UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

SCHEDULE 14A INFORMATION

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Amendment No.    )

Filed by the Registrant  ☒                             Filed by a party other than the Registrant  ☐

Check the appropriate box:

eBay Inc.

(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)

(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if other than the Registrant)

Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):

PRELIMINARY PROXY STATEMENT — SUBJECT TO COMPLETION

Notice of Annual Meeting of Stockholders

To our Stockholders:

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Annual Meeting of Stockholders of eBay Inc., a Delaware corporation, will be held on Wednesday, May 30, 2018 at 8:00 a.m. Pacific Time at 2025 Hamilton Avenue, San Jose, California 95125.

These items of business are described more fully in the accompanying Proxy Statement. We will be providing access to our proxy materials over the Internet under the Securities and Exchange Commission’s “notice and access” rules. As a result, on or about April 16, 2018, we are mailing to many of our stockholders a notice instead of a paper copy of the Proxy Statement and our 2017 Annual Report.

Your vote is important. Regardless of whether you plan to participate in the Annual Meeting, we hope you will vote as soon as possible. You may cast your vote over the Internet, by telephone, by mail or during the Annual Meeting.

IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING THE AVAILABILITY OF PROXY MATERIALS FOR THE STOCKHOLDER

MEETING TO BE HELD ON MAY 30, 2018: THE PROXY STATEMENT AND THE ANNUAL REPORT ARE AVAILABLE AT

https://investors.ebayinc.com/annuals.cfm

This Proxy Statement will also be available in interactive form at https://iiwisdom.com/ebay-2018.

By Order of the Board of Directors

Marie Oh Huber

Secretary

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Corporate Governance

Corporate Governance

Overview

The Board is responsible for (1) providing advice and oversight of the strategic and operational direction of the Company and (2) overseeing the Company’s executive management, each to ensure the Company operates in ways that support the long-term interest of our stockholders and the other stakeholders we serve. To do this effectively, the Board has adopted clear and specific governance guidelines (“Corporate Governance Guidelines”) that, along with our Bylaws, Board committee charters, and our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics (“Code of Business Conduct”), provide the framework for the governance of the Company.

The following is a list of governance provisions that demonstrate eBay’s commitment to transparency and accountability:

Our Corporate Governance Guidelines, the charters of our principal Board committees, and our Code of Business Conduct can be found on our investor relations website at https://investors.ebayinc.com/corporate-governance.cfm. Any changes in these governance documents will be reflected in the same location on our website. Information contained on our investor relations website is not part of this Proxy Statement.

The rules of The NASDAQ Stock Market require listed companies to have a board of directors with at least a majority of independent directors. These rules have both objective tests and a subjective test for determining who is an “independent director.”

On a quarterly basis, each member of our Board is required to complete a questionnaire designed to provide information to assist the Board in determining whether the director is independent under the listing standards of The NASDAQ Stock Market and our Corporate Governance Guidelines, and whether members of our Audit Committee and Compensation Committee satisfy additional Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and NASDAQ independence requirements.

5

Corporate Governance

Our Board has adopted guidelines setting forth certain categories of transactions, relationships, and arrangements that it has deemed immaterial for purposes of making its determination regarding a director’s independence, and does not consider any such transactions, relationships, and arrangements in making its subjective determination.

Our Board has determined that each of the following directors is independent under the listing standards of The NASDAQ Stock Market and under eBay’s Corporate Governance Guidelines:

6

Corporate Governance

The Board limits membership on the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee, and the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee to independent directors.

Our Corporate Governance Guidelines require any director who has previously been determined to be independent to inform the Chairman of the Board and our Corporate Secretary of any change in his or her principal occupation or status as a member of the board of any other public company, including retirement, or any change in circumstance that may cause his or her status as an independent director to change.

Our directors have an average tenure of 6 years and a median tenure of 3 years. This experience balances the institutional knowledge of our longer-tenured directors with the fresh perspectives brought by our newer directors. Of our current directors, 7 independent directors have joined since 2015, 3 of which have been female directors.

7

Corporate Governance

In accordance with our Bylaws, our Board elects our Chairman of the Board and appoints our CEO. Our Corporate Governance Guidelines require that the roles of Chairman of the Board and CEO be held by separate individuals and require the appointment of a lead independent director if the Chairman of the Board is not an independent director. Mr. Tierney has served as our Chairman of the Board since July 2015. The Board believes that the separation of the offices of the Chairman of the Board and CEO is appropriate as it aids in the Board’s oversight of management and it allows our CEO to focus primarily on his management responsibilities.

All directors are elected annually. We do not have a classified board.

The Board has three principal committees: the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee, and the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee.

The purpose of the Board committees is to help the Board effectively and efficiently fulfill its responsibilities, but they do not displace the oversight of the Board as a whole. Each committee meets regularly and has a written charter that has been approved by the Board. In addition, a member of each committee periodically reports on any significant matters discussed by the committee.

During 2017, our Board held four meetings, and each Board member attended at least 75% of the aggregate of all of the Board meetings and committee meetings held for the committees for the period which such director served.

8

Corporate Governance

Audit Committee

Each member of the Audit Committee is independent in accordance with the audit committee independence requirements of the listing rules of The NASDAQ Stock Market and the applicable rules and regulations of the SEC. Our Board has determined that Mr. Anderson is an “audit committee financial expert” as defined by the SEC. Ms. Brown joined the Audit Committee in September 2017. Mr. Pressler resigned from the Audit Committee in September 2017.

9

Corporate Governance

The Audit Committee also has primary responsibility for the oversight of risks facing our business. See “Corporate Governance – Our Corporate Governance Practices – Risk Oversight – Audit Committee’s Role in Risk Oversight.”

You can view our Audit Committee Charter on the corporate governance section of our investor relations website at https://investors.ebayinc.com/corporate-governance.cfm.

Compensation Committee

The members of our Compensation Committee are all independent in accordance with the rules and regulations of The NASDAQ Stock Market, the Exchange Act and Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code. Mr. Pressler joined the Compensation Committee in September 2017.

The Compensation Committee Charter permits the Compensation Committee to, in its discretion, delegate all or a portion of its duties and responsibilities to a subcommittee of the Compensation Committee.

Additional disclosure regarding the role of the Compensation Committee in compensation matters, including the role of consultants in compensation decisions, can be found under “Compensation Discussion and Analysis — Compensation Decisions for 2017” and “Compensation Discussion and Analysis — Further Considerations for Setting Executive Compensation — Role of Consultants in Compensation Decisions” below.

You can view our Compensation Committee Charter on the corporate governance section of our investor relations website at https://investors.ebayinc.com/corporate-governance.cfm.

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation. All members of the Compensation Committee during 2017 were independent directors, and no member was an employee or former employee of eBay. No Compensation Committee member had any relationship requiring disclosure under Item 404 of Regulation S-K promulgated by the SEC. During 2017, none of our executive officers served on the Compensation Committee (or its equivalent) or board of directors of another entity whose executive officer served on our Compensation Committee or Board.

10

Corporate Governance

Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee

All members of our Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee are independent under the listing standards of The NASDAQ Stock Market. Mr. Green joined the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee in March 2017.

Director Nominations. The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee considers nominee recommendations from a variety of sources, including nominees recommended by stockholders. The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee has from time to time retained an executive search firm to help facilitate the screening and interview process of director nominees. The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee expects that qualified candidates will have high-level managerial experience in a relatively complex organization or be accustomed to dealing with complex problems, and will be able to represent the interests of the stockholders as a whole rather than special interest groups or constituencies.

Among other factors, the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee considers each candidate relative to the following:

11

Corporate Governance

Our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee should consider diversity (including gender and race), age, international background, and expertise in evaluating potential Board members.

The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee also considers the interplay of a candidate’s background and expertise with that of other Board members, and the extent to which a candidate may be a desirable addition to any committee of the Board. The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee also values diversity as a factor in selecting nominees to serve on the Board.

Finally, the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee also takes into account the set of guiding principles relating to Board membership described in “Our Corporate Governance Practices — Succession Planning” below.

You can view our Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee Charter on the corporate governance section of our investor relations website at https://investors.ebayinc.com/corporate-governance.cfm.

Our Board is committed to good corporate governance and believes in maintaining policies and practices that serve the interests of all stockholders, including governance provisions that protect and empower stockholders, including:

12

Corporate Governance

We have a practice of regularly engaging with stockholders to seek their feedback on our corporate governance practices and our executive compensation program. After we file our proxy statement, we engage with our largest stockholders about important topics to be addressed at our annual meeting. In the fall, we conduct an additional cycle of stockholder engagement where we focus on our corporate governance practices and executive compensation program, as well as anything else resulting from matters voted on at our annual meeting. Following each round of stockholder engagement, we provide an overview of the discussions and feedback to the applicable Board committees, which is also discussed with the Board.

Gender Pay Equity and Global Diversity & Inclusion. At our 2016 annual meeting, stockholders considered a stockholder proposal to publish a report on gender pay equity. Prior to receiving this stockholder proposal, we had begun the process of conducting an extensive global study of gender pay equity that considered the main components of compensation, including salary, bonus and stock. While the proposal did not pass, it garnered significant support. In October 2016, we publicly disclosed key findings of our pay equity study, including that women earn the same as men in the U.S. in terms of salary. In March 2017, we published our first global Diversity and Inclusion (“D&I”) Report, which included both quantitative information about our global gender diversity and U.S. racial and ethnic diversity along with details about our strategic approach, programs and initiatives. In early April 2018, we published our second global D&I Report, as well as the findings from our second global study of gender pay equity. We found that, in the U.S., women earn 100% of what men earn in terms of total compensation and, globally, women earn 100.1% of what men earn in terms of total compensation.

13

Corporate Governance | Our Corporate Governance Practices

Our Corporate Governance Practices

We believe that strong corporate governance practices that provide meaningful rights to our stockholders and ensure Board accountability are key to our relationship with our stockholders. To help our stockholders understand our commitment to this relationship and our governance practices, the Board has adopted a set of Corporate Governance Guidelines to set a framework within which the Board will conduct its business. Our Corporate Governance Guidelines are summarized below along with certain other of our governance practices.

Executive Sessions among Independent Directors. At least several times a year, the independent directors meet in executive session. The Chairman leads these discussions.

Outside Advisors. The Board and each of its committees may retain outside advisors of its choosing at the Company’s expense. Neither the Board nor any committee is required to obtain management’s consent to retain outside advisors.

Absent exigent circumstances, all Board members are expected to attend eBay’s annual meeting of stockholders in person or by telephone or video call. All of our directors serving on our Board at the time of our last annual meeting of stockholders, which was held in May 2017, attended that meeting.

14

Corporate Governance | Our Corporate Governance Practices

It is important that the Board and its committees are performing effectively and in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders. The Board and each committee perform an annual self-assessment to evaluate its effectiveness in fulfilling its obligations. As part of this annual self-assessment, directors are able to provide feedback on the performance of other directors. The Chair of the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee leads the Board in its review of the results of the annual self-assessment and takes further action as needed. In addition, the Company provides membership in the National Association of Corporate Directors to all Board members, as well as the opportunity to attend director education programs at other institutions, to assist them in remaining current with exemplary board and committee practices and developments in corporate governance.

The Board also has developed a set of guiding principles relating to Board membership. The Board believes that in light of the rapidly changing environment in which the Company’s businesses operate, the Board must add members with highly relevant professional experience. In addition, the Board believes that a certain amount of director turnover is to be expected and desirable, and while it does not have term limits, the Board believes that up to nine to 12 years will generally be the expected time commitment from any individual director.

15

Corporate Governance | Our Corporate Governance Practices

The Board recognizes the importance of effective executive leadership to eBay’s success. We conduct a review process at least annually that includes succession plans for our senior leadership positions. These succession plans are reviewed and approved by our Board. In conducting its review, the Board considers, among other factors, organizational and operational needs, competitive challenges, leadership/management potential and development, and emergency situations.

Risk is inherent with every business, and how well a business manages risk can ultimately determine its success. We face a number of risks, including economic, financial, legal and regulatory, operational, and other risks, such as the impact of competition. Management is responsible for the day-to-day management of the risks that we face, while the Board, as a whole and through its committees, has responsibility for the oversight of risk management. In its risk oversight role, the Board is responsible for satisfying itself that the risk management framework and supporting processes as implemented by management are adequate and functioning as designed.

Audit Committee’s Role in Risk Oversight. While the Board is ultimately responsible for risk oversight at eBay, the Board has delegated to the Audit Committee the primary responsibility for the oversight of risks facing our businesses. The Audit Committee’s charter provides that it will review and discuss with management our major risk exposures, including financial, operational, privacy, security, cybersecurity, competition, legal, and regulatory risks, and the steps we have taken to detect, monitor, and actively manage such exposures, as well as management’s risk assessment and risk management policies. The Audit Committee reviews with our General Counsel any significant legal, compliance, and regulatory matters that could have a material impact on our financial statements or our business, including material notices to or inquiries received from governmental agencies. We also have embedded an enterprise risk management (“ERM”) program across our core businesses, aligned with our Company-wide initiative involving the Audit Committee, management, and other personnel. The ERM framework is designed to identify, assess, prioritize, and manage our major risk exposures which could affect our ability to execute on our corporate strategy and fulfill our business objectives. The ERM program is designed to enable the Audit Committee to establish a mutual understanding with management of the effectiveness of the Company’s risk management practices and capabilities, to review the Company’s risk exposure and risk tolerance, and to elevate certain key risks for oversight at the Board level.

Management’s Role in Risk Oversight. Our Vice President, Internal Audit is responsible for our internal audit function and our risk governance framework, which includes risk assessment, monitoring, and reporting. The Vice President, Internal Audit reports directly to the Audit Committee, and the Audit Committee reviews and evaluates the compensation and performance of the Vice President, Internal Audit and provides the Vice President, Internal Audit with direct access to the Audit Committee. The Vice President, Internal Audit facilitates the Audit Committee’s review and approval of the internal audit plan and provides regular reporting on audit activities. In addition, through consultation with management, the Vice President, Internal Audit periodically assesses the major risks facing eBay and coordinates with the executives responsible for such risks through the risk governance process. The Vice President, Internal Audit periodically reviews with the Audit Committee the major risks facing eBay and the steps management has taken to detect, monitor, and manage those risks within the agreed risk tolerance. The executive responsible for managing a particular risk may also report to the Audit Committee on how the risk is being managed and progress towards agreed mitigation goals.

In addition to the general oversight responsibility that has been delegated to the Audit Committee, other committees review the risks within their areas of responsibility and expertise. For example, the Compensation Committee reviews the risks associated with our compensation policies and practices and our succession planning process.

16

Corporate Governance | Our Corporate Governance Practices

Risk Assessment of Compensation Policies and Practices. We have assessed the compensation policies and practices for our employees and concluded that they do not create risks that are reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company. This analysis was presented to the Audit Committee and the Compensation Committee, both of which agreed with this conclusion.

Corporate Hotline. We have established a corporate hotline that is operated by a third party and allows any employee to confidentially and anonymously (where legally permissible) lodge a complaint about any accounting, internal control, auditing, or other matters of concern.

We expect our directors, executive officers, and other employees to conduct themselves with the highest degree of integrity, ethics, and honesty. Our credibility and reputation depend upon the good judgment, ethical standards, and personal integrity of each director, executive officer, and employee. Our Code of Business Conduct requires that directors, executive officers, and other employees disclose actual or potential conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from related decisions. In order to better protect us and our stockholders, we regularly review our Code of Business Conduct and related policies to ensure that they provide clear guidance to our directors, executive officers, and employees.

The Company also has practices that address potential conflicts in circumstances where a non-employee director is a control person of an investment fund that desires to make an investment in or acquire a company that may compete with one of the Company’s businesses. Under those circumstances, the director is required to notify the Company’s CEO and General Counsel of the proposed transaction, and the Company’s senior management then assesses the nature and degree to which the investee company is competitive with the Company’s businesses, as well as the potential overlaps between the Company and the investee company. If the Company’s senior management determines that the competitive situation and potential overlaps between eBay and the investee company are acceptable, approval of the transaction by the Company would be conditioned upon the director agreeing to certain limitations (including refraining from joining the board of directors of the investee company or conveying any confidential or proprietary material between the Company and the investee company, abstaining from being the primary decision-maker for the investment fund with respect to the investee company, and recusing himself/herself from portions of Company Board meetings that contain competitive information reasonably pertinent to the investee company). All transactions by investment funds in which a non-employee director is a control person also remain subject in all respects to the Board’s written policy for the review of related person transactions, discussed under the section entitled “Certain Transactions with Directors and Officers” below.

Stockholders wishing to submit recommendations or director nominations pursuant to the advance notice procedures set forth in our Bylaws for our 2018 Annual Meeting of Stockholders should submit their proposals to the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee in care of our Corporate Secretary. Such submissions should be in accordance with the time limitations, procedures, and requirements described under the heading “May I propose actions for consideration at next year’s Annual Meeting or nominate individuals to serve as directors?” in the section entitled “Questions and Answers about the Proxy Materials and our 2019 Annual Meeting” below.

Proxy Access for Director Nominations. In March 2016, our Board adopted a “Proxy Access for Director Nominations” bylaw provision, which permits an eligible stockholder or group of up to 20 stockholders to nominate candidates for election to our Board. Proxy access candidates will be included in our proxy statement and ballot. The proxy access bylaw provision provides that holders of at least 3% of eBay common stock, which can comprise up to 20 stockholders, holding such stock continuously for at least three years, can nominate two individuals or 20% of the Board, whichever is greater, for election at an annual stockholders meeting. Our Bylaws provide details regarding the time frames and procedures that must be followed and other requirements that must be met to nominate directors through this process.

17

Corporate Governance | Our Corporate Governance Practices

Stock Ownership Guidelines. Our Board has adopted stock ownership guidelines to better align the interests of our directors and executive officers with the interests of our stockholders and further promote our commitment to sound corporate governance. Under these guidelines, our executive officers are required to achieve ownership of eBay common stock valued at three times their annual base salary (seven times in the case of our CEO). For the executive officers, these guidelines are initially calculated using the executive officer’s base salary as of the date the person is first appointed as an executive officer. Each person who was serving as an executive officer as of June 30, 2016, had his or her guidelines recalculated as of July 1, 2016. These guidelines are then recalculated each January 1st immediately following the third anniversary of the most recent calculation. In addition, these guidelines will also be recalculated as of the date on which an executive officer’s pay grade changes. Our directors (except for our CEO) are required to achieve ownership of eBay common stock valued at three times the amount of the annual retainer payable to directors as of the later of (i) July 1, 2016 or (ii) the year the director is first elected to the Board. Thereafter, these guidelines will be recalculated each June 1 (based on the value of each director’s annual retainer payable for that year).

Each of our executive officers (including our CEO) are required to retain 50% of any shares received (net of any shares sold or withheld to pay any applicable exercise price or satisfy tax withholding obligations) as the result of the exercise, vesting or payment of any eBay equity awards granted to the executive officer until the stock ownership guidelines are met. Each of our directors (except for our CEO) are required to retain 25% of the shares received (net of any shares sold or withheld to pay any applicable exercise price or satisfy tax withholding obligations) as the result of the exercise, vesting or payment of any eBay equity awards granted to the director until the stock ownership guidelines are met. Our stock ownership guidelines can be found on our investor relations website at https://investors.ebayinc.com/corporate-governance.cfm.

The ownership levels of our executive officers and directors as of April 4, 2018 are set forth in the section entitled “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management” below.

Hedging and Pledging Policy. The Company’s insider trading policy prohibits directors, executive officers, and other employees from entering into any hedging or monetization transactions relating to our securities or otherwise trading in any instrument relating to the future price of our securities, such as a put or call option, futures contract, short sale, collar, or other derivative security. The policy also prohibits directors and executive officers from pledging eBay common stock as collateral for any loans.

Clawbacks. In 2012, we implemented changes to the eBay Incentive Plan and the Company’s equity incentive plans to provide that awards made under those plans are subject to a clawback provision. In January 2014, the terms of the clawback were adopted by the Compensation Committee subject to amendment to comply with the SEC rules to be issued in accordance with the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010, or the Dodd-Frank Act.

Stockholders may contact the Board or individual directors at the following address:

The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee has delegated responsibility for initial review of stockholder communications to our Corporate Secretary. This process assists the Board in reviewing and responding to stockholder communications in an appropriate manner. The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee has instructed our Corporate Secretary to review correspondence directed to the Board and its principal committees. It is at her discretion to determine whether to forward items solely related to complaints by users with respect to ordinary course of business, customer service and

18

Corporate Governance | Our Corporate Governance Practices

satisfaction issues, or matters she deems to be of a commercial or frivolous nature or otherwise inappropriate for the Board’s or its committees’ consideration.

We have taken a number of steps to ensure continued independence of our outside auditors. Our independent auditors report directly to the Audit Committee, and we limit the use of our auditors for non-audit services. The fees for services provided by our auditors in 2016 and 2017 and our policy on pre-approval of non-audit services are described under “Proposal 3 — Ratification of Appointment of Independent Auditors” below.

19

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management

The following table sets forth certain information known to us with respect to beneficial ownership of our common stock as of April 4, 2018 by (1) each stockholder known to us to be the beneficial owner of more than 5% of our common stock, (2) each director and nominee for director, (3) each of the executive officers named in the 2017 Summary Compensation Table below, and (4) all executive officers and directors as a group. Unless otherwise indicated below, the address for each of our executive officers and directors is c/o eBay Inc., 2025 Hamilton Avenue, San Jose, California 95125.

20

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management | Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act requires our directors, executive officers, and holders of more than 10% of our common stock to file reports regarding their ownership and changes in ownership of our securities with the SEC and to furnish us with copies of all Section 16(a) reports that they file.

We believe that during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017, our directors, executive officers, and holders of more than 10% of our common stock complied with all applicable Section 16(a) filing requirements, except for one late Form 4, due to administrative error, filed on May 19, 2017 to report one sale of common stock shares on the open market for Mr. Jae Hyun Lee.

In making this statement, we have relied upon a review of the copies of Section 16(a) reports furnished to us and the written representations of our directors, executive officers, and holders of more than 10% of our common stock.

21

Certain Transactions with Directors and Officers

Certain Transactions with Directors and Officers

Our Audit Committee reviews and approves the Code of Business Conduct, which applies to our directors, officers, and employees and reviews our programs that are designed to ensure compliance with the Code of Business Conduct. The Audit Committee also reviews and approves all transactions with related persons that are required to be disclosed in this section of our Proxy Statement. The charter of our Audit Committee and our Code of Business Conduct may be found on our investor relations website at https://investors.ebayinc.com/corporate-governance.cfm.

Our Board has adopted a written policy for the review of related person transactions. For purposes of the policy, a related person transaction includes transactions in which (1) the amount involved is more than $120,000, (2) eBay is a participant, and (3) any related person has a direct or indirect material interest. The policy defines a “related person” to include directors, nominees for director, executive officers, beneficial holders of more than five percent of eBay’s outstanding common stock and their respective family members. Pursuant to the policy, all related person transactions must be approved by the Audit Committee or, in the event of an inadvertent failure to bring the transaction to the Audit Committee for pre-approval, ratified by the Audit Committee. In the event that a member of the Audit Committee has an interest in a related person transaction, the transaction must be approved or ratified by the disinterested members of the Audit Committee. In deciding whether to approve or ratify a related person transaction, the Audit Committee will consider the following factors:

We have entered into indemnification agreements with each of our directors and executive officers. These agreements require us to indemnify such individuals, to the fullest extent permitted by Delaware law, for certain liabilities to which they may become subject as a result of their affiliation with eBay.

Since January 1, 2017, there were no related person transactions, and we are not aware of any currently proposed related person transactions, that would require disclosure under SEC rules.

22

Proposals Requiring Your Vote | Proposal 1 — Election of Directors

Proposals Requiring Your Vote

Proposal 1 — Election of Directors

At the Annual Meeting, 13 directors will be elected to serve for a one-year term until our 2019 Annual Meeting and until their successors are elected and qualified.

Our Board is currently composed of 13 members, 11 of whom are currently independent directors under the listing standards of The NASDAQ Stock Market.

The term of office of each of the nominees standing for election at the Annual Meeting expires at the upcoming Annual Meeting. All of the nominees are currently members of the Board and each of the nominees has been elected previously by the stockholders except Adriane M. Brown and Diana Farrell, who joined the Board in September 2017. Ms. Brown and Ms. Farrell were recommended as nominees by the Chair of our Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee and our CEO. Each of the nominees has consented to serving as a nominee and being named as a nominee in this Proxy Statement and to serving as a director if elected. If elected at the Annual Meeting, each of the nominees will serve a one-year term until our 2019 Annual Meeting and until his or her successor is elected and qualified, or until his or her earlier death, resignation, or removal.

Majority Vote Standard for Election of Directors. Our Bylaws provide that in the event of an uncontested election, each director shall be elected by the affirmative vote of a majority of the votes cast with respect to such director—i.e., the numbers of shares voted “FOR” a director nominee must exceed the number of votes cast “AGAINST” that nominee. “ABSTAIN” votes will be counted as present for purposes of this vote but are not counted as votes cast. Broker non-votes will not be counted as present and are not entitled to vote on the proposal. As a result, abstentions and broker non-votes will have no effect on the vote for this proposal.

Director Resignation Policy for Uncontested Elections. If a nominee who is serving as a director (an “Incumbent Director”) fails to receive the required number of votes for re-election in accordance with our Bylaws in an uncontested election, under Delaware law the Incumbent Director would continue to serve on the Board as a “holdover director” until his or her successor is elected and qualified, or until his or her earlier resignation or removal pursuant to our Bylaws. Our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that, in considering whether to nominate any Incumbent Director for re-election, the Board will take into account whether the Incumbent Director has tendered an irrevocable resignation that is effective upon the Board’s acceptance of such resignation in the event the director fails to receive the required vote to be re-elected, as described above. Each of our Incumbent Directors has tendered an irrevocable resignation. In the case of a proposed nominee who is not an Incumbent Director, the Board will take into account whether he or she has agreed to tender such a resignation prior to being nominated for re-election.

In the case of an uncontested election, if a nominee who is an Incumbent Director does not receive the required vote for re-election, the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee or another committee of the Board will decide whether to accept or reject such director’s resignation (if the director has tendered such a resignation), or whether to take other action, within 90 days after the date of the certification of the election results (subject to an additional 90-day period in certain circumstances). In reaching its decision, the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee will review factors it deems relevant, which may include any stated reasons for “AGAINST” votes, whether the underlying cause or causes of the “AGAINST” votes are curable, criteria considered by the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee in evaluating potential candidates for the Board, the length of service of the director, the size and holding

23

Proposals Requiring Your Vote | Proposal 1 — Election of Directors

period of such director’s stock ownership in the Company, and the director’s contributions to the Company. The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee’s decision will be publicly disclosed in a filing with the SEC. If a nominee who was not already serving as a director fails to receive the required votes to be elected at the Annual Meeting, he or she will not become a member of the Board. All of the director nominees are currently serving on the Board and each director nominee has submitted an irrevocable resignation of the type described above.

The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee considers a number of factors and principles in determining the slate of director nominees for election to the Company’s Board that it recommends to the Board, as discussed in the section titled “Corporate Governance – Board of Directors and Committees – Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee,” above. In particular, the Board considers the following factors and principles to evaluate and select nominees:

Our Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee and Board have evaluated each of the director nominees against the factors and principles eBay uses to select director nominees. Based on this evaluation, our Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee and the Board have concluded that it is in the best interests of eBay and its stockholders for each of the proposed nominees listed below to serve as a director of eBay. The Board believes that all of these nominees have a strong track record of being responsible stewards of stockholders’ interests and bring extraordinarily valuable insight, perspective, and expertise to the Board. Additional reasons that the Board recommends supporting the election of the director nominees include:

In addition to these attributes, in each individual’s biography set forth below, we have highlighted specific experience, qualifications, and skills that led the Board to conclude that each individual should serve as a director of eBay.

24

Proposals Requiring Your Vote | Proposal 1 — Election of Directors

25

Proposals Requiring Your Vote | Proposal 1 — Election of Directors

26

Proposals Requiring Your Vote | Proposal 1 — Election of Directors

27

Proposals Requiring Your Vote | Proposal 1 — Election of Directors

28

Proposals Requiring Your Vote | Proposal 1 — Election of Directors

29

Proposals Requiring Your Vote | Proposal 1 — Election of Directors

30

Proposals Requiring Your Vote | Proposal 1 — Election of Directors

31

Proposals Requiring Your Vote | Proposal 1 — Election of Directors

32

Proposals Requiring Your Vote | Proposal 1 — Election of Directors

33

Proposals Requiring Your Vote | Proposal 2 — Advisory Vote to Approve Named Executive Officer Compensation

Proposal 2 — Advisory Vote to Approve Named Executive Officer Compensation

In accordance with the requirements of Section 14A of the Exchange Act, we are asking stockholders to approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation of our named executive officers as described in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, compensation tables, and related narrative discussion of such compensation included in this Proxy Statement.

As discussed in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, the Compensation Committee of the Board is committed to an executive compensation program that is aligned with our business goals, culture, and stockholder interests. We believe a competitive compensation program that is highly performance-based is key to delivering long-term stockholder returns.

To achieve these objectives, our executive compensation program has three principal components: long-term equity compensation, an annual cash incentive, and base salary. The Compensation Committee seeks to have our named executive officers’ total compensation heavily weighted to variable, performance-based compensation by delivering a majority of compensation in the form of performance-based restricted stock units and annual cash incentives. Performance-based restricted stock units are granted based on our achievement of financial performance goals over a two-year performance period. Under our annual cash incentive plan, 75% of each named executive officer’s target bonus for 2017 was based on Company financial performance with the remaining 25% based on individual performance; there is no payout for individual performance unless thresholds for Company performance are met. We also granted time-based restricted stock units, the value of which depends on the performance of the Company’s stock.

The Compensation Committee believes that the goals of our executive compensation program are appropriate and that the program is properly structured to achieve those goals. We have engaged in ongoing discussions with our investors, who generally support those goals and the program, and we believe our stockholders as a whole should support them as well.

We are asking our stockholders to indicate their support for the compensation of our named executive officers as described in this Proxy Statement. This proposal, commonly known as a “say-on-pay” proposal, gives our stockholders the opportunity to express their views on the compensation of our named executive officers. This vote is not intended to address any specific item of compensation, but rather the overall compensation of our named executive officers and the philosophy, policies, and practices described in this Proxy Statement. Accordingly, we ask our stockholders to vote “FOR” the following resolution at the Annual Meeting:

“RESOLVED, that the Company’s stockholders approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation of the named executive officers, as disclosed in the Company’s Proxy Statement for the 2018 Annual Meeting of

34

Proposals Requiring Your Vote | Proposal 2 — Advisory Vote to Approve Named Executive Officer Compensation

Stockholders pursuant to the compensation disclosure rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission, including the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, the 2017 Summary Compensation Table, and the other related tables and disclosures.”

While the say-on-pay vote is advisory, and therefore not binding on the Company, the Board and the Compensation Committee value the opinions of our stockholders and will take into account the outcome of this vote in considering future compensation arrangements. It is expected that the next say-on-pay vote will occur at the 2019 annual meeting.

35

Proposals Requiring Your Vote | Proposal 3 — Ratification of Appointment of Independent Auditors

Proposal 3 — Ratification of Appointment of Independent Auditors

The Audit Committee is responsible for the appointment, compensation, retention, and oversight of the independent auditors retained to audit our consolidated financial statements. We have appointed PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (“PwC”) as our independent auditors for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2018. PwC served as our auditors since 2017. In order to assure continuing auditor independence, the Audit Committee periodically considers whether there should be a regular rotation of the independent audit firm. Further, in conjunction with the mandated rotation of the independent audit firm’s lead engagement partner, the Audit Committee will continue to be directly involved in the selection and evaluation of PwC’s lead engagement partner. The Board and the Audit Committee believe that the continued retention of PwC to serve as our independent auditors is in the best interests of eBay and our stockholders. We expect that representatives of PwC will be present at the Annual Meeting, will have an opportunity to make a statement if they wish, and will be available to respond to appropriate questions.

Our Bylaws do not require the stockholders to ratify the appointment of PwC as our independent auditors. However, we are submitting the appointment of PwC to our stockholders for ratification as a matter of good corporate practice. If the stockholders do not ratify the appointment, the Audit Committee will reconsider whether or not to retain PwC. Even if the appointment is ratified, the Audit Committee, in its discretion, may change the appointment at any time during the year if it determines that such a change would be in the best interests of eBay and our stockholders.

During the fiscal years ended December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2017, fees for services provided by PwC were as follows (in thousands):

“Audit Fees” consist of fees incurred for services rendered for the audit of eBay’s annual financial statements, review of financial statements included in eBay’s quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, other services normally provided in connection with statutory and regulatory filings, for attestation services related to compliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and services rendered in connection with securities offerings. “Audit-Related Fees” consist of fees incurred for due diligence procedures in connection with acquisitions and divestitures and consultation regarding financial accounting and reporting matters. “Tax Fees” consist of fees incurred for transfer pricing consulting services, tax planning and advisory services, and tax compliance services. “All Other Fees” consist of fees incurred for permitted services not included in the category descriptions provided above with respect to “Audit Fees,” “Audit-Related Fees,” and “Tax Fees,” and include fees for consulting services, compliance-related services, and software licenses, as well as the lease payments described above.

36

Proposals Requiring Your Vote | Proposal 3 — Ratification of Appointment of Independent Auditors

The Audit Committee has determined that the non-audit services rendered by PwC were compatible with maintaining its independence. All such non-audit services were pre-approved by the Audit Committee pursuant to the pre-approval policy set forth below.

The Audit Committee has adopted a policy requiring the pre-approval of any non-audit engagement of PwC. In the event that we wish to engage PwC to perform accounting, technical, diligence, or other permitted services not related to the services performed by PwC as our independent registered public accounting firm, our internal finance personnel will prepare a summary of the proposed engagement, detailing the nature of the engagement, the reasons why PwC is the preferred provider of such services, and the estimated duration and cost of the engagement. This information will be provided to our Audit Committee or a designated Audit Committee member, who will evaluate whether the proposed engagement will interfere with the independence of PwC in the performance of its auditing services and decide whether the engagement will be permitted.

On an interim basis, any non-audit engagement may be presented to the Chair of the Audit Committee for approval and to the full Audit Committee at its next regularly scheduled meeting.

37

Proposals Requiring Your Vote | Proposal 3 — Ratification of Appointment of Independent Auditors

We constitute the Audit Committee of the Board. The Audit Committee’s responsibility is to provide assistance and guidance to the Board in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities to eBay’s stockholders with respect to:

The Audit Committee members are not professional accountants or auditors, and these functions are not intended to replace or duplicate the activities of management or the independent auditors. Management has primary responsibility for preparing the financial statements and designing and assessing the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. Management and the internal audit function are responsible for maintaining appropriate accounting and financial reporting principles and policies and internal controls and procedures that provide for compliance with accounting standards and applicable laws and regulations.

PwC, eBay’s independent auditors, is responsible for planning and carrying out an audit of eBay’s financial statements in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (“PCAOB”) and eBay’s internal control over financial reporting, expressing an opinion on the conformity of eBay’s audited financial statements with generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) as well as the effectiveness of eBay’s internal control over financial reporting, reviewing eBay’s quarterly financial statements prior to the filing of each quarterly report on Form 10-Q, and other procedures.

During 2017 and in early 2018, in connection with the preparation of eBay’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017, and in fulfillment of our oversight responsibilities, we did the following, among other things:

38

Proposals Requiring Your Vote | Proposal 3 — Ratification of Appointment of Independent Auditors

Our Audit Committee held ten meetings in 2017. Throughout the year, we conferred with PwC, eBay’s internal audit function, and senior management in separate executive sessions to discuss any matters that the Audit Committee, PwC, the internal audit function, or senior management believed should be discussed privately with the Audit Committee. We have direct and private access to both the internal and external auditors of eBay.

We have discussed with PwC the matters required to be discussed by the statements on Auditing Standards No. 16 (Communication with Audit Committees). The Audit Committee received written disclosures and a letter from PwC required by the applicable PCAOB requirements for independent accountant communications with audit committees concerning auditor independence, and discussed the independence of PwC with that firm. We concluded that PwC’s provision to eBay and its affiliates of the non-audit services reflected under “Audit-Related Fees,” “Tax Fees,” and “All Other Fees” above is compatible with PwC’s obligation to remain independent.

We have also established procedures for the receipt, retention, and treatment of complaints received by eBay regarding accounting, internal accounting controls, or auditing matters and for the confidential anonymous submission by eBay employees of concerns regarding questionable accounting or auditing matters.

After reviewing the qualifications of the current members of the Audit Committee, and any relationships they may have with eBay that might affect their independence from eBay, the Board determined that each member of the Audit Committee meets the independence requirements of The NASDAQ Stock Market and of Section 10A of the Exchange Act, that each member is able to read and understand fundamental financial statements, and that Mr. Anderson qualifies as an “audit committee financial expert” under the applicable rules promulgated pursuant to the Exchange Act. The Audit Committee operates under a written charter adopted by the Board. The current Audit Committee charter is available on the corporate governance section of eBay’s investor relations website at https://investors.ebayinc.com/corporate-governance.cfm. Any future changes in the Audit Committee charter or key practices will also be reflected on the website.

Based on the reviews and discussions described above, we recommended to the Board, and the Board approved, the inclusion of the audited financial statements in eBay’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017, which eBay filed with the SEC on February 5, 2018. We have also approved the appointment of PwC as our independent auditors for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2018.

AUDIT COMMITTEE

Fred D. Anderson		Adriane M. Brown		Perry M. Traquina

39

Proposals Requiring Your Vote | Proposal 4 — Management Proposal Regarding Ratification of Special Meeting Provisions in the Company’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws

Proposal 4 — Management Proposal Regarding Ratification of Special Meeting Provisions in the Company’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws

The Board is seeking stockholder ratification of certain provisions of our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation (the “Charter”) and Bylaws that grant stockholders who own at least 25% of the Company’s outstanding shares of capital stock and satisfy other requirements the ability to direct the Company to call a special meeting of stockholders (the “Special Meeting Threshold” and together with the related provisions the “Special Meeting Provisions”). The Company received a stockholder proposal in accordance with Rule 14a-8 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, asking the Board to take the necessary steps to amend our governing documents to give holders of 10% of the Company’s outstanding shares of common stock the right to call a special meeting (the “Stockholder Proposal”). As allowed by the staff of the Division of Corporate Finance of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Company omitted the Stockholder Proposal from this Proxy Statement.

The Company believes that a vote in favor of ratifying the Company’s current Special Meeting Threshold and Special Meeting Provisions is tantamount to a vote against the Stockholder Proposal.

At the 2012 annual meeting of stockholders (“2012 Annual Meeting”), the Board recommended that the Company’s stockholders approve and adopt a management proposal relating to the Special Meeting Provisions. This management proposal was overwhelmingly approved by the Company’s stockholders at that annual meeting, with over 99% of stockholders present at the meeting (or represented by proxy) and entitled to vote on the proposal voting in favor of it. Following the meeting, the Company filed the Charter and Bylaws (as in effect at the time) including the Special Meeting Provisions as exhibits to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K on April 27, 2012.

The Board is hereby requesting that the Company’s stockholders ratify the Special Meeting Provisions that were adopted by the Company following stockholders’ approval in favor of such provisions at the Company’s 2012 Annual Meeting.

If stockholders do not ratify the Special Meeting Threshold and Special Meeting Provisions, the existing Special Meeting Threshold will remain in place. In addition, the Board will consider the results of the vote and engage with our stockholders to solicit feedback regarding the current Special Meeting Threshold.

Ratification of the Special Meeting Provisions

The Special Meeting Provisions, which are set forth in Article VI, Section E of the Charter and Article I, Section 1.3 of the Bylaws, and were described in the Company’s proxy statement for the 2012 Annual Meeting, may be summarized as follows:

40

Proposals Requiring Your Vote | Proposal 4 — Management Proposal Regarding Ratification of Special Meeting Provisions in the Company’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws

The above summary is subject, in all respects, to the Special Meeting Provisions of our Charter and Bylaws, which are attached to this Proxy Statement as Appendix A and Appendix B, respectively.

Board Consideration of Appropriate Stockholder Special Meeting Rights

The Board evaluated a number of different factors in adopting the existing right of stockholders to call a special meeting, as further described in the Company’s proxy statement for the 2012 Annual Meeting. The Board continues to believe that a 25% ownership threshold to request a special meeting strikes a reasonable balance between enhancing stockholder rights and protecting against the risk that a small minority of stockholders, including stockholders with special interests, could call one or more special meetings that could result in unnecessary financial expense and disruption to our business. The Board believes that special meetings should only be called to consider extraordinary events that are of interest to a broad base of stockholders and that cannot be delayed until the next annual meeting. Additionally, preparing for a stockholder meeting requires significant attention of our directors, officers and employees, diverting their attention away from performing their primary function of operating the Company’s business in the best interests of our stockholders. Likewise, the Board believes that only stockholders with a true economic and non-transitory interest in the Company should be entitled to utilize the special meeting mechanism.

25% Special Meeting Ownership Threshold Consistent with Market Practice

The 25% ownership threshold is a common threshold for special meeting rights at public companies, among those companies that provide for this right. To put this in perspective, approximately 59% of S&P 500 companies give stockholders the right to call a special meeting. Of those companies, 67% have a special meeting ownership threshold that is equal to or higher than that of the Company. In short, the Company’s stockholders have a right that is equal to or more expansive than that of 80% of S&P 500 companies (when including those companies that do not provide such rights at all).

41

Proposals Requiring Your Vote | Proposal 4 — Management Proposal Regarding Ratification of Special Meeting Provisions in the Company’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws

Corporate Governance Practices

The Board believes that the current Special Meeting Provisions should be considered in the context of the Company’s overall corporate governance practices, including the stockholder rights available under its Bylaws and Charter, applicable law, and the Company’s demonstrated commitment to stockholder engagement and responsiveness to stockholder concerns. Our corporate governance practices are highlighted on page 5 of this Proxy Statement.

In addition to the existing right of stockholders to call a special meeting at the 25% ownership threshold, stockholder approval is required for many key corporate actions before action may be taken. Under Delaware law and the NASDAQ Stock Market rules, the Company must submit certain important matters to a stockholder vote.

Additionally, our Bylaws provide stockholders with the ability to nominate candidates to the Board both through traditional processes and our proxy access procedures. Under existing law, stockholders may request the Company to include stockholder proposals in proxy materials to be considered by our full stockholder base. Directors are elected by majority vote on an annual basis, and stockholders have multiple avenues of communication to the Board.

Given the existing right of stockholders to call a special meeting, coupled with the Company’s strong corporate governance policies, the Board strongly recommends that stockholders ratify the existing Special Meeting Provisions.

Unless you specify otherwise, the Board intends the accompanying proxy to be voted FOR this item.

42

Our Executive Officers

Our Executive Officers

Executive officers are appointed annually by the Board and serve at the discretion of the Board. Set forth below is information regarding our executive officers as of April 4, 2018.

43

Compensation Discussion and Analysis | Introduction

Introduction

This Compensation Discussion and Analysis is presented as follows:

This Compensation Discussion and Analysis describes the compensation of our “named executive officers” (“NEOs”) for 2017:

We regularly review the Company’s compensation philosophy and executive compensation program to assess whether they continue to be properly aligned with our business goals, culture and, importantly, stockholder interests. We also regularly engage with our stockholders at least twice a year to solicit feedback on our compensation philosophy and executive compensation program. After conducting this review and considering the feedback received during the Company’s regular engagement with stockholders by management of the Company and members of the Board, we determined that the Company’s executive compensation philosophy, compensation objectives, and overall program continued to be appropriate. The Compensation Committee determined for 2017 that the elements of our Executive Compensation Program should remain in place. In 2018 and beyond, we will adapt our executive compensation program to reflect the Company’s intention to further improve its customer experience by intermediating payments on its Marketplace platform.

In 2017, our stockholders once again overwhelmingly approved our executive compensation program through the “say on pay” vote, with approximately 93% of the votes cast in favor. As a result, the Compensation Committee did not make any specific changes to the Company’s executive compensation program in response to the 2017 “say on pay” vote.

_➊   Elements of Our Executive Compensation Program

The goals of our executive compensation program are to:

To achieve these goals, we have three principal components of our executive compensation program: equity compensation, an annual cash incentive, and base salary. We seek to ensure that total compensation for our executive officers is heavily weighted to variable, performance-based compensation by delivering a majority of compensation in the form of PBRSUs and annual cash incentives.

49

Compensation Discussion and Analysis | Elements of Our Executive Compensation Program

The Compensation Dashboard below provides a snapshot of the key elements of our 2017 executive compensation program and describes why each element is provided. Additional information about these key elements is included in the sections following the dashboard.

COMPENSATION DASHBOARD

We chose a mix of equity and cash compensation vehicles to compensate executive officers based on long-term value drivers of Company performance over one- and multi-year periods and individual contributions to the Company. Our executive officers also were eligible to participate in our broad-based retirement savings (which include a 401(k) program open to all employees in the United States and an unmatched deferred compensation program available to vice presidents and above in the United States) and benefit programs and received limited perquisites.

50

Compensation Discussion and Analysis | Elements of Our Executive Compensation Program

For 2017, once the value of the annual equity incentive awards has been set for each executive officer, the formula used to allocate the annual equity awards is as follows:

Annual Equity Awards: Value

The value of annual equity awards is determined within guidelines that the Compensation Committee approves on an annual basis for each position. These guidelines are based on our desired pay positioning relative to companies with which we compete for talent. The midpoint of the guidelines, or the median target award, reflects the 50th percentile of the competitive market.

In 2017, the Compensation Committee approved equity award guidelines by position based on the following:

The Compensation Committee is also cognizant of dilution resulting from equity compensation, and so it carefully considers share usage each year and sets an upper limit on the number of shares that can be used for equity compensation, including awards to executive officers and the overall employee population.

Each executive officer’s individual contribution and impact, projected level of contribution and impact in the future, and competitive positioning are considered when determining individual awards. The retention value of current year awards and the total value of unvested equity from previous awards are also considered. The individual awards can be higher or lower than the median target award by an amount ranging from zero to three times the median target award. The Compensation Committee limits the use of special equity-related compensation for executive officers to extraordinary circumstances only. In 2017, our NEOs received equity-related compensation as part of the Company’s standard annual equity award. In addition to the annual awards, two of our executives, Scott Cutler and Jae Hyun Lee, received promotion awards in connection with their promotions to new roles. Both promotion awards were granted using the Company’s standard equity mix of 60% PBRSUs and 40% time-vested restricted stock units.

PBRSU Program

Plan Design and Performance Periods. The PBRSU Program is a key component of the annual equity compensation for each executive officer. At the beginning of each performance period, executive officers receive PBRSU grants that are subject to performance- and time-based vesting requirements.

Each PBRSU cycle has a two-year performance period. The performance goals for each cycle are approved by the Compensation Committee at the beginning of the performance period. Each executive officer is awarded a target number of shares subject to the PBRSU award at the beginning of the performance period.

51

Compensation Discussion and Analysis | Elements of Our Executive Compensation Program

If the Company’s actual performance exceeds or falls short of the target performance goals, the actual number of shares subject to the PBRSU award will be increased or decreased formulaically.

Under the PBRSU program, 100% of any PBRSU awards granted to our CEO and CFO will vest, if at all, 14 months following the end of the applicable two-year performance period. This provision subjects 100% of the CEO and CFO PBRSU awards to a full three years of stock price volatility before the shares vest. For all executive officers other than the CEO and CFO, one-half of the PBRSUs vest in March following the end of the applicable performance period, and the other half of the award vests in March of the following year, more than one full year following the completion of the performance period. The Compensation Committee believes that the post-performance period vesting feature of the PBRSUs provides an important mechanism that helps to retain executive officers and align their interests with long-term stockholder value.

Performance Measures and Rationale. As discussed above, the number of shares subject to a target PBRSU award are adjusted based on whether the Company’s actual performance exceeds or falls short of the target performance goals for the applicable performance period.

52

Compensation Discussion and Analysis | Elements of Our Executive Compensation Program

The following table outlines the performance measures for the 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 performance periods and the rationale for their selection:

Plan Mechanics and Targets. The two-year performance targets are generally set in a manner consistent with the current year budget and multi-year strategic plan. To receive any shares subject to a PBRSU award, at least one of the FX-neutral revenue or non-GAAP operating margin dollars minimum performance thresholds must be met. Each of the minimum performance thresholds are independent and, if any of the FX-neutral revenue or non-GAAP operating margin dollar performance thresholds are met, the award is adjusted with respect to that performance measure in accordance with the percentages outlined in the illustration below. If the minimum performance threshold for either FX-neutral revenue or non-GAAP operating margin dollars is not met, then no shares are awarded for that performance measure. At the time the performance targets were set, the target goals were designed to be achievable with strong management performance, while the maximum goals were designed to be very difficult to achieve.

The following chart shows the minimum, target, and maximum payout percentage for FX-neutral revenue and non-GAAP operating margin dollars:

The number of shares awarded is determined by comparing our actual performance for FX-neutral revenue and non-GAAP operating margin dollars over the performance period against the minimum, target, and maximum performance levels and converting the result into a payout percentage. The FX-neutral revenue and non-GAAP operating margin dollars measures are then added together and this total is multiplied by the third measure, return on invested capital, with the modification multiplier determined in accordance with the table below:

The target award is multiplied by the percentage resulting from this calculation to determine the actual number of PBRSUs awarded. The Compensation Committee may approve adjustments to the calculations of the performance measures due to material events not contemplated at the time the targets were set (such as major acquisitions) and the Compensation Committee may apply negative discretion to reduce the

53

Compensation Discussion and Analysis | Elements of Our Executive Compensation Program

payout levels of the awards. Shares that vest under PBRSU awards are 0% to 240% of the initial grant, based on eBay’s FX-neutral revenue, non-GAAP operating margin dollars, and return on invested capital for the two-year performance period.

Plan Revisions for the 2018-2019 PBRSU Cycle. In recognition of the importance of our strategic decision to improve customer experience by intermediating payments on our Marketplace platform, we have adjusted the PBRSU plan for the 2018-2019 PBRSU cycle to tie our senior executives’ compensation to the degree of achievement of Payments intermediation. Beginning with the 2018-2019 PBRSU cycle, we have added a Payments component to the modifier element of the PBRSU plan design. The Payments modifier will be based on the percentage of Gross Merchandise Volume (GMV) of payments that the Company intermediates in 2018 and 2019. With the combination of the return on invested capital and Payments modifiers, the total shares earned can be adjusted down 45% or up 70%. Shares that vest under the PBRSU awards can be 0% to 340% of the initial grant, based on the degree of achievement of the Company’s FX-Neutral revenue and non-GAAP operating margin dollars goals, as adjusted by the return on invested capital and Payments measures for the two-year performance period.

Time-based RSUs

As discussed above, each executive officer receives a portion of his or her annual equity award as a grant of RSUs that vest on a quarterly basis over a four-year period subject to continued employment. For newly hired executive officers, 25% of the initial grant of time-based RSUs vest on the first anniversary of the date of grant and the remainder vest on the quarterly schedule. This vesting schedule is aligned with market practice and helps enable the Company to remain competitive in attracting talent.

Plan Design and Performance Period. The eBay Incentive Plan (“eIP”) is a broad-based short-term cash incentive plan. The Compensation Committee has set an annual performance period under the plan.

The plan is designed to support a tight link between Company performance and any incentive payouts. The annual cash incentives payable for 2017 had both a FX-neutral revenue threshold and a non-GAAP net income minimum performance threshold. Unless both of these minimum performance thresholds are met, there is no incentive payout. If both minimum performance thresholds are met, the Company uses total non-GAAP net income to determine the payout percentage of the Company financial performance component of the annual cash incentive.

The following chart shows the threshold, target, and maximum payout percentage for non-GAAP net income:

Additionally, if the minimum performance thresholds are met, 75% of executive officers’ payouts under the plan are based on the Company’s performance as described above. To facilitate differentiation based on individual performance, the remaining 25% of awards are based on individual performance. As discussed in more detail below, the Compensation Committee considers many factors in determining the CEO’s individual performance, but does not assign specific weighting to these factors. The CEO partners with the Compensation Committee to similarly assess the individual performance of the other executive officers. In circumstances where the Company’s financial performance is above its minimum performance threshold

54

Compensation Discussion and Analysis | Elements of Our Executive Compensation Program

but below the target performance threshold, a modifier is applied to the individual performance component to reduce it proportionately based on the Company financial performance component. For example, if the Company exceeded the FX-neutral revenue minimum performance threshold but total non-GAAP net income was 90% of the target performance threshold, then the individual performance component would be calculated as follows: target incentive amount x 25% x individual performance score x 90%. The maximum payout for both the Company financial performance and the individual performance components of the annual incentive plan is 200% of target.

Performance Measures and Rationale. The following table provides information on the Company performance measures set in 2017 and rationale for their selection:

Plan Mechanics and Targets. In the first quarter of the year, the Compensation Committee approves Company performance measures based on business criteria and target levels of performance. Targets are set based primarily on the Company’s Board-approved budget for the year.

The Compensation Committee also assesses annual cash incentive award opportunities against data from public filings of our peer group companies and general industry data for comparable technology companies that are included in proprietary third-party surveys, and it approves target annual cash incentive opportunities for our NEOs at approximately the 50th percentile based on that data. We review market data annually, but only periodically adjust incentive opportunities.

After the end of each year, the Compensation Committee approves the actual performance against the Company financial performance measures to determine the payout percentage for that portion of the annual cash incentive plan. With respect to individual performance, our CEO presents the Compensation Committee with his assessment of the individual performance of the executive officers who are his direct reports and recommends a bonus payout percentage for the individual performance component of the annual incentive plan based on his assessment. The Compensation Committee reviews his assessments and payout recommendations and makes a subjective determination of the level of individual performance and payouts for each of those executive officers. In addition, the Compensation Committee (with input from the Chairman of the Board and other independent members of the Board) makes a subjective determination of the individual performance of the CEO. In making its determination of the individual performance of each executive officer, the Compensation Committee does not give any specific weighting to individual goals.

55

Compensation Discussion and Analysis | Compensation Decisions for 2017

Assessment and Target Positioning Strategy. We review market data and approve each executive officer’s base salary for the year. Increases generally become effective on or around April 1^st of the year. We assess competitive market data on base salaries from public filings of our peer group companies and general industry data for comparable technology companies that are included in proprietary third-party surveys. When considering the competitive market data, we also recognize that the data is historical and does not necessarily reflect those companies’ current pay practices. We assess each executive officer’s base salary

against the 50th percentile of the salaries paid to comparable executives at peer group companies and also consider individual performance, levels of responsibility, expertise, and prior experience in our evaluation of base salary adjustments.

We provide certain executive officers with limited perquisites and other personal benefits not available to all employees that we believe are reasonable and consistent with our overall compensation program and philosophy. These benefits are provided to enable the Company to attract and retain these executive officers. We periodically review the levels of these benefits provided to our executive officers.

Prior to September 2017, Mr. Wenig had access to the corporate airplane for up to 50 hours of personal travel, subject to Mr. Wenig fully reimbursing the Company for the incremental costs associated with such use. Beginning in September 2017, the Compensation Committee encouraged Mr. Wenig to use the corporate airplane for personal travel where relevant to reduce possible security concerns. Mr. Wenig’s use of the corporate airplane is subject to on-going oversight by the Compensation Committee. Mr. Schenkel has access to the corporate airplane for up to 20 hours of personal use, subject to Mr. Schenkel fully reimbursing the Company for the incremental costs associated with such use. The Company does not grant bonuses to cover, reimburse, or otherwise “gross-up” any income tax owed for personal travel on the corporate airplane.

Mr. Lee is eligible to receive expatriate benefits, including housing and cost of living allowances, shipment expenses, a transportation allowance and benefits under our Global Tax Equalization Policy in connection with his temporary assignment from Singapore to Switzerland in 2018. These benefits are consistent with our global relocation program and are intended to facilitate any Company-required temporary assignment of our employees and to ensure that these employees are kept whole as compared to their home location during a Company-required temporary assignment. Because the expenses associated with Mr. Lee’s relocation were incurred in 2018, no amounts are reported in the 2017 Summary Compensation Table with respect to these benefits.

_➋   Compensation Decisions for 2017

When making compensation decisions for our NEOs, the Compensation Committee evaluated each individual based on his or her leadership, competencies, innovation, and both past and expected future contributions toward the Company’s financial, strategic, and other priorities. Under the leadership of Mr. Wenig, the Company made solid progress during the year against its long-term strategic plan as it began to deliver on its commitment to drive the best choice, the most relevance, and the most powerful selling platform. At the same time, Mr. Wenig and his leadership team focused on building a values-based culture that is inventive, bold, courageous, diverse and inclusive.

In addition, the Compensation Committee considered retention concerns as well as the total value of each NEO’s unvested equity awards. Based on its assessment, the Compensation Committee approved individual compensation arrangements for each NEO based on the factors and guidelines described above and in this section.

56

Compensation Discussion and Analysis | Compensation Decisions for 2017

The Compensation Committee takes a multi-year view of Mr. Wenig’s total compensation, with the objective of rewarding his leadership of the Company and tying his compensation to Company results and stock price performance. In doing so, the Compensation Committee has sought to focus Mr. Wenig’s attention on the longer-term performance of the Company.

The Compensation Committee considered many factors in setting the various components of Mr. Wenig’s compensation, including the factors set forth below. In evaluating performance against these factors, the Compensation Committee assigned no specific weighting to these factors and it evaluated individual performance in a holistic manner.

The Compensation Committee also reviewed and approved the salary, target annual cash incentive award, and target value of equity awards for our CEO considering available market data as well as Company and individual performance.

The Compensation Committee determined that Mr. Wenig’s base salary and target annual cash incentive award remained competitive without an increase and that his overall cash compensation was consistent with creating an ownership culture by focusing his compensation mix on equity rather than cash.

In determining Mr. Wenig’s 2017 equity award, the Compensation Committee recognized the strength of Mr. Wenig’s leadership, his focus on executing the Company’s strategy, creating a culture of diversity and inclusion that reflects the marketplace, delivering innovative products, the over-delivery of financial results against targets, the execution against the long-term strategic plan to drive future growth while remaining environmentally and socially responsible, and engagement with current and potential investors. They also considered the year-over-year increase in the value of equity grants awarded in the prior year to CEOs of other large, public companies in the Internet and technology space.

The following table outlines Mr. Wenig’s 2017 compensation:

57

Compensation Discussion and Analysis | Compensation Decisions for 2017

The following chart shows the breakdown of reported 2017 compensation for Mr. Wenig. This chart illustrates the predominance of equity incentives and performance-based components in our executive compensation program.

DEVIN WENIG

The Compensation Committee considered many factors in approving the various components of the other NEOs’ compensation, including the factors set forth below. In evaluating performance against these factors, the Compensation Committee assigned no specific weighting to these factors and it evaluated individual performance in a holistic manner.

The Compensation Committee reviewed and approved the target value of equity awards, target annual cash incentive award, and salary for our NEOs based on available market data as well as Company and individual performance.

The Compensation Committee approved salary increases for Mr. Schenkel and Mr. Fisher in order to remain competitive with current market conditions. Mr. Cutler and Mr. Lee received salary increases in connection with their promotions. The Compensation Committee determined that the other NEO’s target annual cash incentive award remained competitive without an increase and that their overall cash compensation was consistent with creating an ownership culture by focusing the compensation mix on equity rather than cash. The Committee determined equity awards based on delivery against business metrics, financial targets and Company-level leadership.

58

Compensation Discussion and Analysis | 2017 Business Results

The following chart shows the compensation arrangements for our other NEOs:

_➌   2017 Business Results

The following is a summary of the business results that directly affected 2017 executive compensation, including performance-based equity awards and annual cash incentive awards.

2016-2017 PBRSU Award

The following graphs show the goals and results achieved for the 2016-2017 performance period:

Foreign-exchange neutral (FX-neutral) revenue ($ billions)		Non-GAAP operating margin dollars ($ billions)		Return on Invested Capital (%) Modifier

Following the end of the performance period, as part of its review of the Company’s financial performance against the PBRSU targets and in accordance with its authority under the plan, the Committee whether the impact of any significant corporate events not contemplated at the time the targets were set that should lead to an adjustment of any of the performance results. The Committee determined that it was appropriate to adjust the calculation of Return on Invested Capital (ROIC) for 2017 to remove the impact of a non-cash deferred tax asset related to a legal structure realignment.

59

Compensation Discussion and Analysis | 2017 Business Results

Actual awards under the PBRSU plan could range from 0% to 240% of the target awards. Based on the Company’s financial performance during the 2016-2017 performance period, the actual PBRSU awards were 117% of target and our NEOs received the following awards:

2017 Annual Cash Incentive Goals and Plan Performance.

The following graphs show the goals and results achieved for the 2017 performance period:

FX-neutral revenue ($ billions)		Non-GAAP net income ($ billions)

The performance goals for the 2017 performance period were set in early 2017 based primarily on the Company’s budget for the year. The performance goal for FX-neutral revenue is a minimum revenue threshold that must be met for the annual cash incentive payment to be paid based on actual results in relation to the Non-GAAP net income performance goals.

In early 2018, as part of its review of the Company’s financial performance against the annual cash incentive plan targets and in accordance with its authority under the plan, the Compensation Committee considered whether the impact of any significant corporate events not contemplated at the time the targets were set should lead to an adjustment of any of the performance results. The Compensation Committee determined that it was appropriate to adjust non-GAAP net income to remove the impact of net interest income/expense related to the Company’s offering of institutional bonds in the second quarter of 2017.

In addition, the Compensation Committee reviewed Mr. Wenig’s performance for the purpose of determining the individual portion of his 2017 annual cash incentive award, with input from the entire Board. The Compensation Committee did not assign fixed weightings to specific individual goals or performance criteria. Instead, it took a holistic view of performance during the year and the Company’s positioning for the future. The Compensation Committee considered the strong financial results in 2017 and the solid positioning of the core eBay business, StubHub and Classifieds. As a result, the individual performance component of Mr. Wenig’s annual cash incentive award consists of two components. The first, Company Performance, makes up 75% of the incentive award. For 2017, the Company performance paid 122% of target. The second component, individual performance, makes up 25% of the incentive award. For 2017, Mr. Wenig’s individual component was established at 150% of target. Mr. Wenig’s total earned annual incentive award for 2017 was 129.0% of target.

60

Compensation Discussion and Analysis | Severance and Change In Control Arrangements with Executive Officers and Clawbacks

The Company performance component was paid at 122% for all NEOs. The individual performance component was based on each NEO’s individual performance score and the total earned annual incentive award for 2017 for each of our NEOs were paid at between 112.8% and 135.3% of target as follows:

_➍  Severance and Change In Control Arrangements with Executive Officers and Clawbacks

The objective of our severance and change in control arrangements described below was to provide fair and reasonable severance that would also serve as a retention incentive for those impacted by a change in control or similar transactions. We believe that these protections help the Company attract and retain highly talented executive officers.

In considering the protections included in our severance and change in control arrangements, we conducted a comprehensive review of protections provided to senior executives of our peer group and took into account the information about candidates’ expectations learned in the course of recruiting for talented senior leaders. When considering whether to enter into arrangements outside our severance and change in control arrangements, the Compensation Committee was also mindful that newly recruited executives were either leaving relatively secure employment arrangements or turning down attractive alternative offers and determined that these protections should be extended to certain, then-current executives in order to maintain internal alignment.

The Company’s Standard Severance Plan provides severance protection outside of a change in control period if a participant is terminated without cause and signs and does not revoke a waiver of claims against the Company. Mr. Cutler, Mr. Fisher and Mr. Lee participate in the Standard Severance Plan.

Mr. Wenig and Mr. Schenkel do not participate in the Standard Severance Plan. Mr. Wenig and Mr. Schenkel entered into offer letters with the Company in 2014 in connection with their appointment to their current roles at the Company, which provided for severance arrangements if they are respectively terminated without cause or resign for good reason not in connection with a change in control, and sign and do not revoke a waiver of claims against the Company.

Under the terms of Mr. Lee’s offer letter entered into in connection with his promotion to his current role, Mr. Lee is entitled to receive a separation payment in the event he terminates his employment with the Company. This separation payment is intended to replicate benefits offered under a retirement program in which Mr. Lee formerly participated when he was employed with the Company in Korea. The benefit is equal to three times his average monthly salary multiplied by his years of service since January 1, 2013. In contrast, should the Company terminate Mr. Lee’s employment for reason other than cause, Mr. Lee is entitled to benefits under the Standard Severance Plan. Mr. Lee’s offer letter also includes a non-competition restrictive covenant for 12-months post termination of employment.

61

Compensation Discussion and Analysis | Severance and Change In Control Arrangements with Executive Officers and Clawbacks

The following chart describes the severance benefits that each of our NEOs would receive if terminated outside of a change in control.