifications include an expansive career focused on empowering those less fortunate around the world, and her leadership, extensive public service and microfinance experience which add a valuable breadth and depth of knowledge to the Board.

Our executive compensation program is intended to attract, motivate and retain a talented and high-performing executive team to lead the Company’s success selling food, dietary supplements and personal care products that are regulated at varying levels in the markets where we operate through a direct selling business channel. The Company’s executive compensation program is designed to incent and create long-term growth and enhanced value for shareholders and is simple in design. The vast majority of the compensation of the Company’s named executive officers — the officers identified in Part 4 — “Compensation discussion

and analysis” — is tied to Company operating and share price performance. Volume Point growth, operating income and earnings per share are used to determine executives’ annual incentive compensation. Long term incentives were provided to our named executive officers in 2013 in the form of an annual grant of SARs that are subject to performance and service criteria. These awards directly align the long-term interests of our executives with those of our shareholders.

In addition, the management team accomplished major strategic objectives in 2013 that provided significant support for the Company’s continued growth and success, including:

Additional information regarding the Company’s compensation program applicable to the named executive officers is described in the Part 4 — “Compensation discussion and analysis” and the related tables and

narrative disclosure. For the reasons discussed above, the Board of Directors unanimously recommends that shareholders vote in favor of the following resolution:

“Resolved, that the shareholders approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation of the named executive officers, as disclosed pursuant to Item 402 of Regulation S-K and described in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, the compensation tables and the accompanying narrative disclosure, in the proxy statement.”

While the resolution is non-binding, the Board of Directors values the opinions that shareholders express in their votes and in any additional dialogue. It will consider the outcome of the vote and those opinions when making future compensation decisions. The next shareholder advisory vote on the Company’s executive compensation is expected to occur at the 2015 annual general meeting and the Company currently intends to offer shareholders this advisory vote on an annual basis.

On February 13, 2014, the Board of Directors approved and recommended for submission to the shareholders for their adoption the Herbalife Ltd. 2014 Stock Incentive Plan, or the Incentive Plan. The approval by an affirmative vote of a majority of the votes cast on the proposal (either in person or by proxy) is required for adoption.

The Board believes that the adoption of the Incentive Plan is desirable because it will promote and closely align the interests of employees, directors and consultants of the Company and its shareholders by providing the ability for the Company to award stock-based compensation and other performance-based compensation. The Board believes the Incentive Plan promotes the Company’s ability to drive performance, which the Board believes enhances long-term shareholder value; increases employee stock ownership; and enables the Company to attract and retain an outstanding employees, directors and consultants.

The Incentive Plan allows for awards that are intended to qualify as “performance-based compensation” within the meaning of Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code. In general, in order for the Company to be able to deduct compensation in excess of $1,000,000 paid in any one year to the Company’s chief executive officer or any of the Company’s three other most highly compensated executive officers (other than the Company’s chief financial officer), such compensation must qualify as “performance-based.” In order for awards under the Incentive Plan to be eligible to qualify as “performance-based compensation” for purposes of Section 162(m) of the Code, among other things, the material terms of the performance goals under which compensation may be paid must be disclosed to and approved by the Company’s shareholders. The material terms include (i) the employees eligible to receive compensation under the Incentive Plan, (ii) a description of the business criteria on which any performance goals are based for awards under the Incentive Plan that are intended to be “performance-based compensation” under Section 162(m) of the Code, and (iii) the maximum amount of compensation that can be paid to an employee under the Incentive Plan’s performance goals. Each of these aspects is discussed below, and approval of the Incentive Plan will constitute approval of the material terms of the performance goals.

A maximum of 5,000,000 Common Shares plus (i) any Common Shares that remained available for issuance under the Company’s Prior Plans (as defined below) as of April 29, 2014 and (ii) any Common Shares subject to outstanding awards under any Prior Plans as of April 29, 2014 that after such date cease for any reason to be subject to such awards (other than by reason of exercise or settlement of the awards to the extent they are exercised for or settled in vested and nonforfeitable shares), subject to adjustments as described below, will be

available for grants of awards under the Incentive Plan. As of February 28, 2014, the number of Common Shares that remain available for issuance under the Prior Plans is 1,886,911 and the number of Common Shares subject to outstanding awards is 12,068,274. The Board believes that this number of Common Shares represents a reasonable amount of potential equity dilution in light of the purposes of the Incentive Plan as described above. The 6,886,911 shares available under the Incentive Plan would represent approximately 6.06% of fully diluted Common Shares outstanding as of February 28, 2014. If the Company issues awards in amounts consistent with its three-year average burn rate described below, it is anticipated that the shares available under the Incentive Plan will meet the Company’s needs for at least three years. Assuming the Company’s shareholders approve the Incentive Plan at the Meeting, the Company will file a Registration Statement on Form S-8 to register the Common Shares available for issuance under the Incentive Plan under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

The following summary of the Incentive Plan is qualified in its entirety by reference to the complete text of the Incentive Plan as set forth in Appendix A to this Proxy Statement. You should read the complete text of the Incentive Plan for more details regarding the operation of the Incentive Plan.

Information regarding grants made under prior plans

The Company has historically granted equity awards under various plans, including most recently the Amended and Restated 2005 Stock Incentive Plan and the 2004 Stock Incentive Plans, which we refer to together as the Prior Plans. If the Incentive Plan is approved by the Company’s shareholders as proposed, no further awards will be made under the Prior Plans.

Information as of February 28, 2014, regarding overhang from awards outstanding under the Prior Plans is summarized in the following table:

One means of evaluating the long-term dilution from equity compensation plans is to monitor the number of equity awards granted annually, commonly referred to as “burn rate.” As shown in the following table, the

Company’s three-year average annual burn rate calculated using the methodology of ISS has been 1.63%, which is below the ISS burn rate threshold of 2.77% applied to our industry.

Key features of the incentive plan

Description of the incentive plan

Eligibility. Our non-employee directors, employees and consultants, and the employees and consultants of our subsidiaries, are eligible to participate in the Incentive Plan. As of February 28, 2014, we had 12 non-employee directors, approximately 7000 employees and several hundred consultants globally that were eligible to participate in the Incentive Plan. As a matter of practice, we limit plan participation among our employees to those that are director-level and above, and dramatically limit the participation of consultants. 

Administration. The Incentive Plan will be administered by the compensation committee or such other committee as designated by the Board, or the Committee. The Committee may grant awards to eligible persons and, to the extent permitted by applicable law, may delegate to (i) one or more subcommittees consisting of one or more directors and/or officers of the Company any of the authority of the Committee under the Incentive Plan or (ii) one or more officers, the right to grant awards in accordance with the terms of the Incentive Plan. The Committee may further designate or delegate to one or more additional officers or employees of the Company or any subsidiary, and/or to one or more agents, authority to assist the Committee in any or all aspects of the day-to-day administration of the Incentive Plan and/or of the

awards granted under the Incentive Plan. The Committee has broad authority, as stated in the Incentive Plan, to interpret and administer the Incentive Plan and related agreements and documents and to take various other actions with respect thereto.

Common shares available under the Incentive Plan

Subject to adjustment as provided for in the Incentive Plan, the number of Common Shares subject to grants under the Incentive Plan will not exceed in the aggregate:

These share authorizations are affected by various provisions in the Incentive Plan, as discussed below under “Share counting” and “Other provisions — Adjustments.” The Common Shares may be authorized and unissued Common Shares or Common Shares that were reacquired by the Company, including Common Shares purchased in the open market, or a combination of the foregoing. After the effective date of the Incentive Plan, no awards may be granted under the Prior Plans, although outstanding awards under the Prior Plans will continue to be administered pursuant to their terms.

Share counting

Under the Incentive Plan, each Common Share that is subject to a stock option or SAR counts against the aggregate Plan limit as one Common Share, and each Common Share that is subject to an award other than a stock option or SAR under the Incentive Plan counts against the aggregate Incentive Plan limit as 2.13 Common Shares. However, for each Common Share subject to an award that is forfeited, expires or is settled for cash (in whole or in part) under the Incentive Plan, one Common Share will be added back to the aggregate Incentive Plan limit for such Common Shares subject to a stock option or SAR, and 2.13 Common Shares will be added back to the aggregate Incentive Plan limit for such Common Shares subject to an award other than a stock option or SAR. The number of Common Shares available

for grant under the Incentive Plan will not be increased by the following:

Common Shares issued as substitution awards (as defined in the Incentive Plan) in connection with any merger with or acquisition of a company will not decrease the number of Common Shares available for grant under the Incentive Plan, but Common Shares subject to substitution awards will not be available for further awards under the Incentive Plan if the substitution awards are forfeited, expire or settled in cash. The Company may use Common Shares under a pre-existing, shareholder-approved plan of a company acquired by the Company for awards under the Incentive Plan, which Common Shares will not decrease the number of Common Shares available for grant under the Incentive Plan, but consistent with NYSE rules such Common Shares may only be used for grants of awards made prior to the expiration of the pre-existing plan and to persons who were not employees or directors of the Company or any subsidiary prior to such acquisition.

Award limitations

Subject to certain adjustments as provided for in the Incentive Plan:

As of February 28, 2014, the closing price of a Common Share was $66.61.

Section 162(m) of the code

The Incentive Plan is designed to allow the Company to grant awards that satisfy the requirements for the “performance-based compensation” exclusion from the deduction limitations under Section 162(m) of the Code. The Board and the Committee believe that it is in the Company’s interests and the interests of the Company’s shareholders to maintain an equity and long-term cash compensation plan under which compensation awards made to the Company’s named executive officers (other than the chief financial officer) can qualify for deductibility for federal income tax purposes based on various performance criteria set forth in the Incentive Plan as described below. Accordingly, the Incentive Plan has been structured in a manner such that awards under it can satisfy the requirements for the “performance-based compensation” exclusion from the deduction limitations under Section 162(m) of the Code. However, the Company cannot guarantee that awards under the Incentive Plan will actually qualify as “performance-based compensation” under Section 162(m) and the Committee may determine to grant awards that do not qualify as performance-based compensation under Section 162(m).

Repricing prohibited

The Committee may not authorize the amendment of any outstanding stock option or SAR to reduce the exercise or base price, and no outstanding stock option or SAR may be cancelled in exchange for other awards, or cancelled in exchange for stock options or SARs having a lower exercise or base price, or cancelled in exchange for cash, without the approval of the Company’s shareholders. However, the foregoing provision does not apply in connection with an adjustment involving a corporate transaction or event as provided in the Incentive Plan.

Types of awards authorized under the incentive plan

Stock options and stock appreciation rights. The Committee may award stock options in the form of nonqualified stock options or incentive stock options, or SARs, each with a maximum term of ten years. The Committee will establish the vesting schedule for stock options and the method of payment for the exercise price, which may include cash, Common Shares, or other awards.

Restricted stock and stock units. The Committee may award restricted stock and restricted stock units and establish the applicable restrictions, including any limitation on voting rights or the receipt of dividends or dividend equivalents. The Committee will establish the manner and timing under which restrictions may lapse; provided, however, in general, if the vesting and/or settlement of any restricted stock or stock unit award is based on performance criteria and level of achievement versus such

criteria, such award will be subject to a performance period of not less than twelve months, and if the vesting and/or settlement of any restricted stock or stock unit award is based solely upon continued employment and/or the passage of time, such award will not vest or be settled in full prior to the twelfth month following its date of grant, other than in the event of the holder’s death, disability or attainment of retirement status or in the event of a change of control of the Company. The Committee may also use up to 5% of the aggregate number of Common Shares authorized for issuance under the Incentive Plan to grant restricted stock or stock unit awards that are not subject to the minimum vesting conditions described in the preceding sentence. The Committee may decide to include dividends or dividend equivalents as part of an award of restricted stock or stock units and may accrue dividends or dividend equivalents, as applicable, with or without interest, until the award is paid. However, in no event will dividends or dividend equivalents be paid during the performance period with respect to restricted stock or stock unit awards that are subject to performance-based vesting criteria.

Incentive bonuses. The Committee may establish performance criteria and level of achievement versus these criteria that shall determine the amount payable under an incentive bonus. Payment of the amount due under an incentive bonus may be denominated in cash or shares as determined by the Committee. Performance criteria mean any measures, as determined by the Committee, which may be used to measure the level of performance of the Company or a participant during a performance period.

Qualifying performance criteria

The Committee may specify that an award or a portion of an award is intended to satisfy the requirements for “performance-based compensation” under Section 162(m) of the Code provided that the performance criteria for an award or portion of an award that is intended to satisfy the requirements for “performance-based compensation” under Section 162(m) of the Code shall be a measure based on one or more qualifying performance criteria selected by the Committee and specified at the time the award is granted. The performance criteria for any award that is intended to satisfy the requirements for “performance-based compensation” under Section 162(m) of the Code will be any one or more of the following performance criteria, or derivations of such performance criteria, either individually, alternatively or in any combination, applied to either the Company as a whole or to a business unit or subsidiary, either individually, alternatively or in any combination, and measured either annually or cumulatively over a period of years, on an

absolute basis or relative to a pre-established target, to previous years’ results or to a designated comparison group, in each case as specified by the Committee: (i) cash flow (before or after dividends), (ii) earnings per share (including earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization), (iii) stock price, (iv) return on equity, (v) total shareholder return, (vi) return on capital (including return on total capital or return on invested capital), (vii) return on assets or net assets, (viii) market capitalization, (ix) economic value added, (x) debt leverage (debt to capital), (xi) revenue (including adjusted revenue, Volume Points, net sales and analogous financial measures), (xii) income or net income, (xiii) operating income, (xiv) operating profit or net operating profit, (xv) operating margin or profit margin, (xvi) return on operating revenue, (xvii) cash from operations, (xviii) operating ratio, (xix) operating revenue or (xx) customer service. To the extent consistent with Section 162(m) of the Code, the Committee may provide, at the time an award is granted or at any time during the first 90 days of the applicable performance period (or prior to the expiration of 25% of the performance period if the performance period is less than one year, or at such later time if permitted pursuant to Section 162(m)), that any evaluation of performance under a qualifying performance criteria shall include or exclude any of the following events that occurs during the applicable performance period: (a) the effects of charges for restructurings, discontinued operations, extraordinary items, (b) items of gain, loss or expense determined to be extraordinary or unusual in nature or related to the disposal of a segment of a business or related to a change in accounting principle, (c) the cumulative effect of accounting change, (d) asset write-downs, (e) litigation, claims, judgments, settlements or loss contingencies, (f) the effect of changes in tax law, accounting principles or other such laws or provisions affecting reported results, (g) accruals for reorganization and restructuring programs and (h) accruals of any amounts for payment under the Incentive Plan or any other compensation arrangement maintained by the Company.

Other provisions

Limitations on transfer. Awards are not transferable other than by will or the laws of descent and distribution unless determined otherwise by the Committee. Awards may not be pledged or otherwise encumbered.

Amendments. The Board may alter, amend, suspend or terminate the Incentive Plan from time to time subject to approval by the Company’s shareholders if required by applicable law, including the rules and regulations of the NYSE. The Committee may waive conditions or amend the term of awards, or otherwise amend or suspend awards already granted subject to certain conditions.

Adjustments. In the event of certain corporate transaction or events affecting the number or type of outstanding Common Shares, including, for example, a dividend or other distribution (whether in cash or stock), recapitalization, stock split, reverse stock split, reorganization, merger, consolidation, split-up, spin-off, combination, repurchase, or exchange of shares or issuance of warrants, the Committee will make adjustments as it deems appropriate. These adjustments include changing the number and type of shares to be issued under the Incentive Plan and outstanding awards; changing the per-participant limitations on awards and the grant, purchase or exercise price of outstanding awards; and changing the limitations on the total amount of restricted stock, stock units, performance awards or other stock-based award that may be granted. The Committee may also make adjustments in the terms of awards in connection with certain acquisitions, and make adjustments in performance award criteria or in the terms and conditions of other awards in recognition of unusual or nonrecurring events affecting the Company or its financial statements or of changes in applicable laws, regulations, or accounting principles.

Federal income tax consequences

This general discussion of the U.S. federal income tax consequences of stock options and other awards that may be awarded under the Incentive Plan is intended for the information of shareholders considering how to vote with respect to this proposal and not as tax guidance to participants in the Incentive Plan. Different tax rules may apply to specific participants and transactions under the Incentive Plan, particularly in jurisdictions outside the United States. In addition, this discussion does not address other federal or state tax issues that may be implicated by awards that may be granted under the Incentive Plan.

The grant of an option or SAR will create no U.S. federal income tax consequences for the participant or the Company. A participant will have no taxable income upon exercise of an incentive stock option, except that the alternative minimum tax may apply. Upon exercise of an option other than an incentive stock option, a participant generally must recognize ordinary income equal to the fair market value of the Common Shares acquired minus the exercise price. Upon a disposition of Common Shares acquired by exercise of an incentive stock option before the end of the applicable incentive stock option holding periods, the participant generally must recognize ordinary income equal to the lesser of (i) the fair market value of the Common Shares at the date of exercise minus the exercise price or (ii) the amount realized upon the disposition of the Common Shares minus the exercise price. Otherwise, a participant’s disposition of Common Shares acquired upon the exercise of an option (including an incentive stock option for which the incentive stock option holding periods are met) generally will result in only capital gain or loss. Other awards under the Incentive

Plan, including non-qualified options and SARs, generally will result in ordinary income to the participant at the later of the time of delivery of cash, Common Shares, or other awards, or the time that either the risk of forfeiture or restriction on transferability lapses on previously delivered cash, Common Shares, or other awards. Except as discussed below, the Company generally will be entitled to a tax deduction equal to the amount recognized as ordinary income by the participant in connection with an option, SARs, or other award, but will be entitled to no tax deduction relating to amounts that represent a capital gain to a participant. Thus, the Company will not be entitled to any tax deduction with respect to an incentive stock option if the participant holds the Common Shares for the incentive stock option holding periods.

Section 162(m) of the Code generally allows the Company to obtain tax deductions without limit for “performance-based compensation.” The Incentive Plan is designed to permit the grant of options and SARs, and certain awards of stock units and contingent long-term performance awards that are intended to qualify as “performance-based compensation” not subject to Section 162(m)’s $1.0 million deductibility cap. The rules and regulations promulgated under Section 162(m) of the Code are complicated and subject to change, possibly with retroactive effect. In addition, a number of requirements must be met in order for particular awards to so qualify. As such, there can be no assurance that any compensation awarded or paid under the Incentive Plan will be fully deductible under all circumstances.

The audit committee has selected PricewaterhouseCoopers, or PwC, as the Company’s independent registered public accountants for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2014. Services provided to the Company and its subsidiaries by PwC in fiscal 2013 and 2012 are described below under “— Fees to independent registered public accountants for fiscal 2012 and 2013.” The circumstances under which PwC in 2013 was first retained as the Company’s independent accountants are described below under “Change in independent accountants.” Additional information regarding the audit committee is set forth in the “Audit committee report.”

The Memorandum and Articles of Association do not require that our shareholders ratify the selection of PwC as the Company’s independent registered public accountants. However, we are requesting ratification because we believe it is a matter of good corporate

practice. If the Company’s shareholders do not ratify the selection, the Audit Committee will reconsider whether or not to retain PwC, but may, nonetheless, retain PwC as the Company’s independent registered public accountants. Even if the selection is ratified, the audit committee in its discretion may change the appointment at any time if it determines that the change would be in the best interests of the Company and its shareholders.

The Company has been advised that representatives of PwC will be present at the Meeting where they will have an opportunity to make a statement if they desire to do so and will be available to respond to appropriate questions.

In the event shareholders do not ratify the appointment of PwC, the appointment will be reconsidered by the audit committee and the Board of Directors.

Change in independent accountants

As previously disclosed, on April 8, 2013, KPMG notified the Company that KPMG resigned, effective immediately, as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm. KPMG stated it had concluded it was no longer independent because of the then-alleged insider trading in the Company’s securities by one of KPMG’s former partners who, until April 5, 2013, was the KPMG engagement partner on the Company’s audit. KPMG advised the Company it resigned as the Company’s independent accountant solely due to the impairment of KPMG’s independence resulting from its now former partner’s unlawful activities and not for any reason related to the Company’s financial statements, its accounting practices, the integrity of the Company’s management or for any other reason. As a result of the then-alleged insider trading activity by its now former partner and KPMG’s resulting resignation on April 8, 2013, KPMG notified the Company its independence had been impaired and it had no option but to withdraw its audit reports on the Company’s financial statements for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2010, 2011 and 2012 and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010, 2011 and 2012 and that such reports should no longer be relied upon as a result of KPMG’s lack of independence created by the circumstances described above.

On May 21, 2013, after considering a number of firms, the audit committee engaged PwC to serve as the Company’s new independent registered public accounting firm to audit the Company’s financial statements for its fiscal year ending December 31, 2013 and to re-audit the Company’s financial statements for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2010, 2011 and 2012, including the audit of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as

of December 31, 2012 required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

None of KPMG’s audit reports on the Company’s financial statements for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2010, 2011 and 2012 or KPMG’s audit reports on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010, 2011 and 2012 contained an adverse opinion or a disclaimer of opinion, nor was any such report qualified or modified as to uncertainty, audit scope or accounting principles. In addition, at no point during the three fiscal years ended December 31, 2012 and the subsequent interim period through April 8, 2013 were there any (i) disagreements with KPMG on any matter of accounting principles or practices, financial statement disclosure or auditing scope or procedures, which disagreement(s), if not resolved to the satisfaction of KPMG, would have caused it to make reference to the subject matter of the disagreement(s) in connection with its reports, or (ii) “reportable events” as such term is defined in Item 304(a)(1)(v) of Regulation S-K.

Additionally, during the fiscal years ended December 31, 2011 and 2012, and the subsequent interim period through May 21, 2013, neither the Company, nor anyone on its behalf, consulted PwC regarding either (i) the application of accounting principles to a specified transaction, either completed or proposed, or the type of audit opinion that might be rendered with respect to the Company’s consolidated financial statements, in connection with which either a written report or oral advice was provided to the Company that PwC concluded was an important factor considered by the Company in reaching a decision as to the accounting, auditing or financial reporting issue; or (ii) any matter that was either

The audit committee is responsible for monitoring our financial auditing, accounting and financial reporting processes and our system of internal controls, and selecting the independent registered public accounting firm on behalf of the Board of Directors. Our management has primary responsibility for our internal controls and reporting process. Our independent registered public accounting firm, PwC, is responsible for performing an independent audit of our consolidated financial statements and the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and issuing an opinion thereon. In this context, the audit committee met regularly and held discussions with management and PwC. Management represented to the audit committee that the consolidated financial statements for the fiscal year 2013 were prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

The audit committee hereby reports as follows:

Based on the reviews and discussions referred to above, the audit committee recommended to the Board of Directors that the audited consolidated financial statements be included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013, which have been filed with the SEC. The audit committee also selected PwC to serve as our independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2014.

AUDIT COMMITTEE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Leroy T. Barnes, Jr., Chairman

Richard P. Bermingham

Michael J. Levitt

Pre-approval policy

The audit committee has adopted pre-approval policies and procedures for audit and non-audit services which the Company’s independent auditors have historically provided. Pursuant to those policies and procedures, the Company’s external auditor cannot be engaged to provide the Company any audit or non-audit services to the Company unless the engagement is pre-approved by the audit committee in compliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. All fees and services described in the table above were pre-approved pursuant to this policy.

At our 2013 annual general meeting, our shareholders expressed strong support for our 2012 executive compensation program, with over 87% of votes cast in favor of the advisory vote proposal. Our 2012 executive compensation program was modeled after our programs in 2011 and in 2010, both of which also received strong support from our shareholders. When designing our 2013 executive compensation program, the compensation committee of the Board of Directors, or the Committee, considered, among other things, our 2010-2012 financial performance and shareholder feedback, and after careful consideration, determined we could make some slight improvements to reflect current business trends in order to improve the design of our executive compensation program for 2013.

We believe that the Company’s financial performance is facilitated by the “pay for performance” design of our compensation program. Our program motivates our executives to deliver financial results, with the appropriate level of risk taking, against three performance metrics in a manner that ultimately results in the realized growth of shareholder equity value. Our executives have the opportunity to earn annual incentive awards provided that the Company achieves aggressive growth targets in Volume Points, operating income and earnings per share, or EPS.

Volume Points are point values assigned to each of our products. We assign a Volume Point value to a product when it is first introduced into a market, and that value is unaffected by subsequent exchange rate and price changes. As a result, we believe that Volume Points exhibit

the most accurate available measure of organic growth or decline in the local demand for our products.

Incenting operating income growth ensures that Volume Point growth is achieved on a cost-effective basis and that cost efficiencies and productivity enhancements are achieved throughout the Company. Incenting EPS growth ensures that the favorable contribution from operating income growth is realized within a tax efficient capital structure. Equity awards — that comprise the potential for the most significant income opportunity for our executive officers — directly align our executives’ interests in creating enhanced shareholder value with those of our shareholders.

Our 2013 executive compensation program incorporates an important performance related enhancement intended to ensure the sustainability of our annual achievements in Volume Point, Operating Income and EPS growth, and we expect to retain this enhancement in 2014. As a company that sells nutrition products through the direct selling channel, the success of our Members engaged in product

resale, or our sales leaders, is critical to the financial success of our company as a whole. The 2013 annual equity awards issued to our NEOs — and to all of our Section 16 reporting executives — requires that, in order for the awards to vest, the Company must meet the additional performance criteria of achieving sales leader retention levels set by the Committee.

We believe that our 2013 executive compensation program aided in providing the appropriate incentives that led to our shareholder returns in 2013. The Committee reviews the executive compensation program of the “Herbalife Peer Group”, an industry peer group selected with the aid of the Committee’s compensation consultant, when making decisions regarding our executive compensation program. In 2013, these peer companies were within 50% and 200% of our annual revenues, market capitalization, or both. Our industry peer group median revenue of $5.8 billion and market capitalization of $9.1 billion were comparable to ours, particularly after considering our revenue and market capitalization growth rates.