Proxy Statement

Table of Contents

Information about the Annual Meeting and Voting			1
Proposals
Proposal No. 1 — Election of 11 Directors			4
Proposal No. 2 — Ratification of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm			9
Proposal No. 3 — Advisory Vote on Compensation of our Named Executive Officers			9
Proposal No. 4 — Approval of 2015 Stock Incentive Plan			10
Company Information
Management			14
Board of Directors and Committees			14
Committees of the Board			14
Audit Committee Report			16
Director Compensation			17
Corporate Governance			17
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management			21
Compensation Discussion and Analysis			23
Executive Compensation
Summary Compensation Table			35
Potential Payments upon Termination or Change in Control			36
Grants of Plan-Based Awards			37
Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End			38
Option Exercises and Stock Vested			39
Nonqualified Defined Contribution and Other Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plans			39
Compensation Committee Report			40
Equity Compensation Plan Information			40
Other Matters
Electronic Access to Proxy Materials and Annual Report			41
Copies of Annual Report on Form 10-K			41
Submitting Shareholder Proposals for the 2016 Annual Meeting of Shareholders			41
Appendix A — 2015 Stock Incentive Plan			A-1

ii

Information about the Annual Meeting and Voting

 Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to Be Held on
Tuesday, May 12, 2015. The Proxy Statement and Annual Report to Shareholders and Form 10-K
(the “Proxy Materials”) are available at www.AFGinc.com.

Why did I receive these proxy materials?

You received these proxy materials because you are a shareholder of the Company. The Board is providing these proxy materials to you in connection with our annual meeting to be held on May 12, 2015. As a shareholder of the Company, you are entitled to vote on the important proposals described in this proxy statement. Since it is not practical for all shareholders to attend the annual meeting and vote in person, the Board is seeking your proxy to vote on these matters.

What is a proxy?

A proxy is your legal designation of another person to vote the common shares you own at the annual meeting. By completing and returning the proxy card(s), which identifies the individuals or trustees authorized to act as your proxy, you are giving each of those individuals authority to vote your common shares as you have instructed. By voting via proxy, each shareholder is able to cast his or her vote without having to attend the annual meeting in person.

Why did I receive more than one proxy card?

You will receive multiple proxy cards if you hold your common shares in different ways (e.g., trusts, custodial accounts, joint tenancy) or in multiple accounts. If your common shares are held by a broker or bank (i.e., in “street name”), you will receive your proxy card and other voting information from your broker, bank, trust, or other nominee. It is important that you complete, sign, date, and return each proxy card you receive, or vote using the telephone, or by using the Internet (as described in the instructions included with your proxy card(s) or in the Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials).

Why didn’t I receive paper copies of the proxy materials?

As permitted by the Securities and Exchange Commission, we are making this proxy statement and our annual report available to our shareholders electronically via the Internet. We believe this delivery method expedites your receipt of materials, while also lowering costs and reducing the environmental impact of our annual meeting. The notice of electronic availability contains instructions on how to access this proxy statement and our annual report and how to vote online.

If you received a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials by mail, you will not receive a printed copy of the proxy materials unless you request one in accordance with the instructions provided in the notice. The Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials has been mailed to shareholders on or about March 27, 2015, and provides instructions on how you may access and review the proxy materials on the Internet.

What is the record date and what does it mean?

The Board established March 18, 2015 as the record date for the annual meeting of shareholders to be held on May 12, 2015. Shareholders who own common shares of the Company at the close of business on the record date are entitled to notice of and to vote at the annual meeting.

What is the difference between a “registered shareholder” and a “street name shareholder”?

These terms describe how your common shares are held. If your common shares are registered directly in your name with American Stock Transfer & Trust Company, our transfer agent, you are a “registered shareholder.” If your common shares are held in the name of a broker, bank, trust, or other nominee as a custodian, you are a “street name shareholder.”

How many common shares are entitled to vote at the annual meeting?

As of the record date, there were 87,815,835 shares of common stock outstanding and eligible to vote. This number does not include 14,940,627 shares held by subsidiaries of AFG which, under Ohio law, are not entitled to vote and are not considered to be outstanding for purposes of the meeting.

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

A majority of the Company’s outstanding common shares as of the record date must be present in order for us to hold the annual meeting. This is called a quorum. Broker “non-votes” and abstentions are counted as present for purposes of determining whether a quorum exists. A broker “non-vote” occurs when a nominee, such as a bank or broker holding shares for a beneficial owner, does not vote on a particular proposal because the nominee does not have discretionary voting power for the particular item and has not received instructions from the beneficial

2015 Proxy Statement | General Information

pg. 1

owner. Proposal 2 (Ratification of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm) is the only routine matter on this year’s ballot that may be voted on by brokers without instructions from beneficial owners.

What vote is required to approve each proposal?

Shareholders are entitled to one vote per share of common stock on all matters submitted for consideration at the Annual Meeting. The affirmative vote of a majority of the shares of common stock represented in person or by proxy at the Annual Meeting is required for the election of directors, approval of the advisory resolution to approve named executive officers’ compensation, approval of the 2015 Stock Incentive Plan and the ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2015.

Abstentions will not count as a vote for or against any of these proposals.

What if a nominee for director fails to receive more votes in favor of election than votes withheld?

Nominees for director in uncontested elections must receive more votes in favor of election than votes withheld. If a nominee fails to receive more votes in favor than votes withheld, our Regulations require the nominee to promptly tender his or her resignation to the Board. Our Corporate Governance Committee will then make a recommendation to the full Board of Directors as to whether to accept or reject the tendered resignation, or whether other action should be taken. Our Board of Directors will then decide whether to accept or reject the resignation, taking into account the Corporate Governance Committee’s recommendation. The determination of our Board of Directors and the rationale behind the decision will be publicly disclosed (by a press release, a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission or other broadly disseminated means of communication) within 90 days from the date of the certification of the election results of our meeting. If the incumbent director’s resignation is not accepted by our Board of Directors, the director will continue to serve until his or her successor is duly elected, or his or her earlier resignation or removal. If a director’s resignation is accepted by our Board of Directors, then our Board of Directors may fill any resulting vacancy or decrease the size of the Board of Directors.

Where will I be able to find voting results of the annual meeting?

We will announce preliminary voting results at the annual meeting. We will also publish final voting results in a Current Report on Form 8-K to be filed with the SEC within four business days after the annual meeting.

How do I vote my common shares?

(1) Via Internet:  Go to www.proxyvote.com to vote via the Internet. You will need to follow the instructions on your Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials (“Notice”) or proxy card and the website. If you vote via the Internet, you may incur telephone and Internet access charges.

(2) By Telephone:  Call the toll-free telephone number on the proxy card or the website to vote by telephone. You will need to follow the instructions and the voice prompts.

(3) By Mail:  Request, complete and return a paper proxy card, following the instructions on your Notice.

(4) In Person:  Attend the Annual Meeting, or send a personal representative with an appropriate proxy, to vote by ballot.

If you vote via the Internet or by telephone, your electronic vote authorizes the named proxies in the same manner as if you signed, dated and returned your proxy card. If you vote via the Internet or by telephone, do not return your proxy card.

If your shares are held in “street name” (that is, in the name of a bank, broker or other holder of record), you will receive instructions from the holder of record that you must follow in order for your shares to be voted, or you may request the record holder to issue you a proxy covering your shares.

Can I change my vote after I have mailed in my proxy card(s) or submitted my vote using the Internet or telephone?

Yes, whether you vote by mail, via the Internet or by telephone, you may revoke your proxy at any time before it is voted by submitting a new proxy with a later date, voting via the Internet or by telephone at a later time, delivering a written notice of revocation to the Company’s Secretary, at the address set forth above under “2015 Proxy Statement — Summary — Company Communications” or by voting in person at the meeting.

What if I hold shares through the Company’s Retirement and Savings Plan?

If you are a participant in the Company’s retirement and savings plan with a balance in the AFG Common Stock Fund, the accompanying proxy card shows the number of shares of common stock attributed to your account balance, calculated as of the record date. In order for your plan shares to be voted in your discretion, you must vote at least two business days prior to the day of the meeting (by the end of the day on May 8, 2015) either by Internet, telephone, or returned properly signed proxy card. If you choose not to vote or if you return an invalid or unvoted

2015 Proxy Statement | General Information

pg. 2

proxy card, the Administrative Plan Committee, consisting of four current or former senior executive officers of the Company, will vote your plan shares in the Committee’s sole discretion. Plan participants’ votes will be processed by the plan trustee, and will not be disclosed to the Company.

How will my proxy be voted?

If you complete, sign, date, and return your proxy card(s) or vote by telephone or by using the Internet, your proxy will be voted in accordance with your instructions. If you sign and date your proxy card(s) but do not indicate how you want to vote, your common shares will be voted for each of the proposals as the Board recommends.

What if my common shares are held in “street name” by my broker?

You should instruct your broker how you would like to vote your shares by using the written instruction form and envelope provided by your broker. If you do not provide your broker with instructions, under the rules of the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”), your broker may, but is not required to, vote your common shares with respect to certain “routine” matters. However, on other matters, when the broker has not received voting instructions from its customers, the broker cannot vote the shares on the matter and a “broker non-vote” occurs. Proposal 2 (Ratification of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm) is the only routine matter on this year’s ballot to be voted on by the shareholders. Proposals 1, 3 and 4 are not considered routine matters under the NYSE rules. This means that brokers may not vote your common shares on such proposals if you have not given your broker specific instructions as to how to vote. Please be sure to give specific voting instructions to your broker so that your votes can be counted. If you hold your common shares in your broker’s name and wish to vote in person at the annual meeting, you must contact your broker and request a document called a “legal proxy.” You must bring this legal proxy to the annual meeting in order to vote in person.

What are the Board’s recommendations on how I should vote my common shares?

The Board recommends that you vote your common shares as follows:

Does the Company have cumulative voting?

Yes. Shareholders have cumulative voting rights in the election of directors and one vote per share on all other matters. Cumulative voting allows a shareholder to multiply the number of shares owned on the record date by the number of directors to be elected and to cast the total for one nominee or distribute the votes among the nominees as the shareholder desires. If cumulative voting is invoked, the 11 nominees who receive the greatest number of votes will be elected, subject to the tender of resignation and related procedures set forth above with respect to incumbent directors who fail to receive more votes in favor than votes withheld. In order to invoke cumulative voting, notice of cumulative voting must be given in writing to the Company’s corporate secretary not less than 48 hours before the time fixed for the holding of the meeting. The authority solicited by this proxy statement includes discretionary authority to cumulate votes in the election of directors. If cumulative voting is in effect with respect to the election of directors, the named proxies reserve the right to cumulate the votes represented by the proxies they receive and distribute such votes in accordance with their best judgment in order to elect as many of the nominees of the Board of Directors as possible.

Who may attend the annual meeting?

All shareholders are eligible to attend the annual meeting. However, only those shareholders of record at the close of business on March 18, 2015 are entitled to vote at the annual meeting.

2015 Proxy Statement | General Information

pg. 3

Proposals

Proposal No. 1 — Election of 11 Directors

The Board of Directors oversees the management of the Company on your behalf. The Board reviews AFG’s long-term strategic plans and exercises direct decision-making authority in key areas such as choosing the Co-Chief Executive Officers, setting the scope of their authority to manage the Company’s business day-to-day, and evaluating senior management performance.

Upon the recommendation of the Corporate Governance Committee, the Board of Directors has nominated 11 individuals to hold office until the next annual meeting of shareholders and until their successors are elected and qualified. If any of the nominees should become unable to

serve as a director, the proxies will be voted for any substitute nominee designated by the Board of Directors but, in any event, no proxy may be voted for more than 11 nominees. Each nominee brings a strong and unique background and set of qualifications to the Board, giving the Board as a whole competence and experience in a wide variety of areas central to the Company’s businesses, including corporate governance and board service, executive management and entrepreneurial experience and insurance, finance, legal and accounting expertise.

The nominees for election to the Board of Directors are as follows.

2015 Proxy Statement | Proposal

pg. 4

2015 Proxy Statement | Proposal

pg. 5

2015 Proxy Statement | Proposal

pg. 6

2015 Proxy Statement | Proposal

pg. 7

2015 Proxy Statement | Proposal

pg. 8

The Board of Directors recommends that shareholders vote FOR the election of these 11 nominees as directors.

Proposal No. 2 — Ratification of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Company’s Audit Committee Charter requires that the Audit Committee appoint annually an independent registered public accounting firm to serve as auditors. In February 2015, the Audit Committee appointed Ernst & Young LLP to serve as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for 2015.

Although the Audit Committee has the sole authority to appoint auditors, shareholders are being asked to ratify this appointment. If the shareholders do not ratify the appointment, the Audit Committee will take that fact into consideration but may, nevertheless, continue to retain Ernst & Young. However, the Audit Committee in its discretion may engage a different independent registered public accounting firm at any time during the year if the

Audit Committee determines that such a change would be in the best interests of the Company whether or not the shareholders ratify the appointment.

Representatives of Ernst & Young are expected to be at the meeting and will be given the opportunity to make a statement if they so desire. They will also be available to respond to appropriate questions from shareholders.

The Board of Directors recommends that shareholders vote FOR the ratification of the Audit Committee’s appointment of Ernst & Young as our independent registered public accounting firm for 2015.

Audit Fees and Non-Audit Fees

The following table presents fees for professional services performed by Ernst & Young for the years ended December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013.

		2014				2013
Audit fees(1)			$7,660,000				$7,144,000
Audit related fees(2)			19,000				157,000
Tax fees(3)			204,000				163,000
All other fees(4)			175,000				156,000
Total			$8,058,000				$7,620,000

Proposal No. 3 — Advisory Vote on Compensation of our Named Executive Officers

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act requires that we provide our shareholders with the opportunity to vote to approve, on a non-binding, advisory basis, the compensation of our named executive officers as disclosed in this proxy statement in accordance with the compensation disclosure rules of the SEC (commonly referred to as “Say-on-Pay”). Our practice, which was approved by our shareholders at the 2011 annual meeting, is to conduct this non-binding vote on an annual basis.

As described in detail below under the heading “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” beginning on page 23 of this proxy statement, we seek to closely align the interests of our named executive officers with the interests of our shareholders. We structure our programs to discourage excessive risk-taking through a balanced use of

compensation vehicles and metrics with an overall goal of delivering sustained long-term shareholder value while aligning our executives’ interests with those of our shareholders. Further, our programs require that a substantial portion of each named executive officer’s compensation be contingent on delivering performance results that benefit our shareholders. Our compensation programs are designed to reward our named executive officers for the achievement of short-term and long-term strategic and operational goals and the achievement of increased total shareholder return. Shareholders should note that, because the advisory vote on executive compensation occurs well after the beginning of the compensation year and because the different elements of our executive compensation programs are designed to

2015 Proxy Statement | Proposal

pg. 9

operate in an integrated manner and to complement one another, in many cases it may not be appropriate or feasible to change our executive compensation programs in consideration of any one year’s advisory vote on executive compensation by the time of the following year’s annual meeting of shareholders.

The vote on this matter is not intended to address any specific element of compensation; rather, the vote relates to the compensation of our named executive officers, as described in this proxy statement in accordance with the compensation disclosure rules of the SEC. The vote is advisory, which means that the vote is not binding on the Company, our Board of Directors or the Compensation Committee. The Board and the Compensation Committee will review and consider the voting results when making future decisions regarding our executive compensation program.

Accordingly, we ask our shareholders to approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation of the named executive officers, as disclosed in this proxy statement pursuant to the compensation disclosure rules of the SEC, including the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, the Summary Compensation Table and the other related tables and disclosure.

The Board of Directors recommends that shareholders vote FOR the approval of the compensation of our named executive officers as disclosed in this proxy statement.

Proposal No. 4 — Approval of 2015 Stock Incentive Plan

The Board of Directors recommends that shareholders approve the Company’s 2015 Stock Incentive Plan (which we refer to as the 2015 Plan). The 2015 Plan would govern grants of stock-based awards to employees. The Company intends that the 2015 Plan would replace the Company’s 2005 Stock Incentive Plan which expires in 2015.

All employees of the Company and its subsidiaries are eligible to receive awards under the 2015 Plan. The 2015 Plan is an “omnibus” stock plan that provides for a variety of equity award vehicles to maintain flexibility. The 2015 Plan will permit the grant of stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock awards, restricted stock units and stock awards.

A maximum of 3,500,000 shares will be available for grants of all equity awards under the 2015 Plan. The Board believes that this number represents a reasonable amount of potential equity dilution and provides a powerful incentive for employees to increase the value of the Company for all shareholders.

The 2015 Plan does not permit the repricing of options or stock appreciation rights without the approval of shareholders and does not contain an “evergreen” provision to automatically increase the number of shares issuable under the 2015 Plan.

The following is a summary of the 2015 Plan. The full text of the 2015 Plan is attached as Appendix A to this proxy statement, and the following summary is qualified in its entirety by reference to Appendix A.

Administration and Eligibility

The 2015 Plan is administered by the Committee, which is composed solely of three “outside directors” as defined under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code. The Committee has exclusive power to determine the employee participants in the 2015 Plan, the level of participation of

each participant and the terms and conditions of all awards. All of the full-time employees of the Company and its subsidiaries are eligible to participate in the 2015 Plan.

Limits on Plan Awards

The number of shares available for issuance pursuant to stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock awards, restricted stock units and stock awards under the 2015 Plan is limited to the aggregate number approved by shareholders. A participant may receive multiple awards under the 2015 Plan, but no participant will receive awards representing more than 500,000 shares in any year.

Types of Awards

Stock Options

Stock options granted under the 2015 Plan may be either non-qualified stock options or incentive stock options qualifying under Section 422 of the Internal Revenue Code. The price of any stock option granted may not be less than the fair market value of the Company common stock on the date the option is granted. The option price may be paid in cash, shares of Company common stock, through a broker-assisted cashless exercise or as otherwise permitted by the Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee determines the terms of each stock option grant at the time of the grant with options generally terminating after a ten-year period from the date of the grant. The Committee specifies at the time each option is granted the time or times at which and in what proportions an option becomes vested and exercisable and may accelerate the vesting of options at any time. In general, unless otherwise determined by the Committee, a stock option expires (i) 12 months after termination of employment, if employment ceases due to death, (ii) immediately, upon the violation of any written employment, confidentiality or noncompetition agreement

2015 Proxy Statement | Proposal

pg. 10

between the Company and the participant, (iii) after specified periods of up to two years, depending upon the term of service of the participant with the Company and its subsidiaries, upon disability or retirement, or (iv) 90 days after termination if employment ceases for any other reason.

Stock Appreciation Rights

A stock appreciation right (which we refer to as an SAR) entitles the participant, upon settlement, to receive a payment based on the excess of the fair market value of a share of Company common stock on the date of settlement over the base price of the right, multiplied by the applicable number of shares of Company common stock. SARs may be granted on a stand-alone basis or in tandem with a related stock option. The base price may not be less than the fair market value of a share of Company common stock on the date of grant. The Compensation Committee determines the vesting requirements and the payment and other terms of an SAR, including the effect of termination of service of a participant and may accelerate the vesting of SARs at any time. Generally, all SARs terminate after the ten-year period from the date of the grant. SARs may be payable in cash or in shares of Company common stock or in a combination of both.

Restricted Stock

A restricted stock award represents shares of Company common stock that are issued subject to restrictions on transfer and vesting requirements as determined by the Compensation Committee. Subject to the transfer restrictions and vesting requirements of the award, the participant has the same rights as one of the Company’s shareholders, including all voting and dividend rights, during the restriction period, unless the Committee determines otherwise at the time of the grant.

Stock Units

An award of stock units provides the participant the right to receive a payment based on the value of a share of Company common stock. Stock units may be subject to such vesting requirements, restrictions and conditions to payment as the Compensation Committee determines are appropriate. A stock unit award may also be granted on a fully vested basis, with a deferred payment date. Stock unit awards are payable in cash or in shares of Company common stock or in a combination of both. Stock units may also be granted together with related dividend equivalent rights.

Stock Awards

A stock award represents shares of Company common stock that are issued free of restrictions on transfer and free of forfeiture conditions and as to which the participant is entitled to all the rights of a shareholder. A

stock award may be granted for past services, in lieu of bonus or other cash compensation, or for any other valid purpose as determined by the Compensation Committee.

Vesting of Awards

Vesting requirements for any awards under the 2015 Plan may be based on the continued service of the participant for a specified time period, the attainment of specified performance goals established by the Compensation Committee, or both.

Performance Criteria

Shareholder approval of the 2015 Plan will also constitute approval of the material terms of the performance criteria under the 2015 Plan for purposes of establishing the specific vesting targets for one or more 162(m) awards under the 2015 Plan intended to qualify for the performance-based exception of Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code.

The performance goals, upon which the payment or vesting of any award to any participant is contingent, are limited to the following performance measures: (i) earnings, including net earnings, total earnings, operating earnings, core net operating earnings, earnings growth, net income, operating income, earnings before or after taxes, earnings before or after interest, depreciation, amortization, or extraordinary or special items, or aggregate or per-share book value or adjusted book value (which may exclude nonrecurring items); (ii) pre-tax income or after-tax income; (iii) earnings per share (basic or diluted), core net operating earnings per share, net income per share, or operating income per share; (iv) operating profit; (v) revenue, revenue growth, or rate of revenue growth; (vi) written premiums (gross or net); (vii) combined ratios; (viii) return measures (gross or net), including but not limited to return on assets, capital, invested capital, equity, sales, and premiums, financial return ratios, or internal rates of return; (ix) operating expenses; (x) share price, including but not limited to growth measures and total shareholder return; (xi) cash flow (including but not limited to operating cash flow, free cash flow, and cash flow return on capital), cash flow return on investment (discounted or otherwise), net cash provided by operations or cash flow in excess of cost of capital, working capital turnover; (xii) implementation or completion of projects or processes; (xiii) balance sheet measurements; (xiv) cumulative earnings per share growth or cumulative core operating earnings per share growth; (xv) operating margin, profit margin, or gross margin; (xvi) cost or expense targets, reductions and savings, productivity and efficiencies; and (xvii) debt maintenance or reduction, including as a percentage of equity.

The Compensation Committee may establish performance objectives based on performance goals on other measures not

2015 Proxy Statement | Proposal

pg. 11

listed above with respect to performance awards that are not intended to qualify as qualified performance-based awards.

Any one or more of these performance measure(s) may be used to measure the performance of the Company, a subsidiary, and/or affiliate as a whole, or any business unit of the Company, subsidiary, and/or affiliate, or any combination thereof, or by comparison with the performance of one or more comparison companies or business units, or any published or special index that the Compensation Committee deems appropriate. The Compensation Committee may provide in any award that any evaluation of the attainment of performance goals may include or exclude any of the following events that occur during a performance period: asset write-downs or impairments; litigation or claim judgments or settlements; the effect of changes in tax laws, accounting principles, or other laws or provisions affecting reported results; reorganization, restructuring and recapitalization programs; extraordinary items pursuant to GAAP and/or in management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations appearing in the Company’s annual report to stockholders for the applicable year; acquisitions or divestitures; foreign exchange gains and losses; stock repurchases and imputed income on stock repurchases; payment of dividends or distributions on equity; accrual of tax expense from all the awards made under the 2015 Plan and such other economic event not in the ordinary course of business.

Effect of Change of Control

Awards (other than performance awards) under the 2015 Plan are generally subject to acceleration, becoming exercisable in full upon the occurrence of a “change in control” (as defined in the 2015 Plan) transaction with respect to the Company. Upon a change of control, performance awards will generally be deemed earned at the target level (or maximum level if no target is specified).

Limited Transferability

Except with respect to the transferability of stock options as discussed above, all awards granted under the 2015 Plan are nontransferable except upon death or under a qualified domestic relations order, or in the case of non-qualified options only, during the participant’s lifetime to immediate family members of the participant and others as may be approved by the Compensation Committee.

Adjustments for Corporate Changes

In the event of recapitalizations, reclassifications or other specified events affecting the Company or shares of Company common stock, appropriate and equitable adjustments may be made to the number and kind of shares of Company common stock available for grant, as well as to other maximum limitations under the 2015 Plan, and the number and kind of shares of Company common stock or other rights and prices under outstanding awards.

Term, Amendment and Termination

The 2015 Plan will expire on February 23, 2025, unless terminated earlier by the Board of Directors. The Board may at any time and from time to time and in any respect amend or modify the 2015 Plan. The Board may seek the approval of any amendment or modification by the Company’s shareholders to the extent it deems necessary or advisable in its sole discretion for purposes of compliance with Section 162(m) or Section 422 of the Internal Revenue Code, the listing requirements of the NYSE or another exchange or securities market or for any other purpose. No amendment or modification of the 2015 Plan will adversely affect any outstanding award without the consent of the participant or the permitted transferee of the award.

Federal Income Tax Consequences

Below is a summary of the principal U.S. federal income tax consequences to participants and to the Company of options granted under the 2015 Plan. This summary is not a complete analysis of all potential tax consequences relevant to participants and to the Company and does not describe tax consequences based on particular circumstances. The laws governing the tax consequences of these awards are highly technical and such laws are subject to change.

When a nonqualified stock option is granted, there are no income tax consequences for the option holder or the Company. When a nonqualified stock option is exercised, in general, the option holder recognizes compensation equal to the excess of the fair market value of the underlying ordinary shares on the date of exercise over the exercise price. The Company is entitled to a deduction equal to the compensation recognized by the option holder for the taxable year that ends with or within the taxable year in which the option holder recognized the compensation.

When an incentive stock option is granted, there are no income tax consequences for the option holder or the Company. When an incentive stock option is exercised, the option holder does not recognize income, and the Company does not receive a deduction. The option holder, however, must treat the excess of the fair market value of the underlying ordinary shares on the date of exercise over the option price as an item of adjustment for purposes of the alternative minimum tax.

If the option holder disposes of the underlying shares after the option holder has held the shares for at least two years after the incentive stock option was granted and one year after the incentive stock option was exercised, the amount the option holder receives upon the disposition over the exercise price is treated as long-term capital gain for the option holder. The Company is not entitled to a deduction. If the option holder makes a “disqualifying disposition” of

2015 Proxy Statement | Proposal

pg. 12

the underlying shares by disposing of the shares before they have been held for at least two years after the date the incentive stock option was granted and one year after the date the incentive stock option was exercised, the option holder recognizes compensation income equal to the excess of the fair market value of the underlying shares on the date the incentive option was exercised or, if less, the amount received on the disposition minus the exercise price. The Company is entitled to a deduction equal to the compensation recognized by the option holder for our taxable year that ends with or within the taxable year in which the option holder recognized the compensation.

Section 162(m)

Compensation of persons who are “covered employees” of the Company is subject to the tax deduction limits of Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code. Awards that qualify as “performance-based compensation” are exempt from Section 162(m), thus allowing the Company the full federal tax deduction otherwise permitted for such compensation. The 2015 Plan is designed to allow awards made under the 2015 Plan to qualify as performance-based

compensation under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code. See “Compensation Discussion and Analysis — Tax Deductibility of Pay” on page 26.

New Plan Benefits

Because future awards under the 2015 Plan will be granted in the discretion of the Compensation Committee, the type, number, recipients, and other terms of such awards cannot be determined at this time. Information regarding our recent practices with respect to stock-based compensation awarded under the 2015 Plan is presented in the “Summary Compensation Table” and these related tables: “Grants of Plan-Based Awards,” “Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End,” and “Options Exercised and Stock Vested,” elsewhere in this proxy statement, and in the “Compensation Discussion and Analysis,” section below.

The Board of Directors recommends that shareholders vote FOR the approval of the 2015 Stock Incentive Plan.

2015 Proxy Statement | Proposal

pg. 13

Company Information

Management

The directors, nominees for director and executive officers of the Company are as follows. Ages and positions are provided as of March 31, 2015.

		Age		Position		Director or Executive Since
Carl H. Lindner III		61		Co-Chief Executive Officer, Co-President and Director		1979
S. Craig Lindner		60		Co-Chief Executive Officer, Co-President and Director		1980
Kenneth C. Ambrecht		69		Director		2005
John B. Berding		52		President of American Money Management Corporation and Director		2012
Joseph E. (Jeff) Consolino		48		Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, Chairman of the Board of National Interstate Corporation and Director		2012
Virginia “Gina” C. Drosos		52		Director		2013
James E. Evans		69		Director		1976
Terry S. Jacobs		72		Director		2003
Gregory G. Joseph		52		Director		2008
William W. Verity		56		Director		2002
John I. Von Lehman		62		Director		2008
Michelle A. Gillis		46		Senior Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer		2013
Vito C. Peraino		59		Senior Vice President and General Counsel		2012

Michelle A. Gillis was elected Senior Vice President of the Company in March 2013 and serves in such role in addition to serving as Chief Administrative Officer with responsibilities for Human Resources, Corporate Communications, Real Estate and various shared service areas. Since joining the Company in 2004, Ms. Gillis has held various senior human resource management positions with Great American Insurance Company and AFG. Previously, Ms. Gillis spent several years in senior human resources roles in the financial services sector. Ms. Gillis holds an active accreditation as Senior Professional in Human Resources (SPHR) from the Human Resources Certification Institute.

Vito C. Peraino was elected Senior Vice President and General Counsel of the Company in March 2012. He previously served as Senior Vice President of Great American Insurance Company since 2002 and Assistant General Counsel of Great American Insurance Company since 2004. Through September 2014, he also served on the Board of Directors of the Company’s subsidiary, National Interstate Corporation. Since joining Great American Insurance Company in 1999, Mr. Peraino has held various executive claims management positions. Previously, Mr. Peraino spent several years in private practice and has represented various insurance industry entities as an attorney since 1981.

Information regarding all nominees for director and directors is set forth beginning on page 4 under “Proposals —  Proposal No. 1 — Elect 11 Directors.”

Board of Directors and Committees

There are 11 members on the Board of Directors. The Board met nine times during 2014. No director of the Company attended fewer than 75% of the Board meetings and the committee meetings to which he or she was appointed and served during 2014. The members of the Board are expected to be present at the annual meeting. All of the Directors attended last year’s annual meeting except for Mr. Evans who was unable to attend as he was recovering from a scheduled medical procedure.

Committees of the Board

The committees of the Board consist of the Audit Committee, Compensation Committee and Governance Committee. Each committee is governed by a charter that defines its role and responsibilities and are available on the Company’s website at www.AFGinc.com under “Company — Board Committees.” A printed copy of these charters may be obtained by shareholders upon written request addressed to the Company’s Secretary, at the address set forth under “2015 Proxy Statement —  Summary — Company Communications.”

The Compensation Committee acts on behalf of the Board of Directors and, by extension, the shareholders to monitor adherence to the Company’s compensation philosophy. The Committee ensures that the total compensation paid to the named executive officers is fair, reasonable and competitive. The Compensation Committee also acts as the oversight committee with respect to the Company’s deferred compensation plans, stock incentive

2015 Proxy Statement | Company Information

pg. 14

plans, and bonus plans covering senior executive officers. In overseeing those plans, the Committee may delegate authority for day-to-day administration and interpretation of the plan, including selection of participants, determination of award levels within plan parameters, and approval of award documents, to officers of the Company. However, the Committee may not delegate any authority under those plans for matters affecting the compensation and benefits of the Company’s Co-CEOs. Additional information regarding the processes and procedures for establishing and overseeing executive compensation is provided in the “Compensation Discussion and Analysis.”

The Corporate Governance Committee is responsible for, among other things, establishing criteria for selecting new directors, identifying individuals qualified to be Board members, as needed, and recommending to the Board director nominees for the next annual meeting of shareholders. The Corporate Governance Committee also facilitates participation by directors in continuing education programs, including accredited director education programs and structured internal programs presented by management.

Our Corporate Governance Guidelines identify some of the criteria used to evaluate prospective nominees for director. Our Corporate Governance Guidelines are available on the Company’s website at www.AFGinc.com.

Nominees for director will be recommended by the Corporate Governance Committee in accordance with the principles in its charter and the Corporate Governance Guidelines. When considering an individual candidate’s suitability for membership on the Board, the Corporate Governance Committee will evaluate each individual on a case-by-case basis. Although the Committee does not prescribe minimum qualifications or standards for directors, candidates for Board membership should have the highest personal and professional integrity, demonstrated exceptional ability and judgment, and availability and willingness to take the time necessary to properly discharge the duties of a director. Additionally, we consider it desirable for director candidates to have management experience, especially with public companies, and that a portion of such candidates have experience in the insurance and financial services industries. The Board seeks candidates with diverse experiences, qualifications, backgrounds and skills that the Board believes enable each candidate to make a significant contribution to the Board. The Board will also consider diverse Board candidates, including women and minorities, and individuals from both corporate positions and non-traditional environments such as government, academia, and nonprofit organizations.

The Corporate Governance Committee does not have a policy with regard to the consideration of director candidates recommended by shareholders because Ohio law and the Company’s Amended and Restated Code of Regulations (the “Regulations”) afford shareholders

certain rights related to such matters. The Regulations provide that only candidates nominated by or at the direction of the Board of Directors and candidates nominated at the meeting by a shareholder who has complied with the procedures set forth in the Regulations will be eligible for election at a meeting of shareholders. The Regulations require a shareholder wishing to nominate a director candidate to give the Secretary of the Company at least 90 and not more than 120 days prior written notice setting forth or accompanied by: (1) certain biographical, stock ownership and investment intent disclosures about the proposed nominee; (2) certain biographical, stock ownership and hedging or similar activity disclosures about the shareholder giving the notice and specified persons associated with such shareholder; (3) verification of the accuracy or completeness of any nomination information at the Company’s request; (4) a statement that a nomination that is inaccurate or incomplete in any manner shall be disregarded; (5) a representation that the shareholder was a record holder of the Company’s voting stock and intended to appear, in person or by proxy, at the meeting to make the nomination; and (6) the consent of each such nominee to serve as director if elected.

The Committee will make its determinations on whether to nominate an individual in the context of the Board as a whole based on the Board’s then-current needs, the merits of each such candidate and the qualifications of other available candidates. The Committee will have no obligation to respond to shareholders who propose candidates that it has determined not to nominate for election to the Board, but the Committee may do so in its sole discretion. All director candidates are evaluated similarly, whether nominated by the Board or by a shareholder.

The Corporate Governance Committee did not seek, nor did it receive the recommendation of, any of the director candidates named in this proxy statement from any shareholder, independent director, executive officer or third-party search firm in connection with its own approval of such candidates. The Company has not paid any fee to a third party to assist it in identifying or evaluating nominees.

The Audit Committee oversees the Company’s accounting and financial reporting process, audits of the financial statements, and internal controls over financial reporting. It meets with both the Company’s management and the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm. Each of the members of the Audit Committee is independent as defined by the NYSE and NASDAQ listing standards. The Company’s Board has determined that two of the Audit Committee’s members, Terry S. Jacobs, and John I. Von Lehman, are each considered to be an “audit committee financial expert” as defined under SEC Regulation S-K Item 407(d).

2015 Proxy Statement | Company Information

pg. 15

Audit Committee Report

The members of the Committee are Gregory G. Joseph (Chairman), Terry S. Jacobs, Virginia “Gina” C. Drosos and John I. Von Lehman. Each of the members of the Audit Committee is independent as defined by the NYSE and NASDAQ listing standards. The Board has determined that two of the four members of the Audit Committee are “audit committee financial experts” as defined in SEC regulations.

The primary function of the Audit Committee is to assist the Board in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities by reviewing the financial information which will be provided to shareholders and others, the systems of internal control which management has established and the audit process.

Management is responsible for the Company’s internal controls and the financial reporting process. The independent registered public accountants are responsible for performing an independent audit of the Company’s consolidated financial statements and internal control over financial reporting in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (US) (PCAOB) and issuing reports thereon. The Committee’s responsibility is to monitor and oversee these processes. Additionally, the Audit Committee engages the Company’s independent registered public accountants who report directly to the Committee.

The Committee has met and held discussions with management and the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm. Management represented to the Committee that the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements were prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and the

Committee has reviewed and discussed the audited consolidated financial statements and the audit of internal control over financial reporting with management and the independent registered public accountants. The Committee discussed with the independent registered public accountants the matters required to be discussed by the PCAOB and relevant listing standards.

The Company’s independent registered public accountants also provided to the Committee the written disclosures and the letter pursuant to applicable requirements of the PCAOB regarding the independent registered public accountant’s communications with the Committee concerning independence and the Committee discussed with the independent registered public accountants that firm’s independence. As part of its discussions, the Committee determined that Ernst & Young LLP was independent of AFG.

Based on the Committee’s discussions with management and the independent registered public accountants, the Committee’s review of the representation of management and the report of the independent registered public accountants to the Committee, the Committee recommended that the audited consolidated financial statements be included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014 filed with the SEC.

Members of the Audit Committee

Gregory G. Joseph, Chairman
Virginia “Gina” C. Drosos
Terry S. Jacobs
John I. Von Lehman

The following table identifies membership and the Chairman of each of the current committees of the Board, as well as the number of times each committee met during 2014.

Director		Audit Committee		Compensation Committee		Corporate Governance Committee
Kenneth C. Ambrecht				Member		Member
Virginia “Gina” C. Drosos		Member				Member
Terry S. Jacobs		Member		Chair
Gregory G. Joseph		Chair
William W. Verity				Member		Chair
John I. Von Lehman		Member				Member
Meetings in 2014		8		4		4

2015 Proxy Statement | Company Information

pg. 16

Director Compensation

The compensation program for non-employee directors during 2014 is shown in the following table:

Compensation Element		Non-Employee Director Compensation(1)
Board Member Annual Retainer		$50,000
Board Meeting Fee		$1,750 per meeting
Committee Chair Annual Retainer		$35,000 Audit $15,000 Compensation and Corporate Governance
Committee Member Annual Retainer		$15,000 Audit $10,000 Compensation and Corporate Governance
Committee Meeting Fee		$1,250 per meeting
Annual Restricted Stock Award		$120,000

The Non-Employee Director Compensation Plan provides that the objective for each non-employee director is, within three years of receiving his or her first restricted stock award under such plan, to beneficially own shares of AFG common stock with a value of at least six times the then-current annual board retainer.

The following table sets forth information regarding compensation earned by, or paid to, the non-employee directors during 2014:

Name		Fees Earned or Paid in Cash ($)				Stock Award ($)(1)				All Other Compensation ($)				Total ($)
Kenneth C. Ambrecht			121,750				120,012				—				241,762
Virginia “Gina” C. Drosos			122,500				120,012				—				242,512
James E. Evans(2)			86,250				120,012				353,379				559,641
Terry S. Jacobs			133,000				120,012				—				253,012
Gregory G. Joseph			135,000				120,012				—				255,012
William W. Verity			126,750				120,012				—				246,762
John I. Von Lehman			114,500				120,012				—				234,512

Corporate Governance

Director Independence

In accordance with NYSE and NASDAQ rules, the Board affirmatively determines the independence of each director and nominee for election as a director in accordance with guidelines it has adopted, which guidelines comply with the listing standards set forth by the NYSE and NASDAQ. Where the NYSE and NASDAQ rules on director independence conflicted, the Company’s standards reflected the applicable rule which was more stringent to the director and the Company. Based on these standards, the Board determined for 2014 that each of the following non-employee directors, namely Ms. Drosos and

Messrs. Ambrecht, Jacobs, Joseph, Verity and Von Lehman, is independent and has no relationship with the Company, except as a director and shareholder of the Company.

In reaching its independence determinations for 2014, the Board considered that the Company has acquired vehicles from, and had vehicles serviced by, automobile dealerships affiliated with a company of which Mr. Joseph is an executive and part owner. The amounts involved in these transactions were deemed by AFG’s Board of Directors not to be material.

2015 Proxy Statement | Company Information

pg. 17

Leadership Structure

The Board does not currently have a Chairman. Additionally, the Board does not have a formal policy as to whether the same person may serve as both the principal executive officer of the Company and Chairman. At the present time, the Board does not believe that such a policy is necessary because of its determination that the current Board membership, together with the Company’s management, possess the requisite leadership and industry skills, expertise and experiences to effectively oversee the business and affairs of the Company. Moreover, the Board prefers to retain the flexibility to select the appropriate leadership structure for the Company based upon the existence of various conditions, including, but not limited to, business, financial or other market conditions, affecting the Company at any given time.

The Company has two principal executive officers: Carl H. Lindner III and S. Craig Lindner, each of whom serves as a Co-Chief Executive Officer, Co-President and a director of the Company. Carl H. Lindner III also serves as Chairman of Great American Insurance Company and is primarily responsible for AFG’s property and casualty insurance operations and investor relations. S. Craig Lindner also serves as President of Great American Financial Resources, Inc. and is primarily responsible for AFG’s annuity operations and investments. While each Co-CEO functions within a clearly defined role with respect to the day-to-day operations of the Company, both Co-CEOs work closely with one another and are significantly involved in all aspects of Company management so that either could succeed the other in the event such a need arose.

The Board of Directors believes that the Company’s leadership structure aids in succession planning and provides the Company with significant executive depth and leadership experience. The Board has determined that the Company’s leadership structure is currently the most appropriate for the Company. To the extent it deems necessary, the Board intends to review the leadership structure of the Company from time to time and in the event of any potential change in the persons serving as executive officers, although no potential change is contemplated at this time.

Risk Oversight

The Company believes a role of management, including the named executive officers, is to identify and manage risks confronting the Company. The Board of Directors plays an integral part in the Company’s risk oversight, particularly in reviewing the processes used by management to identify and report risk, and also in monitoring corporate actions so as to minimize inappropriate levels of risk.

The Company’s current Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) process was initially formalized in 2009. The process is overseen by a risk officer with the input of

senior leaders representing significant areas from throughout the organization including operational, financial, accounting and information technology.

The risk officer annually, following interviews with the Co-CEOs and senior management, reviews the top organizational risks and determines whether to add any new significant risks or to prioritize any identified risks. The risk officer, through regular meetings with senior leaders of the Company, monitors these risks, as well as any other significant risks that may arise during the year, and provides an ERM report to the Audit Committee on a quarterly basis.

The Company’s leadership structure and overall corporate governance framework is designed to aid the Board in its oversight of management responsibility for risk. The Audit Committee serves a key risk oversight function in carrying out its review of the Company’s financial reporting and internal reporting processes, as required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Inherently, part of this review involves an evaluation of whether our financial reporting and internal reporting systems are adequately reporting the Company’s exposure to certain risks. In connection with this evaluation, the Audit Committee has, from time to time, considered whether any changes to these processes are necessary or desirable. While it has concluded that no such changes are warranted at this time, the Audit Committee will continue to monitor the Company’s financial reporting and internal reporting processes. In addition, pursuant to its charter, the Audit Committee is responsible for discussing with management the guidelines and policies related to enterprise risk assessment and risk management.

As more fully described under “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” in this proxy statement, the Compensation Committee takes an active role in overseeing risks relating to AFG’s executive compensation programs, plans and practices. Specifically, the Compensation Committee reviews the risk profile of the components of the executive compensation program, including the performance objectives and target levels used in connection with incentive awards, and considers the risks an executive officer might be incentivized to take with respect to such components with special attention given to establishing a mix among these components that does not encourage excessive risk taking.

The Corporate Governance Committee contributes to the Company’s risk oversight process by reviewing the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines and Board committee charters at least annually to ensure that they continue to comply with any applicable laws, regulations, and stock exchange or other listing standards, as each are subject to change from time to time. The Corporate Governance Committee also oversees the director nomination process, the overall Board reporting structure and the operations of the individual committees.

2015 Proxy Statement | Company Information

pg. 18

Code of Ethics, Code of Conduct and Corporate Governance Principles

The Company has adopted a Code of Ethics applicable to all employees. The Company has also adopted Corporate Governance Guidelines. The Code and Guidelines are available on the Company’s website at www.AFGinc.com, under “Company.” A printed copy of the Code and Guidelines may be obtained by shareholders upon written request to the Corporate Secretary at the address set forth under “2015 Proxy Statement — Summary — Company Communications.” We intend to satisfy any disclosure requirements regarding any amendments to, or waivers from, provisions of the Code by posting such information on our website as promptly as practicable, as may be required by applicable SEC and NYSE rules.

Director Education

The Corporate Governance Committee facilitates participation by directors in continuing education programs, including accredited director education programs and structured internal programs presented by management.

Executive Sessions

NYSE and NASDAQ rules require independent directors to meet regularly in executive sessions. Four of these sessions were held during 2014. The independent director presiding over each session rotates.

Communications with Directors

The Board of Directors has adopted procedures for shareholders to send written communications to the Board as a group. Communications must be clearly addressed either to the Board of Directors, a committee of the Board or any or all of the independent directors, and sent to either of the persons listed under “2015 Proxy Statement — Summary — Company Communications”, who will forward any communications except for spam, junk mail, mass mailings, resumes, job inquiries, surveys, business solicitations or advertisements, or patently offensive, hostile, threatening or otherwise unsuitable or inappropriate material.

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

No member of AFG’s Compensation Committee was at any time during 2014 or at any other time an officer or employee of the Company, and none had any relationship with the Company requiring disclosure as a related-person transaction. None of our executive officers served on the compensation committee (or its equivalent) or board of directors of another entity that has, or had during any time during 2014, an executive officer who served as a member of our board of directors or our Compensation Committee. as an executive officer of which served on our Compensation Committee.

Review, Approval or Ratification of Transactions with Related Persons

Stock exchange rules require the Company to conduct an appropriate review of all related party transactions (including those required to be disclosed by the Company pursuant to SEC Regulation S-K Item 404) for potential conflict of interest situations on an ongoing basis and that all such transactions must be approved by the Audit Committee or another committee comprised of independent directors. As a result, our Audit Committee Charter provides that the Audit Committee review and approve all related party transactions involving directors, executive officers and significant shareholders of the Company. In considering the transaction, the Committee may consider all relevant factors, including as applicable: the Company’s business rationale for entering into the transaction; the alternatives to entering into a related person transaction; whether the transaction is on terms comparable to those available to third parties, or in the case of employment relationships, to employees generally; the potential for the transaction to lead to an actual or apparent conflict of interest and any safeguards imposed to prevent such actual or apparent conflicts; and the overall fairness of the transaction to the Company.

While the Company adheres to this policy for potential related person transactions, the policy is not in written form (other than as a part of listing agreements with stock exchanges). However, approval of such related person transactions is evidenced by Audit Committee resolutions in accordance with our practice of approving transactions in this manner.

Other than as follows, there were no such transactions in 2014 requiring disclosure under applicable rules. Subsidiaries of the Company employed a son of one of the Co-CEOs and a son-in-law of the other Co-CEO in executive positions during 2014, and the individuals received salary and bonus of $271,000 and $290,000 during 2014. Each individual also participates in employee benefit plans, including equity incentive plans, commensurate with his position and tenure with the Company.

A brother-in-law of S. Craig Lindner is a Senior Vice President with Raymond James Financial, Inc. During 2014, Raymond James received approximately $108,000 in commissions for equity transactions made by the Company and its subsidiaries, and the Company traded approximately $160 million par amount of debt securities through Raymond James.

In December 2014, the Company invested $10 million as part of a $30 million private placement of preferred stock by Assurex Health, Inc., which investment amounts to less than 4% of the outstanding equity of Assurex Health on a fully-diluted basis. Virginia “Gina” C. Drosos, a director of the Company, serves as Chief Executive Officer and

2015 Proxy Statement | Company Information

pg. 19

President of Assurex Health. Other executive officers and directors are also investors in the company, with each such person owning less than 1% of the equity of Assurex Health on a fully-diluted basis.

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 requires AFG’s executive officers, directors and persons who own more than ten percent of AFG’s common stock to file reports of ownership with the SEC and to furnish AFG with copies of these reports. Like many companies, AFG assists its directors and officers by monitoring transactions and completing and filing Section 16 reports on their behalf. Based on the Company’s involvement in the preparation and review of these reports, the Company believes that all filing requirements were met in 2014.

Pre-Approval of Services Provided by the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Audit Committee has adopted policies that require its pre-approval for any audit and non-audit services to be provided to AFG by Ernst & Young LLP. The Audit Committee delegated authority to the Committee Chairman to pre-approve certain non-audit services which arise between meetings of the Audit Committee. Pursuant to these procedures and delegation of authority, the Audit Committee was informed of and pre-approved all of the audit and other services described above. No services were provided with respect to the de minimis waiver process provided by rules of the SEC.

2015 Proxy Statement | Company Information

pg. 20

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management

The following table sets forth certain information regarding beneficial ownership of shares of common stock by each of the Company’s directors, board nominees and the named executive officers and by all directors and named executive officers of the Company as a group. The table also includes those who are known by the Company to own beneficially more than 5% of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock. Except as otherwise provided below, information in the table is as of February 28, 2015 and, to the Company’s knowledge all shares of common stock are beneficially owned, and investment and voting power is held solely by the persons named as owners. The addresses of Carl H. Lindner III, S. Craig Lindner and Edyth B. Lindner are 301 East Fourth Street, Cincinnati, Ohio, 45202.

Common Stock Ownership		Beneficial Ownership Amount(1)				Percent of Class (* means less than 1%)
Carl H. Lindner III(2)			8,375,336				9.5	%
S. Craig Lindner(3)			6,155,307				7.0	%
Kenneth C. Ambrecht			28.649					*
John B. Berding(4)			281,957					*
Joseph E. (Jeff) Consolino			126,484					*
Virginia “Gina” C. Drosos			4,278					*
James E. Evans			330,532					*
Terry S. Jacobs			100					*
Gregory G. Joseph(5)			95,525					*
William W. Verity			9,390					*
John I. Von Lehman			10,388					*
Michelle A. Gillis			45,393					*
Vito C. Peraino			180,761					*
All Directors, Nominees and Named Executive Officers as a group (13 persons)(6)			13,278,404				15.0	%
Security Ownership of 5% Beneficial Owners
Edyth B. Lindner(7)			5,995,909				6.8	%
BlackRock, Inc.(8)			5,160,123				5.9	%

2015 Proxy Statement | Company Information

pg. 21

2015 Proxy Statement | Company Information

pg. 22

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

Named Executive Officers

In this section, we describe the material components of our executive compensation program for our named executive officers whose compensation is displayed in the 2014 Summary Compensation Table and the other compensation tables contained in this proxy statement. We also provide an overview of our executive compensation philosophy and we explain how and why the Compensation Committee arrives at specific compensation policies and decisions.

Our 2014 named executive officers are our Co-Chief Executive Officers (“Co-CEOs”), principal financial officer and the three other most highly compensated executive officers employed at the end of 2014. These persons include:

Carl H. Lindner III
Co-Chief Executive Officer and Co-President (Co-Principal Executive Officer)

S. Craig Lindner
Co-Chief Executive Officer and Co-President (Co-Principal Executive Officer)

Joseph E. (Jeff) Consolino
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)

John B. Berding
President of American Money Management

Michelle A. Gillis
Senior Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer

Vito C. Peraino
Senior Vice President and General Counsel

Corporate Policy Highlights

Stock Ownership Guidelines:

Pledging of Shares — Limited pledges permitted; no named executive officers or directors have pledged shares
Hedging of Shares — Prohibited

Senior Executive Equity Bonus Plan — Added a second metric to comprise 50% of bonus amount beginning with 2014 awards

Overview of Compensation Program

The Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors has responsibility for reviewing and approving the compensation paid to the Company’s Co-CEOs, reviewing the compensation of the other Company senior executive officers and overseeing the executive compensation policies of the Company. The Compensation Committee ensures that the total compensation paid to the named executive officers is fair, reasonable and competitive.

Compensation Philosophy and Objectives; Pay for Performance

AFG’s philosophy regarding executive compensation programs focuses on the balance of attracting, motivating, retaining and rewarding executives with a compensation

package competitive among its peers, and maximizing shareholder value by designing and implementing programs that tie compensation earned to the performance of the Company. The Company’s executive compensation programs are designed to link pay to the long-term performance of the Company, with an emphasis on long-term performance versus the Compensation Peer Group (as defined below), and aligning executive pay with shareholder interests.

Guided by principles that reinforce the Company’s pay-for-performance philosophy for the past several years, named executive officer compensation has included base salary and eligibility for annual cash bonuses and long-term incentives such as stock options, restricted stock and stock awards and other compensation, including certain

2015 Proxy Statement | Compensation Discussion and Analysis

pg. 23

perquisites. A significant portion of each senior executive officer’s compensation is dependent upon the Company achieving business and financial goals and the executive achieving individual performance objectives.

At our 2014 annual meeting, AFG held an advisory vote on the compensation of its named executive officers, commonly referred to as a Say-on-Pay vote. Our shareholders approved the compensation of our named executive officers, with over 84% of votes cast in favor of our 2014 Say-on-Pay resolution.

The Compensation Committee during 2014 considered the vote on our Say-on-Pay resolution. The Compensation Committee evaluated the Company’s 2013 performance as outstanding and, consistent with the pay-for-performance philosophy, the Co-CEOs and other named executive officers were rewarded, largely in the form of annual cash bonuses based on Company performance.

Establishing Compensation Levels

As in prior years, compensation levels for the Co-CEOs were based primarily upon the Compensation Committee’s assessment of their leadership performance and potential to enhance long-term shareholder value. The Compensation Committee relies upon a combination of judgment and guidelines in determining the amount and mix of compensation elements for the Co-CEOs. The compensation levels for the other named executive officers are similarly determined by the Co-CEOs, and reviewed by the Compensation Committee, again based primarily upon the assessment of each named executive officer’s leadership performance and potential to enhance long-term shareholder value.

Key factors affecting the Compensation Committee’s judgment with respect to the Co-CEOs include the nature and scope of their responsibilities and their effectiveness in leading initiatives to effectively manage capital and increase shareholder value, productivity, profitability and growth.

The Compensation Committee and the Co-CEOs analyze peer group and industry pay rates at least annually using relevant published survey sources available. In addition, the Compensation Committee and Co-CEOs annually review detailed data compiled, at the direction of the Compensation Committee, on the compensation levels and performances of a comparison group of publicly-held insurance companies (collectively, the “Compensation Peer Group”) in reviewing the appropriateness and competitiveness of the Company’s compensation programs.

The Compensation Committee believes, however, that the peer review should be simply a point of reference for measurement, not a determinative factor for executive compensation. The purpose of this research and analysis is to complement, not to supplant, the evaluation of the individual performance of the named executive officers that the Compensation Committee considers when making

compensation decisions. The Compensation Peer Group, which is periodically reviewed and updated by the Compensation Committee, consisted in 2014 of companies against which the Compensation Committee believes AFG competes for talent and for shareholder investment, and in the marketplace for business. The Compensation Peer Group is identical to the group utilized in 2014. In analyzing market pay levels among the Compensation Peer Group, the Compensation Committee factors into its analysis the large variance in size (both in terms of revenues and market capitalization) among the companies.

The companies comprising the Compensation Peer Group during 2014 were as follows:

ACE Limited
Arch Capital Group Ltd.
The Chubb Corporation
Cincinnati Financial Corporation
CNA Financial Corp.
The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc.
HCC Insurance Holdings, Inc.
Markel Corporation
RLI Corp.
W. R. Berkley Corporation
XL Group plc

The Compensation Committee determined that the types of compensation paid to the Company’s senior executives (i.e. annual salary, performance bonus, equity incentives, retirement plan contributions and perquisites) are similar to those paid to senior management at companies in the Compensation Peer Group. Although the Company seeks to offer a level of total compensation to our executive officers that is competitive with the compensation paid by companies in the Compensation Peer Group, we do not target or benchmark a particular percentile with respect to our executives’ total pay packages or any individual components thereof. Rather, the Compensation Committee’s consideration of the compensation levels and performances of the companies in the Compensation Peer Group constitutes just one of many of the factors described in this Compensation Discussion and Analysis, and such peer group data is considered generally and not as a substitute for the Compensation Committee’s discharge of its fiduciary duties in making executive officer compensation decisions.

Based upon all these factors, the Compensation Committee believes it is in AFG shareholders’ best long-term interest for the Compensation Committee to ensure that the overall level of compensation, especially the aggregate total of salary, bonus and equity-based awards, is competitive with companies in the Compensation Peer Group. The Compensation Committee continues to believe that the quality, skills and dedication of executive leaders are critical factors affecting the long-term value of the Company. Therefore, the Compensation Committee and the Co-CEOs continue to try to maintain an executive

2015 Proxy Statement | Compensation Discussion and Analysis

pg. 24

compensation program that will attract, motivate, retain and reward the highest level of executive leadership possible and align the interests of AFG’s executives with those of AFG’s shareholders.

The Compensation Committee’s decisions concerning the specific 2014 compensation elements for the Co-CEOs were made within this framework. The Compensation Committee also considered each Co-CEO’s performance and prior-year salary, bonus and other compensation. In all cases, specific decisions involving 2014 compensation were ultimately based upon the Compensation Committee’s judgment about the Co-CEOs’ performance, potential future contributions and about whether each particular payment or award would provide an appropriate incentive and reward for performance that sustains and enhances long-term shareholder value without subjecting the Company to inappropriate or unreasonable risk.

Based on its review, the Compensation Committee found the named executive officers’ total compensation in the aggregate to be reasonable and consistent with the objectives of the Company’s compensation programs.

No Payments Upon Change in Control

The Compensation Committee has also noted that, except for the acceleration of vesting of equity awards under the Company’s shareholder approved equity incentive plans upon a change in control, which acceleration applies to all holders of awards under such plans, no amounts become payable to the named executive officers under severance or change in control arrangements, unlike many of the executive officers of the companies in the Compensation Peer Group.

Tally Sheets

The Compensation Committee reviews a comprehensive tally sheet compiled internally to review all elements of the named executive officers’ compensation. The tally sheets reviewed include all of the information that is reflected in the Summary Compensation Table as well as amounts and descriptions of perquisites not required to be specifically identified by SEC regulations, generally due to the fact that the amount of such items is not deemed material under applicable SEC regulations. The review by the Compensation Committee analyzes how changes in any element of compensation would impact other elements. Such analysis has become an important component in the Compensation Committee’s review of named executive officer compensation as various components, including perquisites, are deemed by the Compensation Committee to be important elements of an executive’s overall compensation. This also allows the Compensation Committee to make compensation decisions and evaluate management recommendations based upon a complete analysis of an executive’s total compensation.

To get a clearer picture of the total amount of compensation paid to the Company’s executive officers, the

Compensation Committee annually reviews all components of the named executive officers’ total compensation package. This review includes salary, bonus, equity and long-term incentive compensation, accumulated realized and unrealized stock option gains, the dollar value to the executive and cost to the Company of all perquisites and other personal benefits, and the contributions to and investment performance under the Company’s retirement plans. At the Compensation Committee’s direction, a tally sheet totaling all the above components was prepared for and reviewed by the Compensation Committee. With regard to perquisites paid to the Co-CEOs, the Compensation Committee noted the annual limitations with respect to personal use of corporate aircraft (120 occupied flight hours each) and the executive insurance program ($300,000) and the fact that, if such limitations are exceeded, reimbursement is made based on the cost to the Company of providing those benefits.

Wealth Accumulation

As part of its analysis and approval of long-term equity incentive compensation available to the named executive officers, the Compensation Committee reviewed information relative to equity wealth accumulation of the named executive officers based on previous awards. The purpose of this analysis was to determine whether prior and proposed awards are likely to be effective for retention and as performance incentives to the named executive officers. The Compensation Committee was mindful of the substantial percentage ownership of the Company’s common stock by the Co-CEOs, and the effect of such ownership in aligning their interests with those of all of our shareholders.

Internal Pay Equity

The Compensation Committee does not apply fixed ratios when conducting an analysis of the relative difference between the Co-CEOs’ compensation and the compensation of the Company’s other senior executives. However, the Compensation Committee believes that the Company’s internal pay equity structure is appropriate based upon the contributions to the success of the Company and as a means of motivation to other executives and employees.

Outside Consultants

The Compensation Committee has the sole authority to retain and from time to time has considered the use of outside consultants to assist in evaluating the Company’s executive compensation programs and practices. While the Compensation Committee did not formally engage such a compensation consultant during 2014, it has obtained and considered studies and reports containing comparative market and industry-wide data, which were generated by professional compensation research firms. The Company has also surveyed publicly available compensation data. As

2015 Proxy Statement | Compensation Discussion and Analysis

pg. 25

a result, the Compensation Committee believes that it has the necessary resources available to survey the compensation practices of the Company’s Compensation Peer Group and receive current information regarding the compensation developments in the marketplace.

Tax Deductibility of Pay

Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code limits the deductibility of compensation in excess of $1 million paid to certain named executive officers. An exception to the limitations is provided for “performance-based compensation.” Certain compensation that the Company pays to the named executive officers qualifies as “performance-based compensation” for purposes of Section 162(m) and is, therefore, eligible to be fully deducted by the Company for federal income tax purposes. Examples of compensation paid to named executive officers not qualifying as “performance based compensation” and thus subject to the deduction limits of Section 162(m) include the Performance Component under the Annual Senior Executive Bonus Plan for certain named executive officers, which is qualitative in nature, and awards of restricted shares that have vesting based only on continued service.

The Company views preserving tax deductibility as an important objective, but not the sole objective, in establishing executive compensation. Although the Company has compensation plans that are intended to permit the award of deductible compensation under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code, the

Compensation Committee does not necessarily limit executive compensation to the amount deductible under that provision. Rather, it considers the available alternatives and acts with the intention of preserving the deductibility of compensation to the extent reasonably practicable and consistent with its other compensation objectives, including the attraction and retention of key executives.

While certain awards may be intended to qualify for the “performance-based compensation” exception under Section 162(m), the determination of whether compensation actually qualifies for the exception is complex and is based on the facts and circumstances of each case. Consequently, the Company cannot guarantee that compensation that is intended to qualify for the “performance-based compensation” exception under Section 162(m) will in fact so qualify.

Section 409A

Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code requires that “nonqualified deferred compensation” be deferred and paid under plans or arrangements that satisfy the requirements of the law with respect to the timing of deferral elections, timing of payments and certain other matters. In general, it is AFG’s intention to design and administer its compensation and benefits plans and arrangements for all of its employees so that they are either exempt from, or satisfy the requirements of, Section 409A.

2015 Proxy Statement | Compensation Discussion and Analysis

pg. 26

Compensation Components

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014, the principal components of compensation for named executive officers were:

Each of these components plays a different strategic role in our compensation program:

Compensation Element		Strategic Role in Compensation
Base salary is determined based on position, scope of responsibilities, experience, tenure, qualifications and competitive data.		•   Provides a fixed level of compensation for services rendered during the year. •   Attracts and retains executive talent.
Annual cash incentive awards are variable awards payable in large part based on Company performance and results established by the Compensation Committee.		•   Provides focus on annual performance goals that are linked to Company success and shareholder value. •   Motivates and rewards named executive officers to achieve strong annual business results that will contribute to the Company’s long-term success without creating an incentive to take excessive risk.
Long-term incentive awards granted annually, including stock options and restricted stock awards.		•   Ensures that the named executive officers have a significant continuing interest in the long-term financial success of the Company. •   Aligns the interests of the named executive officers with Company shareholders. •   Encourages decisions and rewards performance that contributes to the long-term Company success. •   Encourages executive retention. •   Discourages excessive risk taking.
Long-term equity awards under the Senior Executive Equity Bonus Plan.		•   Encourages focus on growth in book value, a primary driver of shareholder value. •   Encourages retention through overlapping three-year performance periods after initial one year and two year ramping awards. •   Long-term focus discourages excessive risk taking.
Retirement benefits which provide competitive retirement benefits that are generally comparable to those provided to all employees.		•   Provides qualified retirement benefits through Company matching of a percentage of contributions in a defined contribution plan. •   Provides non-qualified contributions where tax law limits amounts. •   Attracts executive talent.
Deferred compensation elections, which are voluntary and permit deferral of base salary or bonus into our common stock and/or cash at an interest rate determined annually.		•   Permits named executive officers to defer receipt of all or any part of their base salary and/or annual cash bonus. •   Provides a retention feature through reasonable return potential. •   Provides an attractive tax planning opportunity designed to attract and retain executives.
Perquisites including health care; life, disability, auto and home insurance; security services; aircraft usage; entertainment; and administrative services.		•   Provides competitive compensation elements designed to attract and retain executive talent. •   Personal use of Company aircraft enhances security and personal safety as well as enhancing productivity.

2015 Proxy Statement | Compensation Discussion and Analysis

pg. 27

Compensation Risk Analysis

The Compensation Committee has reviewed the risk profile of the components of AFG’s executive compensation programs, including the performance objectives and target and maximum levels used in connection with incentive awards. In addition to analyzing each individual compensation component to discourage excessive risk-taking, we structure our overall compensation program to discourage excessive risk-taking through a balanced use of compensation vehicles and metrics with an overall goal of delivering sustained long-term shareholder value while aligning our executives’ interests with those of our shareholders. Further, our program makes a substantial portion of each named executive officer’s compensation contingent on delivering performance results that benefit our shareholders. The Compensation Committee believes that AFG’s executive compensation programs incentivize the appropriate level of risk-taking behavior by its named executive officers needed to grow the business, while encouraging prudent decision-making that focuses on both short-term and long-term results.

The Compensation Committee continues to monitor and evaluate on an ongoing basis the mix of compensation, especially equity compensation, awarded to the named executive officers, and the extent to which such compensation aligns the interests of the named executive officers with those of AFG’s shareholders. In connection with this practice, the Compensation Committee annually considers and discusses the structure of the Company’s executive compensation program and the relative weighting of various compensation elements.

Compensation Committee Discussions with Co-CEOs

Our Co-CEOs determine the compensation for the named executive officers other than themselves. The Compensation Committee reviews the levels of compensation determined by the Co-CEOs, and annually reviews the performance of the other named executive officers with the Co-CEOs. The Compensation Committee makes recommendations to the Board and the Co-CEOs with respect to general non-CEO compensation, incentive-compensation plans and equity-based plans.

Our Co-CEOs discuss with the Compensation Committee their thoughts on the Company’s performance, their performance, their current and future compensation levels, and the reported compensation of senior executives at the Compensation Peer Group prior to the time that the Compensation Committee takes any action with respect to setting the compensation of the Co-CEOs. The Co-CEOs also make recommendations to the Compensation Committee with respect to the EPS and Company Performance Components of the incentive compensation arrangements applicable to them. Specifically, the Co-CEOs recommended that these components from

AFG’s business plan be considered in connection with 2014 compensation objectives and targets. The Compensation Committee considers this input in connection with its review and approval of corporate goals and objectives relevant to Co-CEO compensation, deliberation of Co-CEO performance in light of those goals and objectives, and determination of Co-CEO compensation levels based on this evaluation.

Base Salary

The Company pays salaries that are designed to attract and retain superior leaders. After reviewing compiled data and materials as discussed above, the Compensation Committee determines annual base salaries for the Co-CEOs that are appropriate, in its subjective judgment, based on each Co-CEO’s responsibilities and performance and input from the Co-CEOs themselves. The Co-CEOs set salaries for the other named executive officers, which are reviewed by the Compensation Committee. The Co-CEOs believe that such salaries are appropriate in light of the levels of responsibility of such officers and their individual contributions to the Company’s success. The base salaries for the Co-CEOs for 2014 remained the same as 2010 – 2013.

Annual Performance-Based Cash Bonuses

Annual performance-based cash bonuses are designed to reward the current year performance of AFG as compared to AFG’s performance in prior years and its current year performance versus other companies in its market segment. The Company believes that the overall performance of AFG is substantially related to the performance of its executives. If earned, cash bonuses are generally paid in the first quarter for the prior year’s performance. Generally, and in 2014, annual performance-based cash bonuses were payable upon achievement of earnings per share goals and performance goals as discussed in detail below.

Annual Senior Executive Bonus Plan-EPS Component

Consistent with prior years, under the Annual Senior Executive Bonus Plan, the Compensation Committee, working with management, developed for 2014 an annual bonus plan providing that a substantial portion of annual compensation is dependent on AFG’s performance. Participants in the Annual Senior Executive Bonus Plan during 2014 include the Co-CEOs and the other named executive officers.

For 2014, for all named executive officers, 50% of the annual cash bonus was payable based on the Company’s 2014 “Operating EPS” which was calculated consistent with prior years. The Operating EPS goals for all named executive officers were identical.

2015 Proxy Statement | Compensation Discussion and Analysis

pg. 28

Operating EPS differs from AFG’s reported net earnings per share (determined in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles) by excluding realized gains and losses in the investment portfolio and certain other items that may not be indicative of AFG’s ongoing core operations. Further, any special charge taken as a result of an internal review of asbestos and environmental reserves is to be considered a non-core item. The Compensation Committee believes that Operating EPS results are a significant indicator of the Company’s annual performance and that because all Company executives, working as a team, contribute to the Operating EPS, a large portion of annual incentive cash compensation should be based on these Company results.

The Operating EPS target for 2014 was established by the Compensation Committee after reviewing the Company’s 2014 business plan prepared by management, approved by the Co-CEOs and reviewed with the Board of Directors. The 2014 target of $4.75 per share represented an increase of 25% over the Operating EPS target for 2013 and an increase of nearly 13% over the Company’s outstanding Operating EPS results of $4.22 for 2013. In increasing the Operating EPS target for 2014 by such a large margin, the Compensation Committee considered primarily the higher anticipated earnings in the Company’s property and casualty insurance operating results. The Compensation Committee determined that achieving the 2014 Operating EPS target would require substantial efforts on behalf of the entire organization, including the named executive officers and other Company senior management, and gave consideration to factors which might impact ongoing earnings, including, but not limited to, competition, market influences, governmental regulation and the Board of Directors’ desire to devote resources to other internal corporate objectives, such as acquisitions or start-ups.

The determination of bonus amounts under the EPS Component were as follows:

Operating EPS		Percentage of Bonus Target to be paid for EPS Component
Less than $4.35			0
$4.75			100%
$5.05 or more			Maximum

For each named executive officer, one hundred percent of the EPS Component was to be paid if Operating EPS were $4.75 per share. If Operating EPS was at least $4.35 but less than $4.75 or above $4.75 but less than $5.05, the EPS Component of the bonus was to be determined by straight-line interpolation. If Operating EPS was $5.05 or more, the maximum amount was to be paid. For the Co-CEOs, the maximum was 175% of the target bonus; for Mr. Consolino and Mr. Berding, the maximum amount was 150% of the target bonus and for the other named executive officers, the maximum amount was 125% of the target bonus.

Name		EPS Component Target Bonus
Carl H. Lindner III		$	650,000
S. Craig Lindner		$	650,000
Joseph E. (Jeff) Consolino		$	500,000
John B. Berding		$	500,000
Michelle A. Gillis		$	100,000
Vito C. Peraino		$	275,000

For 2014, AFG reported Operating EPS of $4.82. As a result, the Compensation Committee authorized the payment of bonuses for 2014 as follows under the EPS Component: $763,750 (117.5% of the $650,000 bonus target) to each Co-CEO; $558,350 (111.67% of bonus target) to each of Mr. Consolino and Mr. Berding; $105,830 and $291,033, respectively, (105.83% of bonus target) to Ms. Gillis and Mr. Peraino.

Annual Senior Executive Bonus Plan-Performance Component

As discussed in more detail below, for the Co-CEOs, Mr. Consolino and Mr. Berding, the remaining 50% of the annual bonus was based on Company Performance Components, and for Ms. Gillis and Mr. Peraino, 50% of the annual bonus was based on the Co-CEO’s subjective Performance Component determinations.

In setting Company Performance Components applicable to the Co-CEOs, Mr. Consolino and Mr. Berding, the Compensation Committee considered AFG’s business plan and budgeted targets.

With respect to the Co-CEOs, as in prior years, the Compensation Committee determined that the quantifiable measurements for each Co-CEO should be identical because the Compensation Committee believes that the Co-CEOs are ultimately jointly responsible for the achievement of such objectives. The Compensation Committee views the roles of the Co-CEOs as collaborative, as opposed to competitive, and thus does not seek to distinguish the performance of one from the other. Rather, the Compensation Committee scrutinized the Co-CEOs’ collective role in AFG’s achievement of EPS targets, developing management personnel, focus on investment portfolio performance and development and implementation of strategic transactions and initiatives to enhance shareholder value.

With respect to Mr. Consolino and Mr. Berding, the Co-CEOs believe that each plays a collaborative role with the Co-CEOs in the achievement of AFG’s business plan and budgeted targets. While most of the applicable performance goals were identical to each, the Co-CEOs determined the weight assigned to certain performance goals based on each executive’s areas of responsibility as described below.

2015 Proxy Statement | Compensation Discussion and Analysis

pg. 29

The following were the performance goals established by the Compensation Committee for 2014:

For the Co-CEOs, Mr. Consolino and Mr. Berding, no target amount applied to the Company Performance Component. For achievement of none of the performance goals, each would receive no bonus for the component. For the achievement of all performance goals, each could receive a maximum amount as follows:

Name		Company Performance Component Maximum Bonus
Carl H. Lindner III		$	1,137,500
S. Craig Lindner		$	1,137,500
Joseph E. (Jeff) Consolino		$	750,000
John B. Berding		$	750,000

After identifying the performance goals, the Compensation Committee determined the applicability and weighting of the goals to the Co-CEOs, Mr. Consolino and Mr. Berding.

Each Co-CEO would receive one-seventh ($162,500) of their maximum bonus for the Company Performance Component ($1,137,500) for the achievement of each of goal nos. 1 – 7. These goals were consistent in type for

the goals applicable to the Co-CEOs in recent years and were viewed by the Compensation Committee as significant company-wide goals requiring effort by each Co-CEO.

Mr. Consolino would receive one-seventh ($107,143) of his maximum bonus for the Company Performance Component ($750,000) for the achievement of each of goal nos. 1 – 6 and 8. The Compensation Committee determined that all of the company-wide goals, except with respect to fixed income portfolio performance, were applicable to Mr. Consolino as Chief Financial Officer. In addition, the Compensation Committee concluded that Mr. Consolino’s role as Chairman of the Board of National Interstate, which represents an important strategic component of the Company’s overall operations, merited a performance goal tied to National Interstate results.

Mr. Berding would receive $175,000 for the achievement of goal no. 7 and one-fifth ($115,000) of his remaining maximum bonus for the Company Performance Component ($750,000) for the achievement of each of goals nos. 1-5. The Compensation Committee determined that it was appropriate, in light of Mr. Berding’s position as president of the Company’s investment management organization, to weigh the performance goal relating to fixed income portfolio performance higher than the company-wide goals that the Compensation Committee applied to Mr. Berding.

For 2014, the Compensation Committee certified that the Company satisfied four of the eight goals (nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5) as set forth below:

As of the date of this proxy statement, AFG has preliminarily determined that performance goal no. 7 above has been satisfied, but the data necessary to make a final determination is not currently available in full. No

2015 Proxy Statement | Compensation Discussion and Analysis

pg. 30

amounts have been paid, or will be paid, with respect to goal no. 7 unless and until the Compensation Committee certifies that it has been satisfied.

As a result, each Co-CEO received a bonus of $650,000 (achievement of four of seven goals, with an additional $162,500 payable to each Co-CEO in the event that goal no. 7 is satisfied), Mr. Consolino received a bonus of $428,572 (achievement of four of seven goals) and Mr. Berding received a bonus of $460,000 (achievement of four of five goals, with an additional $175,000 payable in the event that goal no. 7 is satisfied).

For Ms. Gillis and Mr. Peraino, the Performance Component was determined by the Co-CEOs based on the Co-CEOs’ subjective rating of the named executive officers relative to overall performance for 2014. Each of Ms. Gillis and Mr. Peraino were eligible to receive a bonus ranging from 0% to 125% of the target amount allocated to the Performance Component. The target amounts were as follows:

Name		Performance Component Target Bonus
Vito C. Peraino		$	275,000
Michelle A. Gillis		$	100,000

The determination for Ms. Gillis and Mr. Peraino includes a consideration of all factors deemed relevant, including, but not limited to: operational, qualitative measurements relating to the development and implementation of strategic initiatives and annual objectives; responses to unexpected developments; the development of management personnel; and the impact of any extraordinary transactions involving or affecting the Company and its subsidiaries. The Co-CEOs considered these factors, together with the respective roles of the named executive officers with respect to the consistent improvement in the Company’s operating performance over the past several years, and determined that the named executive officers receive the following: $125,000 to Ms. Gillis (125% of target); and $319,000 to Mr. Peraino (116% of target).

Long-Term Equity Incentive Compensation

The Compensation Committee believes long-term equity incentive compensation encourages management to focus on long-term Company performance and provides an opportunity for executive officers and certain designated key employees to increase their stake in the Company through stock option grants and restricted stock awards that vest over time. The Compensation Committee believes that stock options and stock awards represent an important part of AFG’s performance-based compensation system. The Compensation Committee believes that AFG shareholders’ interests are well served by aligning AFG’s senior executives’ interests with those of its shareholders through the grant of stock options and stock awards. In determining the size of overall annual grants to all

employees, the Compensation Committee takes into consideration the dilutive effect to shareholders of the additional shares which may be issued pursuant to stock-based awards as well as the expense to AFG as stock-based awards vest. The Compensation Committee believes that several features present in stock-based awards give recipients substantial incentive to maximize AFG’s long-term success. Specifically, the Compensation Committee believes that, because stock options vest at the rate of 20% per year and restricted stock awards “cliff” vests in four years, these awards promote executive retention due to the potential for forfeiture of options and restricted stock that have not fully vested upon departure from AFG.

Consistent with past practice, in February 2014, the Compensation Committee determined to award a portion of the long-term equity incentive compensation of several key executives, including each named executive officer, in restricted stock awards. The restricted stock awards vest in four years, or sooner upon the death or permanent disability of the recipient. The recipients are entitled to receive dividends on and vote the shares during the restriction period.

Equity award levels are determined based on award amounts for participants from previous years, market and peer company data, fair value of option grants, expense to AFG, the relative benefits to participants of such expense and the overall compensation level of such participants. Equity grants vary among participants based on their positions within the Company, and AFG believes that the consideration of these factors results in reasonable grant levels to its named executive officers and other employees. Options and restricted shares granted to the named executive officers are set forth in the Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table on page 37 of this proxy statement.

Equity awards are generally granted at a regularly-scheduled Compensation Committee meeting in February after AFG issues a press release announcing results of the recently ended fiscal year.

Senior Executive Equity Bonus Plan

Under the Senior Executive Equity Bonus Plan, the Company may grant bonus awards in the form of shares of AFG common stock to the Co-CEOs and other senior executive officers of the Company and its subsidiaries, including the named executive officers, based upon the achievement of the performance goals set forth annually by the Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee believes that payment in shares further aligns the interests of the participants with those of all shareholders.

For awards granted through 2013 (payable for the three year period 2013 – 2015), including those payable for 2014 (for the three year period 2012 – 2014), the Compensation Committee determined to utilize one performance criterion — book value per share growth over

2015 Proxy Statement | Compensation Discussion and Analysis

pg. 31

a specified period versus the book value per share growth over the same period of the group of companies set forth below (the “plan companies”). The book value per share comparisons, for the Company and each plan company, negate the effects of accounting changes, accumulated other comprehensive income and the impact of dividends and other capital distributions made on common shares. The Compensation Committee determined to adjust book value per share for the Company and the plan companies because it determined that failing to adjust for accounting changes could result in artificially inflating or decreasing book value per share and failing to adjust for other comprehensive income and the impact of distributions could influence Company decisions, like, for example, the timing and amount of dividends to be paid, in a manner not consistent with a goal of continuing to increase shareholder value.

For awards granted in 2014 (payable for the three year period 2014 – 2016), the Compensation Committee modified awards by retaining the book value per share growth criterion but providing that one-half of the senior executive’s bonus amount would be based on book value per share growth. The remaining one-half of the bonus amount is based on annual return on equity growth defined as the percentage equal to the Company’s core operating earnings divided by the Company’s shareholders equity (excluding appropriated retained earnings and accumulated other comprehensive income). The applicable percentage would be the average return on equity for each of the three years in the performance period. For awards granted in 2014, if the return on equity percentage equals or exceeds 12%, the participant would receive 100% of the bonus amount attributed to this metric. If the return on equity percentage equals or is less than 9%, the participant would receive no bonus amount attributed to this metric. For a return on equity greater than 9% but less than 12%, the bonus amount will be calculated by applying straight line interpolation rounded to the nearest whole dollar amount.

The group of companies utilized for purposes of determining satisfaction of the book value per share criterion was designed to approximate the Company’s business mix of property and casualty insurance and annuities.

The Compensation Committee currently intends that awards under the Senior Executive Equity Bonus Plan reward multi-year Company performance and has adopted rolling three-year performance periods. In order to retain a performance equity compensation component for participants in the two years preceding the end of the initial three-year performance period, the Committee has, to date, approved performance goals based on one year

and two year performance in addition to three year performance. After the initial grants to each participant, annual grants have been based on three year performance.

The participants under the Equity Bonus Plan for awards payable for 2014 were the Co-CEOs, Mr. Berding and Mr. Consolino. The maximum amount payable to each Co-CEO was $5,000,000, and the maximum amount payable to each of Mr. Berding and Mr. Consolino was $1,500,000. For the Co-CEOs, the amount payable was determined as follows. If the Company’s growth from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2014 in book value per share exceeded that of all of the other plan companies, then each Co-CEO would receive the maximum of $5,000,000. For Mr. Consolino and Mr. Berding, if the Company’s growth from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2014 in book value per share exceeded that of all of the other plan companies, then each would receive the maximum of $1,500,000. Mr. Consolino and Mr. Berding began participating in this plan for 2013, and awards for 2013 were based on a performance period of one year while the awards for 2014 were based on a performance period of two years. Beginning with awards in 2015, each of Mr. Consolino and Mr. Berding will, like the Co-CEOs, receive awards based on a three year performance period.

For all participants, if the Company’s growth in book value per share placed it in the fourth (lowest) quartile of the plan companies, no bonus would be payable to any participant. If the Company’s growth in book value per share exceeded the fourth (lowest) quartile of the plan companies but did not exceed that of all plan companies, each participant would be entitled to a bonus amount calculated by applying straight line interpolation rounded to the nearest whole dollar amount for growth in book value per share between 0% (for being in the fourth (lowest) quartile of plan companies) and 100% (for growth in book value per share exceeding that of all other plan companies).

The Company’s growth in book value per share for the period from January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2014 placed it tenth in comparison to the plan companies. As a result, each Co-CEO received a bonus of $2,631,579 for 2014, payable (after taxes withheld) through the issuance of 22,069 shares of AFG common stock.

The Company’s growth in book value per share for the period from January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2014 placed it twelfth in comparison to the plan companies. As a result, each of Mr. Consolino and Mr. Berding received a bonus of $631,579 for 2014, payable (after taxes withheld) through the issuance of 5,297 shares of AFG common stock.

2015 Proxy Statement | Compensation Discussion and Analysis

pg. 32

The plan companies under the Senior Executive Equity Bonus Plan include:

Ace Limited
Alleghany Corp.
American Equity Investment Life Holding Co.
American National Insurance Co.
Arch Capital Group Ltd.
Argo Group International Holdings, Ltd.
Baldwin & Lyons Inc.
The Chubb Corporation
Cincinnati Financial Corp.
CNA Financial Corporation
CNO Financial Group, Inc.
Hanover Insurance Group, Inc.
The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc.

HCC Insurance Holdings, Inc.
Horace Mann Educators Corp.
Lincoln National Corp.
Markel Corporation
Metlife, Inc.
National Western Life Insurance Co.
Protective Life Corp.
RLI Corp.
Symetra Financial Corporation⁽¹⁾
Travelers Companies, Inc.
W.R. Berkley Corporation
XL Group plc

Recovery of Prior Awards

Other than as specifically provided with regard to awards paid under the Senior Executive Equity Bonus Plan and the Annual Senior Executive Bonus Plan, AFG does not have a policy with respect to adjustment or recovery of awards or payments if relevant company performance measures upon which previous awards were based are restated or otherwise adjusted in a manner that would reduce the size of such award or payment. Under those circumstances, we expect that the Compensation Committee and the Board would evaluate whether compensation adjustments were appropriate based upon the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicable restatement or adjustment. Nevertheless, the Company is subject to the provisions of Section 304 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, with its recoupment requirements. In addition, each of the Senior Executive Equity Bonus Plan and the Annual Senior Executive Bonus Plan contain specific provisions regarding recovery of awards in the event of restatement of materially inaccurate financial results.

Retirement and Other Related Benefits

The Company provides retirement benefits to named executive officers through a combination of qualified (under the Internal Revenue Code) and nonqualified plans. AFG provides retirement benefits to qualified employees through the 401(k) Retirement and Savings Plan (“RASP”), a defined contribution plan. AFG makes discretionary contributions to the retirement fund portion of the plan and matches a percentage of employee contributions to the savings fund. The amount of such contributions and matching payments are based on a percentage of the employee’s salary up to certain thresholds. AFG also makes available to certain employees benefits in its Nonqualified Auxiliary RASP (“Auxiliary RASP”). The purpose of the

Auxiliary RASP is to enable employees whose contributions in the retirement contribution portion of the 401(k) RASP are limited by IRS regulations to have an additional benefit to the 401(k) RASP.

The Company also maintains a Deferred Compensation Plan pursuant to which certain employees of AFG and its subsidiaries (currently those paid $110,000 or more annually) may defer up to 80% of their annual salary and/or bonus. For 2014, participants could elect to have the value of deferrals earn a fixed rate of interest, set annually by the Board of Directors (2.0% in 2014); fluctuate based on the market value of AFG common stock, as adjusted to reflect stock splits, distributions, dividends; or earn interest as determined by one or more publicly traded mutual funds. A deferral term of either a fixed number of years or upon termination of employment must be elected at the time of deferral. Under the plan, no federal or state income taxes are paid on deferred compensation. Rather, such taxes will be due upon receipt at the end of the deferral period. The Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Table on page 39 of this proxy statement discloses 2014 compensation earned by the named executive officers in connection with the Deferred Compensation Plan.

Perquisites and Other Personal Benefits

Perquisites, such as insurance coverage, security services, certain entertainment expenses, administrative staff attending to occasional personal matters, and the personal use of corporate aircraft, are made available to AFG’s executive officers. These benefits and the estimated costs to the Company of such benefits are included in the All Other Compensation table below on page 39. The Compensation Committee and the Co-CEOs have limited the benefit attributable to the Co-CEOs’ personal use of corporate aircraft and insurance coverage. See “Tally Sheet” discussion above. The Company does not provide tax gross-up payments to named executive officers for any perquisites.

2015 Proxy Statement | Compensation Discussion and Analysis

pg. 33

During 2014, as in prior years, the Company operated corporate aircraft used for the business travel of senior management of the Company and its subsidiaries. The Board has encouraged the use of corporate aircraft for the travel needs of the Company’s Co-CEOs, including personal travel, in order to minimize and more efficiently utilize their travel time, protect the confidentiality of their travel and the Company’s business, and enhance their personal security. Notwithstanding, the Compensation Committee and the Co-CEOs jointly acknowledge that

such aircraft use is a personal benefit, and as such, the Compensation Committee considers the cost to the Company of such use to be an element of the total compensation paid to these individuals.

The Compensation Committee believes these perquisites to be reasonable, particularly as a part of total executive compensation, comparable with plan companies and consistent with the Company’s overall executive compensation programs.

2015 Proxy Statement | Compensation Discussion and Analysis

pg. 34

Executive Compensation

Summary Compensation Table

The following table summarizes the aggregate compensation paid to or earned by the named executive officers for each of the last three years. Such compensation includes amounts paid by AFG and its subsidiaries and certain affiliates for the years indicated. Amounts shown relate to the year indicated, regardless of when paid. AFG has no employment agreements with the named executive officers.

Name and Principal Position		Year				Salary ($)(1)				Bonus				Stock Awards ($)(2)				Option Awards ($)(3)				Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation ($)(4)				All Other Compensation ($)(5)				Total ($)
Carl H. Lindner III Co-Chief Executive Officer and Co-President (Co-Principal Executive Officer)			2014				1,150,000				—				3,383,360				732,500				1,576,250				955,779				7,797,889
			2013				1,150,000				—				4,695,538				755,110				2,112,500				943,693				9,656,841
			2012				1,150,000				—				4,858,396				651,320				817,700				921,842				8,399,258
S. Craig Lindner Co-Chief Executive Officer and Co-President (Co-Principal Executive Officer)			2014				1,150,000				—				3,383,360				732,500				1,576,250				899,131				7,741,241
			2013				1,150,000				—				4,695,538				755,110				2,112,500				961,595				9,674,743
			2012				1,150,000				—				4,858,396				651,320				817,700				928,835				8,406,251
Joseph E. (Jeff) Consolino Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)			2014				817,307				—				1,007,469				366,250				986,922				79,148				3,257,097
			2013				676,293				—				5,998,731				377,555				1,500,000				83,666				8,636,875
John B. Berding President of American Money Management			2014				800,000				—				1,082,535				439,500				1,193,350				74,773				3,590,158
			2013				800,000				1,300,000				1,080,481				453,066				—				80,375				3,713,922
			2012				780,000				1,031,250				388,722				390,792				—				78,844				2,669,608
Michelle A. Gillis Senior Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer			2014				293,284				—				150,695				146,500				230,830				30,843				852,152
Vito C. Peraino Senior Vice President and General Counsel			2014				535,960				—				300,825				293,000				610,033				60,987				1,800,805
			2013				521,538				—				299,268				302,044				879,360				64,789				2,066,999

2015 Proxy Statement | Executive Compensation

pg. 35

All Other Compensation — 2014

Item		C.H. Lindner III				S.C. Lindner				J. E. Consolino				J.B. Berding				M.A. Gillis				V.C. Peraino
Group life insurance			7,524				4,902				1,710				2,622				966				4,902
Insurance (Auto/Home Executive Insurance Program)			300,000				289,285				18,236				24,260				5,885				8,134
Aircraft Usage			513,359				450,122				43,713				—				—				—
Annual RASP Contribution(3)			11,700				11,700				7,800				11,700				11,700				11,700
Annual Auxiliary RASP Contribution			29,800				29,800				—				29,800				6,533				29,800
Other(4)			93,396				113,322				7,689				6,391				5,759				6,451
Totals			955,779				899,131				79,148				74,773				30,843				60,987

Potential Payments upon Termination or Change in Control

As described in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis section, the named executive officers do not have employment, severance or change in control agreements with the Company. In addition, any agreements, plans or arrangements that provide for payments to a named executive officer at, following, or in connection with any termination (including retirement) of such named executive officer, do not discriminate in scope, terms or operation in favor of the named executive officer, and are available generally to all salaried employees. All options and restricted shares granted under the Company’s shareholder approved equity compensation plans provide for the acceleration of vesting upon a change in control.

2015 Proxy Statement | Executive Compensation

pg. 36

Grants of Plan-Based Awards

2015 Proxy Statement | Executive Compensation

pg. 37

Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End

						Option Awards(1)																Stock Awards
Name		Grant Date				Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options Exercisable (#)				Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options Unexercisable (#)				Option Exercise Price ($)				Option Expiration Date				Number of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested (#)(2)				Market Value of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested ($)				Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Market or Payout Value of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights That Have Not Vested ($)(3)
Carl H. Lindner III			02/22/2007				75,000								36.57				02/22/2017
			02/21/2008				75,000								27.20				02/21/2018
			02/12/2009				37,500								19.10				02/12/2019
			02/11/2010				40,000				10,000				24.83				02/11/2020
			02/16/2011				30,000				20,000				34.34				02/16/2021				18,750				1,138,500
			02/23/2012				20,000				30,000				38.11				02/23/2022				17,000				1,032,240
			02/21/2013				10,000				40,000				44.01				02/21/2023				17,000				1,032,240
			02/24/2014								50,000				56.44				02/24/2024				13,320				808,790
			02/23/2012																												5,000,000
			02/21/2013																												5,000,000
			03/07/2014																												5,000,000
S. Craig Lindner			02/22/2007				75,000								36.57				02/22/2017
			02/21/2008				75,000								27.20				02/21/2018
			02/12/2009				37,500								19.10				02/12/2019
			02/11/2010				40,000				10,000				24.83				02/11/2020
			02/16/2011				30,000				20,000				34.34				02/16/2021				18,750				1,138,500
			02/23/2012				20,000				30,000				38.11				02/23/2022				17,000				1,032,240
			02/21/2013				10,000				40,000				44.01				02/21/2023				17,000				1,032,240
			02/24/2014								50,000				56.44				02/24/2024				13,320				808,790
			02/23/2012																												5,000,000
			02/21/2013																												5,000,000
			03/07/2014																												5,000,000
Joseph E. (Jeff) Consolino			02/21/2013				5,000				20,000				44.01				02/21/2023				84,136				5,108,738
			02/24/2014								25,000				56.44				02/24/2024				6,660				404,395
			02/21/2013																												1,500,000
			02/21/2013																												1,500,000
			03/07/2014																												1,500,000
John B. Berding			02/22/2007				41,016								36.57				02/22/2017
			09/28/2007				20,000								28.61				09/28/2017
			02/21/2008				46,324								27.20				02/21/2018
			02/12/2009				25,000								19.10				02/12/2019
			02/11/2010				20,000				5,000				24.83				02/11/2020
			02/16/2011				16,500				11,000				34.34				02/16/2021				10,313				626,205
			02/23/2012				12,000				18,000				38.11				02/23/2022				10,200				619,344
			02/21/2013				6,000				24,000				44.01				02/21/2023				10,200				619,344
			02/24/2014								30,000				56.44				02/24/2024				7,990				485,153
			02/21/2013																												1,500,000
			02/21/2013																												1,500,000
			03/07/2014																												1,500,000
Michelle A. Gillis			02/22/2006				3,000								26.89				02/22/2016
			02/22/2007				3,250								36.57				02/22/2017
			02/21/2008				3,750								27.20				02/21/2018
			02/12/2009				4,000								19.10				02/12/2019
			02/11/2010				3,600				900				24.83				02/11/2020
			02/16/2011				3,600				2,400				34.34				02/16/2021
			02/23/2012				2,400				3,600				38.11				02/23/2022
			03/12/2012				1,200				1,800				37.60				03/12/2022
			02/21/2013				1,800				7,200				44.01				02/21/2023				3,060				185,863
			02/24/2014								10,000				56.44				02/24/2024				2,670				162,122
Vito C. Peraino			02/22/2007				18,750								36.57				02/22/2017
			02/21/2008				18,000								27.20				02/21/2018
			02/12/2009				18,000								19.10				02/12/2019
			02/11/2010				8,800				2,200				24.83				02/11/2020
			02/16/2011				7,200				4,800				34.34				02/16/2021				4,500				273,240
			02/23/2012				4,800				7,200				38.11				02/23/2022				4,080				247,738
			03/12/2012				1,200				1,800				37.60				03/12/2022				1,000				60,720
			02/21/2013				4,000				16,000				44.01				02/21/2023				6,800				412,896
			02/24/2014								20,000				56.44				02/24/2024				5,330				323,638

2015 Proxy Statement | Executive Compensation

pg. 38

Option Exercises and Stock Vested

The table below shows the number of shares of AFG common stock acquired during 2014 upon the exercise of options and restricted share awards which vested in 2014.

		Option Awards								Stock Awards
		Number of Shares Acquired on Exercise (#)				Value Realized on Exercise ($)(1)				Number of Shares Acquired on Vesting (#)				Value Realized on Vesting ($)(2)
Carl H. Lindner III			32,500				979,118				17,500				975,100
S. Craig Lindner			—				—				17,500				975,100
Joseph E. (Jeff) Consolino			—				—				37,817				2,124,937
John B. Berding			—				—				28,279				1,705,378
Michelle A. Gillis			—				—				—				—
Vito C. Peraino			39,122				1,390,651				3,850				214,522

Nonqualified Defined Contribution and Other Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plans

The Company provides retirement benefits to named executive officers through a combination of qualified (under the Internal Revenue Code) and nonqualified plans. AFG makes available to certain employees, including its named executive officers, benefits in its Nonqualified Auxiliary RASP (“Auxiliary RASP”). The purpose of the Auxiliary RASP is to enable employees whose contributions are limited by IRS regulations in the retirement contribution portion of the AFG Retirement and Savings Plan (“RASP”) to have an additional benefit to the RASP.

The Company also maintains a Deferred Compensation Plan pursuant to which certain key employees of AFG and its subsidiaries may defer up to 80% of their annual salary and/or bonus. The deferral term of either a fixed number of years or upon termination of employment must be elected at the time of deferral. Under the plan, no federal or state income taxes are paid on deferred compensation. Rather, such taxes will be due upon receipt at the end of the deferral period.

The table below discloses information on the nonqualified deferred compensation of the named executives in 2014, including the Auxiliary RASP and the Deferred Compensation Plan. Mr. Consolino joined the Company during 2013 and will first be eligible to participate in the Auxiliary RASP in 2015.

Name		Executive contributions in last FY($)				Registrant contributions in last FY($)(1)				Aggregate earnings in last FY($)(2)				Aggregate withdrawals/ distributions($)				Aggregate balances at last FYE($)
Carl H. Lindner III			—				29,800				105,698				—				2,861,963
S. Craig Lindner			—				29,800				270,808				—				2,635,971
Joseph E. (Jeff) Consolino			—				—				—				—				—
John B. Berding			—				29,800				110,334				—				1,193,464
Michelle A. Gillis			—				6,533				1,526				—				22,405
Vito C. Peraino			67,375				29,800				37,992				—				516,204

2015 Proxy Statement | Executive Compensation

pg. 39

Compensation Committee Report

The Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed the Compensation Discussion and Analysis required by Item 402(b) of Regulation S-K with management. Based on these reviews and discussions, the Compensation Committee recommended to the Board of Directors that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in the Company’s proxy statement on Schedule 14A.

Members of the Compensation Committee:		Terry S. Jacobs (Chairman) William W. Verity Kenneth C. Ambrecht

Equity Compensation Plan Information

The following reflects certain information about shares of our common stock authorized for issuance (at December 31, 2014) under compensation plans.

Plan category		(a) Number of securities to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options, warrants, and rights				(b) Weighted-average exercise price of outstanding options, warrants, and rights				(c) Number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans (excluding securities reflected in column (a)
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders			6,383,799			$	36.92				6,083,481	(1)
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders			__				__				320,412	(2)
Total			6,383,799			$	36.92				6,403,893