As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 20, 2010

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, DC 20549

SCHEDULE 14A

(RULE 14a-101)

INFORMATION REQUIRED IN PROXY STATEMENT

SCHEDULE 14A INFORMATION

PROXY STATEMENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 14(a) OF THE SECURITIES

EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

Filed by the Registrant  x                     Filed by a Party other than the Registrant  ¨

Check the appropriate box:

GLOBAL PAYMENTS 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):

GLOBAL PAYMENTS INC.

10 GLENLAKE PARKWAY, NORTH TOWER

ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30328

NOTICE OF 2010 ANNUAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS

To the Shareholders:

The 2010 annual meeting of shareholders (the “Annual Meeting”) of Global Payments Inc., or the Company, will be held at our offices at 10 Glenlake Parkway, North Tower, Atlanta, Georgia, 30328-3473 on September 30, 2010, at 11:00 a.m., Atlanta time, for the following purposes:

Only shareholders of record at the close of business on August 6, 2010 are entitled to receive notice of, and to vote at, the Annual Meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof. You may vote your shares via the Internet or by telephone, as instructed in the Notice of Electronic Availability of Proxy Materials, or if you received your proxy materials by mail, you may also vote by mail.

YOUR VOTE IS IMPORTANT

Submitting your proxy does not affect your right to vote in person if you attend the Annual Meeting. Instead, it benefits us by reducing the expenses of additional proxy solicitation. Therefore, you are urged to submit your proxy as soon as possible, regardless of whether or not you expect to attend the Annual Meeting. You may revoke your proxy at any time before its exercise by (i) delivering written notice of revocation to our Corporate Secretary, Suellyn P. Tornay, at the above address, (ii) submitting to us a duly executed proxy card bearing a later date, (iii) voting via the Internet or by telephone at a later date, or (iv) appearing at the Annual Meeting and voting in person; provided, however, that no such revocation under clause (i) or (ii) shall be effective until written notice of revocation or a later dated proxy card is received by the Corporate Secretary at or before the Annual Meeting, and no such revocation under clause (iii) shall be effective unless received on or before 1:00 a.m., Central Time, on September 30, 2010.

When you submit your proxy, you authorize Paul R. Garcia or Suellyn P. Tornay or either one of them, each with full power of substitution, to vote your shares at the Annual Meeting in accordance with your instructions or, if no instructions are given, for the election of the Class I nominees and for the ratification of the reappointment of Deloitte & Touche LLP (“Deloitte”) as the Company’s independent public accountants. The proxies, in their discretion, are further authorized to vote on any adjournments or postponements of the Annual Meeting, for the election of one or more persons to the Board of Directors if any of the nominees becomes unable to serve or for good cause will not serve, on matters which the Board does not know a reasonable time before making the proxy solicitations will be presented at the Annual Meeting, or any other matters which may properly come before the Annual Meeting and any postponements or adjournments thereto.

By Order of the Board of Directors,

SUELLYN P. TORNAY,

Executive Vice President,

General Counsel and Corporate Secretary

Dated: August 20, 2010

August 20, 2010

GLOBAL PAYMENTS INC.

10 GLENLAKE PARKWAY, NORTH TOWER

ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30328

PROXY STATEMENT

This Proxy Statement is being furnished to solicit proxies on behalf of the Board of Directors of Global Payments Inc. (the “Company” or “we”) for use at the 2010 annual meeting of shareholders (the “Annual Meeting”), and at any adjournments or postponements thereof. The Annual Meeting will be held at our offices at 10 Glenlake Parkway, North Tower, Atlanta, Georgia, 30328-3473 on September 30, 2010, at 11:00 a.m., Atlanta time, for the following purposes:

Notice of Electronic Availability of Proxy Statement and Annual Report. As permitted by the Securities and Exchange Commission rules, we are making this proxy statement and our annual report available to our shareholders electronically via the Internet. The notice of electronic availability contains instructions on how to access this proxy statement and our annual report and vote online. You will not receive a printed copy of the proxy materials in the mail. Instead, the notice instructs you on how to access and review all of the important information contained in the proxy statement and annual report. The notice also instructs you on how you may submit your proxy over the Internet or by telephone. If you would like to receive a printed copy of our proxy materials, you should follow the instructions for requesting such materials contained on the notice.

The Notice of Electronic Availability of Proxy Materials and this Proxy Statement are first being mailed to shareholders on or about August 20, 2010.

(1) Voting Shares. Pursuant to our Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation, only the Company’s common shares, no par value (the “Common Stock”), may be voted at the Annual Meeting.

(2) Record Date. Only those holders of Common Stock of record at the close of business on August 6, 2010, are entitled to receive notice and to vote at the Annual Meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof. On that date, there were 79,713,654 shares of Common Stock issued and outstanding, held by approximately 2,358 shareholders of record. These holders are entitled to one vote per share.

(3) Quorum. In order for any business to be conducted, the holders of a majority of the shares entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting must be present (a “Quorum”), either in person or represented by proxy. Abstentions and votes withheld, and shares represented by proxies reflecting abstentions or votes withheld, will be treated as present for purposes of determining the existence of a Quorum at the Annual Meeting. They will not be considered as votes “for” or “against” any matter for which the respective shareholders have indicated their intention to abstain or withhold their votes. Broker or nominee non-votes, which occur when shares held in “street name” by brokers or nominees who indicate that they do not have discretionary authority to vote on a particular matter, will not be considered as votes “for” or “against” that particular

1

matter. Broker and nominee non-votes will be treated as present for purposes of determining the existence of a Quorum and may be entitled to vote on other matters at the Annual Meeting.

(4) Voting Options. The first proposal, which is the election of three directors in Class I, will require the vote of the holders of a plurality of the shares of Common Stock represented and entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting at which a Quorum is present. Shareholders may (i) vote “for” each nominee, or (ii) “withhold” authority to vote for any nominee. If a Quorum is present, a vote to “withhold” and a broker non-vote will have no effect on the outcome of the election of directors. The three nominees receiving the most votes will be elected to serve as the Class I Directors for a three-year term.

With respect to the second proposal, the ratification of the reappointment of Deloitte as the Company’s independent public accountants, shareholders may (i) vote “for,” (ii) vote “against,” or (iii) “abstain” from voting on the proposal. An abstention will have the same effect as a vote “against,” while a broker non-vote will have no effect on the outcome of the reappointment of Deloitte as the Company’s independent public accountants.

(5) How to Vote. If you received a notice of electronic availability, you cannot vote your shares by filling out and returning the notice. The notice, however, provides instructions on how to vote by Internet, by telephone, or by requesting and returning a paper proxy card.

(6) Internet and Telephone Voting. Shareholders of record can simplify their voting and reduce our costs by voting their shares via the Internet or by telephone. Shareholders may submit their proxy voting instructions via the Internet or telephone by following the instructions provided in the notice of electronic availability. The Internet and telephone voting procedures are designed to authenticate shareholders’ identities, to allow shareholders to vote their shares, and to confirm that their instructions have been properly recorded. If your shares are held in the name of a bank or broker, the availability of Internet and telephone voting will depend on the voting processes of the applicable bank or broker; therefore, it is recommended that you follow the voting instructions on the form you receive. If you received a printed version of the proxy materials by mail, you may vote by following the instructions provided with your proxy materials and on your proxy card.

(7) Default Voting. When a proxy is timely executed and not revoked, the shares represented by the proxy will be voted in accordance with the instructions indicated in the proxy. IF NO INSTRUCTIONS ARE INDICATED, HOWEVER, PROXIES WILL BE VOTED “FOR” THE ELECTION OF EACH OF THE DIRECTOR NOMINEES NAMED IN PROPOSAL 1 AND “FOR” PROPOSAL 2 RELATING TO THE RATIFICATION OF THE REAPPOINTMENT OF DELOITTE AS THE COMPANY’S INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS.

The Board of Directors is not presently aware of any business to be presented for a vote at the Annual Meeting other than the proposals noted above. If any other matter properly comes before the meeting, the proxy holders will vote as recommended by the Board or, if no recommendation is made, in their own discretion.

(8) Revocation of a Proxy. A shareholder’s submission of a proxy via the Internet, by telephone, or by mail does not affect the shareholder’s right to attend in person. A shareholder who has given a proxy may revoke it at any time prior to its being voted at the Annual Meeting by (i) delivering written notice of revocation to our Corporate Secretary, Suellyn P. Tornay, at our address listed on the first page of this proxy statement, (ii) properly submitting to us a duly executed proxy card bearing a later date, (iii) voting via the Internet or by telephone at a later date, or (iv) appearing at the Annual Meeting and voting in person; provided, however, that no such revocation under clause (i) or (ii) shall be effective until written notice of revocation or a later dated proxy card is received by the Corporate Secretary at or before the Annual Meeting, and no such revocation under clause (iii) shall be effective unless received on or before 1:00 a.m. Central Time on September 30, 2010.

(9) Adjourned Meeting. If a Quorum is not present, the Annual Meeting may be adjourned by the holders of a majority of the shares of Common Stock represented at the Annual Meeting. The Annual Meeting may be rescheduled at the time of the adjournment with no further notice of the reconvened meeting if the date, time and place of the reconvened meeting are announced at the adjourned meeting before its adjournment; provided, however, that if a new record date is or must be fixed, notice of the reconvened

2

meeting must be given to the shareholders of record as of the new record date. An adjournment will have no effect on the business to be conducted at the meeting.

PROPOSAL ONE:

ELECTION OF DIRECTORS; NOMINEES

Our Bylaws provide that the number of directors constituting the Board of Directors shall be not less than two nor more than twelve, as determined from time to time by resolution of the shareholders or of the Board of Directors. Our Board of Directors has adopted a resolution that the Board should have nine members. The Board of Directors currently consists of nine members, who are divided into three classes, with the term of office of each class ending in successive years. Each class of directors serves staggered three-year terms.

The three directors in Class I, Edwin H. Burba, Jr., Raymond L. Killian, and Ruth Ann Marshall have been nominated for election at the Annual Meeting. The Class I Directors will be elected to hold office until the 2013 annual meeting of shareholders, or until their respective successors have been duly elected and qualified, or until their respective earlier resignation, retirement, disqualification, removal from office or death. In the event that any of the nominees is unable to serve (which is not anticipated), the persons designated as proxies will cast votes for such other person(s) as they may select.

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” THE ELECTION OF ALL OF THE NOMINEES FOR DIRECTOR.

The affirmative vote of the holders of a plurality of the shares of Common Stock represented and entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting at which a quorum is present is required for the election of each of the nominees. If a choice is specified on the proxy card by a shareholder, the shares will be voted as specified. If no specification is made, the shares will be voted “FOR” each of the three nominees.

3

The following table sets forth the names of the nominees and the directors continuing in office, their ages, the month and year in which they first became directors of the Company, their positions with the Company, their principal occupations and employers for at least the past five years, any other directorships held by them in the last five years in companies that are subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or any company registered as an investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as well as additional information The following table includes the experience that led the Board of Directors to conclude that the individual should continue to serve as a director of the Company. There is no family relationship between any of our executive officers or directors. There are no arrangements or understandings between any of our directors and any other person pursuant to which any of them was elected as a director, other than arrangements or understandings with the directors solely in their capacities as such. For information concerning membership on committees of the Board of Directors, see “Other Information about the Board and its Committees” below.

NOMINEES FOR DIRECTOR

Class I

Term Expiring Annual Meeting 2010

4

MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS CONTINUING IN OFFICE

Class II

Term Expiring Annual Meeting 2011

5

Class III

Term Expiring Annual Meeting 2012

6

(1) Meetings. During the fiscal year ended May 31, 2010 (the 2010 fiscal year), our Board of Directors held seven meetings. All directors attended 100% of the combined total of the Board of Directors meetings and meetings of the committees on which they served during the period for which the respective director served on the Board of Directors or the applicable committee.

(2) Fiscal Year 2010 Director Compensation. The following table reflects the compensation payable to the outside directors of the Company. Since we do not offer any non-equity incentive plan compensation or any pension benefits to our directors, and there was no other compensation required to be disclosed, columns (e), (f), and (g) have been eliminated.

2010 DIRECTOR COMPENSATION

(3) Compensation Policy. During fiscal year 2010, our policy regarding the compensation of directors provided that a non-employee director who served as the lead director was compensated at a rate of $75,000 per year in cash and received fully-vested shares of Common Stock worth approximately $70,000. A non-employee director who served as the chairperson of the audit committee received $55,000 in cash and fully-vested shares of Common Stock worth approximately $45,000. A non-employee director who served as a chairperson of any other committee received $50,000 in cash and fully-vested shares of Common Stock worth approximately $45,000. Each other non-employee director received an annual retainer of $45,000 in cash and fully vested shares of Common Stock worth approximately $45,000. All Common Stock granted pursuant to the director compensation policy is valued at the market price as of the date of grant and is issued under our Amended and Restated 2005 Incentive Plan. Pursuant to the foregoing policy, Mr. Jacobs received

7

1,517 shares of Common Stock, and each of the other non-employee directors received 975 shares of Common Stock. Such Common Stock was issued and cash was paid on the business day following the annual meeting of shareholders. By paying part of the annual consideration in Common Stock, we believe that this encourages ownership of our Common Stock by our directors.

In addition, all non-employee directors received $1,500 per Board meeting attended, except for the lead director who received $2,500 per Board meeting. Non-employee directors who served on a committee received $1,500 per committee meeting, while the chairperson of such committee received $2,500 per committee meeting. Telephonic meetings and telephonic participation for both Board meetings and committee meetings are compensated at $1000 per meeting. We do not compensate a director who is also an employee of the Company for his or her services as a director. Directors were also compensated for their out-of-pocket expenses incurred in connection with attendance at Board and committee meetings. The spouses of the Board members were invited to attend one of the meetings held in Pine Mountain, Georgia and we paid or reimbursed the two outside directors whose spouses attended for the applicable out-of-pocket expenses incurred.

(4) Amended and Restated 2000 Non-Employee Director Stock Option Plan. We maintain the Amended and Restated 2000 Non-Employee Director Stock Option Plan (the “2000 Director Plan”), which provides for the grant to each of our non-employee directors of an option to purchase shares of Common Stock having a valuation according to the Black-Scholes option pricing model of $80,000. The purpose of the 2000 Director Plan is to advance the interests of the Company by encouraging ownership of our Common Stock by non-employee directors, thereby giving such directors an increased incentive to devote their efforts to our success. The options are granted to non-employee directors upon election or appointment to the Board and on the business day following each annual meeting of shareholders. Option grants under the 2000 Director Plan are pro-rated for partial years of service. All options granted in fiscal year 2010 under the 2000 Director Plan will become exercisable as to 25% of the shares after the first year, 25% after the second year, 25% after the third year, and 25% after the fourth year of service from the grant date, except that such options will become fully exercisable upon the death, disability or retirement of the grantee, or upon the grantee’s failure to be re-nominated or re-elected as a director. Upon a grantee’s termination as a director for any reason, the options held by such person under the 2000 Director Plan will remain exercisable for five years or until the earlier expiration of the option. The exercise price for each option granted under the 2000 Director Plan will be the fair market value of the shares of Common Stock subject to the option on the date of the grant. Each option granted under the 2000 Director Plan will, to the extent not previously exercised, terminate and expire on the date which is 10 years after the grant date of the option unless the 2000 Director Plan provides for earlier termination. During the fiscal year ended May 31, 2010, the eight non-employee directors received a stock option grant for the purchase of 5,490 shares of Common Stock at an exercise price of $46.16 per share.

(5) Outstanding Options for Directors. The following table reflects the outstanding options (vested and unvested) for each non-employee director as of May 31, 2010. The “spread” value is calculated by multiplying the number of options outstanding by the difference between the value of the Common Stock on the first business day after May 31, 2010, which was $41.44, and the exercise price of the option.

(6) Board Leadership Structure. The Board of Directors does not have a formal policy on whether the same person should serve as the Chairman of the Board and the Chief Executive Officer. Since 2002,

8

however, Mr. Garcia has served in both roles. The Board believes the combined role of Chief Executive Officer and Chairman, together with a lead independent director having the duties described below, is in the best interest of the shareholders because it provides the appropriate balance between strategy development and independent oversight of management. The Board of Directors believes that having our Chief Executive Officer as Chairman of the Board facilitates the Board’s decision-making process because Mr. Garcia possesses detailed and in-depth knowledge of the issues, opportunities, and challenges facing the Company and its business and is thus best positioned to develop agendas (with input from the lead independent director) that ensure that the Board’s time and attention are focused on the most critical matters. His combined role enables decisive leadership, ensures clear accountability, and enhances the Company’s ability to communicate its message and strategy clearly and consistently to the Company’s shareholders, employees, customers, and suppliers.

Mr. Jacobs serves as our lead independent director. The lead independent director’s duties include providing input on the Board meeting agenda items, serving as the chairperson for all executive sessions of the independent directors, and communicating to the Chief Executive Officer the results of the independent executive Board sessions. Executive sessions of the independent directors are generally held immediately after each regularly scheduled meeting of the Board and do not include our only non-independent director. The independent directors of the Board met in executive session 6 times during our fiscal year ended May 31, 2010.

Any interested party may contact the lead director by directing such communications to Mr. Jacobs in care of the Corporate Secretary at our address (10 Glenlake Parkway, North Tower, Suite 1068, Atlanta, Georgia 30328-3473). Any such correspondence received by us will be forwarded to him.

(7) Director Independence. Each year the Board of Directors undertakes a review of director independence based on the standards for director independence included in the New York Stock Exchange corporate governance rules. The Board considers whether or not there existed any relationships and transactions during the past three years between each director or any member of his or her immediate family, on the one hand, and the Company and its subsidiaries and affiliates, on the other hand. The purpose of the review was to determine whether or not any such relationships and transactions existed and, if so, whether any such relationships or transactions were inconsistent with a determination that the director is independent. In fiscal year 2010, there were no such relationships or transactions between the non-employee directors and the Company to review and, as a result, the Board of Directors has determined that all of the directors, except Mr. Garcia (who serves as the Company’s Chief Executive Officer), are independent of the Company and its management.

(8) Committees. Our Board of Directors has a separately-designated Audit Committee, a Compensation Committee, a Governance, Nominating, and Risk Oversight Committee, and a Technology Committee. The Audit Committee has been established in accordance with Section 3(a)(58)(A) of the Exchange Act. The Board of Directors has determined that all members of the four committees satisfy the independence requirements of the SEC and the New York Stock Exchange. Each of the committee charters and our corporate governance guidelines are available on our website (www.globalpaymentsinc.com), and will be provided free of charge, upon written request of any shareholder addressed to Global Payments Inc., 10 Glenlake Parkway, North Tower, Atlanta, Georgia 30328-3473, Attention: Investor Relations. Certain information regarding the functions of the Board’s committees and their present membership is provided below.

(9) Audit Committee. As of the end of fiscal year 2010, the members of the Audit Committee were Mr. Trapp (Chairperson), Mr. Wilkins, and Mr. Silberstein. The Audit Committee operates under a written charter adopted by the Board of Directors which is available on our website (www.globalpaymentsinc.com). The Audit Committee annually reviews a report by the independent auditors describing the firm’s internal quality control procedures; reviews the scope, plan and results of the annual audit of the financial statements by our independent auditors; reviews the scope, plan and results of the internal audit program; reviews the nature and extent of non-audit professional services performed by the independent auditors; and annually recommends to the Board of Directors the firm of independent public accountants to be selected as our independent auditors for the next fiscal year. During fiscal year 2010, the Audit Committee held four meetings, each of which was separate from a regular Board meeting.

(10) Audit Committee Financial Expert. The Board of Directors has determined that the chairman of the Audit Committee, Mr. Trapp, is an audit committee financial expert and is independent as independence

9

for audit committee members is defined under the rules established by the SEC and the New York Stock Exchange.

(11) Compensation Committee. As of the end of fiscal year 2010, the members of the Compensation Committee were General Burba (Chairperson), Mr. Hart, Mr. Jacobs, Mr. Killian, and Ms. Marshall. The Committee operates under a written charter which is available on our website (www.globalpaymentsinc.com). This Committee reviews levels of compensation, benefits, and performance criteria for our executive officers and administers the Amended and Restated 2000 Long Term Incentive Plan, the 2000 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, the 2000 Director Plan, and the Amended and Restated 2005 Incentive Plan. They also consider our compensation programs from a risk perspective. Additional information regarding risk consideration is contained in the Compensation Tables and Narratives section under the heading “Consideration of Risk.”

The Compensation Committee charter allows the Committee to delegate certain matters within its authority to individuals, and the Committee may form and delegate authority to subcommittees as appropriate. In addition, the Committee has the authority under its charter to retain outside advisors to assist the Committee in the performance of its duties, and for fiscal year 2010 the Committee retained the services of Hewitt Associates, or Hewitt, an independent compensation consulting firm. The individual consultant that the Committee has used for several years changed employers from Hewitt to Meridian Compensation Partners LLC, or Meridian, so the Committee now utilizes the services of Meridian instead. The Compensation Discussion and Analysis section of this proxy statement describes our processes and procedures for the consideration and determination of executive compensation, including the role of the executive officers in determining compensation, and describes the role of the independent consultant in more detail.

During fiscal year 2007, the Compensation Committee also hired Hewitt to assist with a review of the director compensation. The Compensation Committee, with Hewitt’s assistance, made recommendations to the full Board, which were approved on July 24, 2007 and which took effect on September 27, 2007 and will remain in effect through September 30, 2010. The executives have no role in determining Board compensation. During fiscal year 2010, the Compensation Committee held four meetings, all of which were separate from regular Board meetings.

(12) Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation. None of the members of the Compensation Committee (a) has ever served as an officer or an employee of the Company or any of its subsidiaries and (b) has ever had any relationship requiring disclosure by the Company under Item 404 of Regulation S-K.

(13) Technology Committee. As of the end of fiscal year 2010, the members of the Technology Committee were Mr. Killian (Chairperson), Mr. Hart, and Mr. Silberstein. The Committee operates under a formal charter which is available on our website (www.globalpaymentsinc.com). This committee is to serve as a liaison between the Board and management with regard to matters related to information technology and information security and to review the practices and key initiatives of the Company related to information technology and information security. During fiscal year 2010, the Technology Committee held three meetings, all of which were separate from regular Board meetings.

(14) Governance, Nominating, and Risk Oversight Committee. As of the end of fiscal year 2010, the members of the Governance, Nominating, and Risk Oversight Committee (the “Governance Committee”) were Mr. Hart (Chairperson), General Burba, Mr. Jacobs, and Ms. Marshall. The Committee operates under a formal charter which is available on our website (www.globalpaymentsinc.com). This committee is responsible for developing and recommending to the Board of Directors a set of corporate governance principles applicable to us, determining the structure of the Board and its committees, for overseeing the Company’s enterprise risk management process (as described in more detail below), and for identifying, nominating, proposing, and qualifying nominees (including incumbent directors) for open seats on the Board of Directors, based primarily on the following criteria:

10

We do not have a formal diversity policy. However, as part of its evaluation of director candidates and in addition to other standards the Governance Committee may deem appropriate from time to time for the overall structure and composition of the Board, the Committee considers whether each candidate, if elected, assists in achieving a mix of board members that represent a diversity of background and experience. Accordingly, the Board seeks members from diverse professional backgrounds who combine a broad spectrum of relevant industry and strategic experience and expertise that, in concert, offer the Company and its shareholders diversity of opinion and insight in the areas most important to us and our corporate mission. The Committee also considers the independence of candidates for director nominees, including the appearance of any conflict in serving as a director. Candidates for director nominees who do not meet all of these criteria may still be considered for nomination to the Board if the Committee believes the candidate will make an exceptional contribution to the Company and its shareholders. In evaluating nominees, the Committee will also take into account the consideration that members of the Board of Directors should collectively possess a broad range of skills, expertise, industry knowledge and other knowledge, business experience and other experience useful to the effective oversight of our business.

The Governance Committee considers candidates for director who are recommended by other members of the Board of Directors and by management, as well as those identified by any outside consultants who are periodically retained by the committee to assist in identifying possible candidates. The Governance Committee will evaluate potential nominees for open Board positions suggested by shareholders on the same basis as all other potential nominees. To recommend a potential nominee, you may send a letter to the Corporate Secretary, Global Payments Inc., 10 Glenlake Parkway, North Tower, Suite 1068, Atlanta, Georgia, 30328. Such letter should include the following information:

Members of the Governance Committee must discuss and evaluate possible candidates prior to recommending them to the Board. This committee had no formal meetings during fiscal year 2010 but will meet twice before the end of calendar year 2010.

(15) Role in Risk Oversight by the Board of Directors. Managing risk is an ongoing process inherent in all decisions made by management. The Board of Directors discusses risk throughout the year, particularly at Board and Committee meetings when specific actions are considered for approval. The Board of Directors has ultimate responsibility to oversee the Company’s enterprise risk management program (“ERM”). The Governance Committee has been appointed by our Board of Directors to coordinate the oversight of ERM by the Board.

In connection with the Company’s ERM, the Company has formed a management risk committee which is comprised of the Company’s senior management and which is responsible for identifying, assessing, prioritizing, and developing action plans to mitigate the material risks affecting the Company including monitoring the business environment for changes in and emergence of significant risks. The Governance

11

Committee’s role in overseeing the management of the process is primarily accomplished through the management reporting process, including receiving reports from the chairman of the management risk committee and other members of senior management on areas of material risk to the Company. The Chairman of the Governance Committee will update the full Board of Directors on the process after each Committee meeting and, annually, the chairman of the management risk committee will also present directly to the full board and seek their input and direction on the process.

The Audit Committee receives reports from the Chairman of the Governance Committee regarding the Company’s ERM, receives a report annually from the chairman of the management risk committee as described above, and receives reports regularly from the internal auditor, who has responsibility for providing an independent assessment of the effectiveness of management’s risk mitigation activities developed by management. The Audit Committee directly provides oversight of risks related to the integrity of the consolidated financial statements, internal control over financial reporting, and the internal audit function. The Compensation Committee oversees the management of risks related to management succession planning and the Company’s executive compensation program.

(16) Communications from Security Holders. Any security holder may contact any member of the Board of Directors by directing such communication to such Board member in care of the Corporate Secretary at our address (10 Glenlake Parkway, North Tower, Suite 1068, Atlanta, Georgia 30328-3473). Any such correspondence received by us shall be forwarded to the applicable Board member.

(17) Attendance at Annual Meeting. All directors are expected to attend our annual meeting of shareholders. All nine members of our Board of Directors attended our fiscal year 2009 annual shareholder meeting.

(18) Certain Legal Proceedings. William I Jacobs, a member of the Board of Directors, was the Chief Financial Officer and Managing Director of The New Power Company, a subsidiary of NewPower Holdings, Inc. Both The New Power Company and NewPower Holdings, Inc. filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Georgia on June 11, 2002.

12

PROPOSAL TWO:

RATIFICATION OF THE REAPPOINTMENT OF AUDITORS

The Audit Committee recommends, and the Board of Directors selects, independent public accountants for the Company. The Audit Committee has recommended that Deloitte & Touche LLP, or Deloitte, who served during the fiscal year ended May 31, 2010, be selected for the fiscal year ending May 31, 2011, and the Board has approved the selection. Unless a shareholder directs otherwise, proxies will be voted for the approval of the selection of Deloitte as independent public accountants for fiscal year ending May 31, 2011. If the appointment of Deloitte is not ratified by the shareholders, the Board will consider the selection of other independent public accountants for 2011.

A representative of Deloitte will be present at the 2010 Annual Meeting. The representative will be given the opportunity to make a statement, if he or she desires to do so, and will be available to respond to appropriate questions from shareholders.

The aggregate fees billed by Deloitte for professional services rendered for the audit of our annual financial statements and the reviews of the financial statements included in our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q were $2,411,141 for fiscal year 2010 and $2,622,000 for fiscal year 2009.

Audit-related fees are the fees billed by Deloitte for professional services rendered for assurance and related services that are reasonably related to the performance of the audit or review of our financial statements. There were no audit-related fees billed during fiscal year 2010 and the audit-related fees billed during fiscal year 2009 were $172,000. The fees paid in fiscal year 2009 were for services in connection with acquisition due diligence procedures and audits of financial statements included in certain Asia-Pacific jurisdiction tax returns, as required by local statute.

The aggregate fees billed by Deloitte for professional services rendered for tax compliance, tax advice, and tax planning services were $379,700 for fiscal year 2010 and $544,000 for fiscal year 2009. In fiscal year 2010, $47,000 of such fees were for tax return preparation and compliance and $332,700 were for tax consulting and advisory services. In fiscal year 2009, $107,000 of such fees were for tax return preparation and compliance and $437,000 were for tax consulting and advisory services.

Except as described above, there were no other fees billed by Deloitte for professional services in either fiscal year 2010 or fiscal year 2009.

The Audit Committee must approve any audit services and any permissible non-audit services provided by Deloitte prior to the commencement of the services. In making its pre-approval determination, the Audit Committee considers whether providing the non-audit services is compatible with maintaining the auditor’s independence. To minimize relationships which could appear to impair the objectivity of the independent registered public accounting firm, it is the Audit Committee’s practice to restrict the non-audit services that may be provided to us by our independent auditor to audit-related services, tax services and merger and acquisition due diligence and integration services.

The Audit Committee has delegated to the Chair of the Audit Committee the authority to approve non-audit services by the independent registered public accounting firm within the guidelines set forth above, provided that the fees associated with the applicable engagement are not anticipated to exceed $100,000. Any decision by the Chair to pre-approve non-audit services must be presented to the full Audit Committee for ratification at its next scheduled meeting. All of the services described under the headings “Audit Fees,”

13

“Audit-Related Fees,” “Tax Fees,” and “All Other Fees” were approved by the Audit Committee in accordance with the foregoing policy.

Our Audit Committee has reviewed the services rendered and the fees billed by Deloitte for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2010. The Audit Committee has considered whether or not the provision of non-audit services described above under the headings “Audit-Related Fees” and “All Other Fees” is compatible with maintaining Deloitte’s independence and have determined that the provision of such services does not affect Deloitte’s independence.

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” THE RATIFICATION OF THE REAPPOINTMENT OF THE INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS.

14

CERTAIN INFORMATION CONCERNING THE EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

The following table sets forth the names of our executive officers as of May 31, 2010, their ages, their positions with the Company, and their principal occupations and employers for at least the past five years. There are no arrangements or understandings between any of our executive officers and any other person pursuant to which any of them was elected an officer, other than arrangements or understandings with our officers acting solely in their capacities as such. Our executive officers serve at the pleasure of our Board of Directors.

15

16

COMMON STOCK OWNERSHIP OF MANAGEMENT

The following table sets forth information as of June 30, 2010, with respect to the beneficial ownership of the Company’s Common Stock by the nominees to the Board, by the directors of the Company, by each of the persons named in the Summary Compensation Table, and by the 16 persons, as a group, who were directors and/or executive officers of the Company on June 30, 2010.

Except as explained in the footnotes below, the named persons have sole voting and investment power with regard to the shares shown as beneficially owned by them.

17

18

COMMON STOCK OWNERSHIP BY CERTAIN OTHER PERSONS

The following table sets forth information as of the date indicated with respect to the only persons who are known by the Company to be the beneficial owners of more than 5% of the outstanding shares of Common Stock.

19

COMPENSATION AND OTHER BENEFITS:

COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

2010 Compensation Highlights

Fiscal year 2010 was a successful year for Global Payments; we had substantial growth in EPS and revenue. Below is a summary of compensation decisions made during the year.

Following is additional detail regarding our executive pay program.

In the paragraphs that follow, we provide an overview and analysis of our compensation program and policies, the material compensation decisions we have made under those programs and policies, and the material factors that we considered in making those decisions. Following this section is a series of tables containing specific information about the compensation earned or paid in fiscal year 2010 to the following individuals, to whom we refer as our “Named Executive Officers” or “NEOs” for the purposes of this proxy statement.

Paul R. Garcia—Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

David E. Mangum—Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

Joseph C. Hyde—President—International

James G. Kelly—Former President and Chief Operating Officer

Suellyn P. Tornay—Executive Vice President and General Counsel

Morgan M. Schuessler—Executive Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer

The discussion below is intended to help you understand the detailed information provided in those tables and put that information into context within our overall compensation program.

We design our compensation program with a view to retaining and attracting executive leadership of a caliber and level of experience necessary to effectively manage our complex, growth-oriented, and global businesses. Our objective is to have a compensation program that will allow us to:

In order to do this effectively, our program must:

20

The Compensation Committee retained an independent compensation consultant during fiscal year 2010. The consultant takes guidance from and reports directly to the Compensation Committee. She advises the Compensation Committee on current and future trends and issues in executive compensation and on the competitiveness of the compensation structure and levels of our executives, including the Named Executive Officers. At the request of the Committee and to provide context for the Committee’s compensation decisions made for fiscal year 2010, the consultant performed the following services for the Committee late in fiscal year 2009:

The same individual consultant was retained throughout the year. However, the consultant changed employers from Hewitt Associates to Meridian Compensation Partners LLC during the year. Neither Hewitt Associates nor Meridian Compensation Partners performed non-executive compensation services for the company during fiscal year 2010. The tally sheets referred to above allowed the Committee to assess the impact of compensation decisions over time, but the Committee did not deem any changes to be necessary to the compensation decisions as the result of their review of the information contained in them.

We consider the compensation levels, programs, and practices of certain other companies to assist us in setting our executive compensation so that it is market competitive. For fiscal year 2010, the peer group listed below was utilized for this purpose. These companies were chosen because each such company is in the transaction processing or data services business, is publicly traded, and, in terms of our revenue compared to that of the peer group, we would fall near the median. We compete for talent with several of these peer companies.

The Compensation Committee annually reviews and updates the list of companies comprising the peer group to ensure we have an appropriate marketplace focus.

Before the Compensation Committee met in executive session to set fiscal year 2010 compensation, the independent consultant collected and analyzed comprehensive market data for its use. The consultant presented size-adjusted market values for base salary, short term incentives, and long term incentives, using peer group proxy data as the primary data source and supplementing it as necessary with general industry information from Hewitt’s proprietary executive compensation database. In addition, Hewitt provided an analysis of the peer group’s short term incentive payouts as it related to their respective performance compared to the Company. The Committee reviews the data for each of the Named Executive Officers for the different elements of compensation and then makes individual compensation decisions, taking into

21

consideration such factors as performance, retention, internal equity, individual development, and succession planning.

Our Chief Executive Officer (Paul R. Garcia), with the assistance of our human resources department, develops compensation recommendations for the executive officers who report directly to him (including the Named Executive Officers) based upon market data supplied by the independent consultant, the Company’s performance relative to goals approved by the Compensation Committee, individual performance versus personal objectives, and other individual contributions to the Company’s performance. Mr. Garcia is not involved in determining his own compensation. The Compensation Committee reviews and approves all compensation elements for the Named Executive Officers and sets the compensation of the CEO, after receiving advice from the independent consultant.

The following elements comprise our compensation program for executives:

To provide flexibility in using the different elements of compensation from year to year, the Compensation Committee does not have a policy with regard to the allocation among the major elements of compensation, including base salary, short term incentives, and long term incentives but tends to approximate the mix of pay inherent in the market data. The following executive pay at target levels was set by the Compensation Committee for fiscal year 2010:

When the Committee established the EPS goals for the annual performance and performance unit plans that are described throughout this narrative, it calculated the relationship between the additional earnings represented and the incremental short-term incentive and performance unit payouts that would be owed as a result of the executives reaching their goals. This maintains an equilibrium between shareholder reward and executive reward between the target and maximum goal levels.

(1) Base Salary. Base salary provides our executive officers with a level of compensation consistent with their skills, responsibilities, experience and performance in relation to comparable positions in the marketplace. Base salary is the one fixed component of our executives’ compensation. The Compensation Committee reviews the base salaries of our executive officers annually. The Named Executive Officers did not receive a salary increase for fiscal year 2010. Mr. Kelly received a promotion and an increase during fiscal year 2009. Although a review of the Summary Compensation Table reveals that his salary was greater in fiscal year 2010 than in fiscal year 2009, his fiscal year 2009 base salary was increased during the year but was not increased from the end of fiscal year 2009 to fiscal year 2010.

(2) Short Term Incentives. We provide our Named Executive Officers with short term incentive opportunities to motivate and reward them for the achievement of the Company’s defined business goals and objectives and to reward individual performance. Our short term incentive program includes an annual performance plan and our commitment and accountability program.

22

(a) Annual Performance Plan. The annual performance plan provides an opportunity for executives to earn variable at-risk cash compensation. Each executive is assigned a target award opportunity, expressed as a percentage of base salary. Overall, the total fiscal year 2009 target opportunities were lower than the market levels provided by the consultant. Based on the review of the data, the Compensation Committee increased and set each executive’s target bonus opportunities for fiscal year 2010 as follows: Mr. Garcia—$1,140,000 or 120% of his base salary, which was increased from 100% of his base salary in fiscal year 2009; Mr. Mangum—$300,000 or 75% of his base salary, which was increased from 70% of his base salary in fiscal year 2009; Mr. Hyde—$280,000 or 70% of his base salary, which was not increased from fiscal year 2009; Mr. Kelly—$510,000 or 80% of his base salary, which was increased from 75% of his base salary in fiscal year 2009; Ms. Tornay—$192,500 or 55% of her base salary, which was not increased from fiscal year 2009, and Mr. Schuessler—$178,750 or 55% of his base salary, which was not increased from fiscal year 2009.

For fiscal year 2010, there were three weighted components of the annual performance plan. There were two Company objectives, diluted earnings per share (EPS) and revenue, and a set of individual objectives that varied from person to person. The rationale for using each component in the plan is outlined in the following table:

The three parts of the annual performance plan were calculated separately. The target opportunity was allocated among the three elements based upon the table below.

The range of possible payouts for each performance measure varied by person, by measure and in total as shown in the tables below. Each executive can earn up to 100% of the individual objectives component. For each of the corporate components, Mr. Garcia could earn up to 225%, Mr. Kelly could earn up to approximately 215%, and the other NEOs could earn up to 200%. Once calculated, all bonus payments are totaled and then rounded up to the nearest $1,000.

23

For Mr. Garcia:

For Mr. Kelly:

For the Executives (other than Mr. Garcia and Mr. Kelly):

For example, an executive (other than Mr. Garcia or Mr. Kelly) with a base salary of $200,000 per year and a target bonus of 50% of his base salary would have a target bonus of $100,000. Based upon the relative weighting set forth in the table above, the target bonus would be apportioned $40,000 for diluted EPS results (40%), $30,000 for revenue results (30%), and $30,000 for individual goals (30%). The executive’s target diluted EPS payout was $40,000, so he could earn from zero to 200% (or from $0 to $80,000) for this portion of the bonus. The executive’s target revenue bonus was $30,000, so he could earn from zero to 200% (or from $0 to $60,000) for this portion of the bonus. Finally, the executive’s target bonus for individual goals was $30,000, so he could earn from zero to 100% (or from $0 to $30,000) for performance against individual goals. The total payout opportunity in this example is from 0% to 170% (or from $0 to $170,000).

(i) Diluted EPS Payout

The following table contains the range of diluted EPS goals for fiscal year 2010 and the applicable payout percentages. The diluted EPS goal excludes the impact of restructuring, other non-recurring charges and changes in foreign currency and includes Money Transfer Services through November 2009.

The metric at target was established at a level that reflected growth over fiscal year 2009 results. The actual diluted EPS result for the Company for fiscal year 2010 on a GAAP basis was $2.48, which represents a 439% increase from fiscal year 2009 GAAP EPS of $0.46. Factoring in the adjustments described above, diluted EPS for fiscal year 2010 was $2.4969. Using straight line interpolation, the payout was approximately

24

106% for Mr. Garcia and Mr. Kelly and approximately 105% for the other Named Executive Officers of the target amount of the bonus apportioned to diluted EPS results. The diluted EPS performance resulted in the following payouts to the Named Executive Officers: Mr. Garcia—$605,116; Mr. Mangum—$125,914; Mr. Hyde—$117,520; Mr. Kelly—$215,491; Ms. Tornay—$80,795; and Mr. Schuessler—$75,024.

(ii) Revenue Payout

The following table contains the range of revenue goals for fiscal year 2010 and the applicable payout percentages. The revenue goal excludes the impact of restructuring, other non-recurring charges and changes in foreign currency and includes Money Transfer Services through November 2009.

The metric at target was established at a level that reflected growth over fiscal year 2009 results. The actual revenue for the Company for fiscal year 2010 on a GAAP basis was $1,642 million, rounded to the nearest $1 million, which represents an increase of 12.3% over fiscal year 2009 GAAP revenue of $1,462 million. Factoring in the adjustments described above, revenue for fiscal 2010 was $1,683 million. Using straight line interpolation, the payout was approximately 95.2% for all executives of the target amount of the bonus apportioned to revenue results. The revenue performance resulted in the following payouts to the Named Executive Officers: Mr. Garcia—$325,636; Mr. Mangum—$85,694; Mr. Hyde—$79,981; Mr. Kelly—$145,679; Ms. Tornay—$54,987, and Mr. Schuessler—$51,059.

(iii) Payout Based upon Individual Performance Objectives

The third component of the bonus payout was based upon individual performance objectives. Each of the executives could earn from zero to 100% of the payout amount allocated to individual performance. Individual performance objectives are established annually in writing. The Compensation Committee and the Lead Director set the individual performance objectives for the CEO, and the CEO approves the individual objectives for the other executives. Examples of actual individual performance objectives for our Named Executive Officers for fiscal year 2010 included:

This individual assessment promotes accountability for each executive’s personal performance and helps differentiate our executives’ compensation based on individual contributions. At the end of the year, the CEO reviews the performance of each Named Executive Officer (other than himself) against his or her objectives, which are weighted according to proportional importance and impact, and makes a recommendation to the Compensation Committee regarding this portion of the bonus. The Lead Director and the Compensation Committee review Mr. Garcia’s performance against his objectives and determine the amount payable. Based upon the performance against such objectives, the payouts for each executive were as follows: Mr. Garcia—$221,730 or approximately 97%; Mr. Mangum—$87,300 or 97%; Mr. Hyde—$80,850 or approximately 96%; Mr. Kelly—$76,500 or 50%; Ms. Tornay—$55,000 or approximately 95%, and Mr. Schuessler—$50,944 or approximately 95%.

25

(iv) Summary of the Annual Performance Plan

The following table summarizes the final annual performance incentive plan payouts for each executive based on fiscal year 2010 performance:

For further clarification, we have provided pie charts summarizing the results described in the foregoing pages:

Paul R. Garcia		James G. Kelly
Target Cash Incentive: $1,140,000		Target Cash Incentive: $510,000
Actual Cash Received: $1,153,000		Actual Cash Received: $438,000

26

David E. Mangum		Joseph C. Hyde
Target Cash Incentive: $300,000		Target Cash Incentive: $280,000
Actual Cash Received: $299,000		Actual Cash Received: $279,000
Suellyn P. Tornay		Morgan Schuessler
Target Cash Incentive: $192,500		Target Cash Incentive: $178,750
Actual Cash Received: $191,000		Actual Cash Received: $178,000

(b) Commitment and Accountability Discretionary Awards. In addition to the annual performance plan, all employees, including the executives, can earn discretionary bonuses. These bonuses are paid for specific accomplishments during the year that were not anticipated at the beginning of the year or were in addition to the executive’s individual objectives. Examples of the type of accomplishments that could result in a discretionary bonus would be the closing of a major acquisition or the completion of a major project. For fiscal year 2010, Mr. Hyde received a discretionary award of $85,000 based on his involvement in and achievement of the acquisition of the remaining 49% of the HSBC merchant services business from HSBC.

27

(3) Long Term Incentive Program. Each year the Company grants Long Term Incentive Awards, which we refer to as LTIs, to executives and other key employees throughout the Company. All LTI grants are made pursuant to our Amended and Restated 2005 Incentive Plan, the material terms of which were approved by our shareholders. All grants of LTIs to the Named Executive Officers are approved by the Compensation Committee. We believe the LTIs align the executives’ interests with those of the shareholders by linking their compensation to stock price. The LTI grants for Named Executive Officers were as follows: Mr. Garcia—$3,200,000, Mr. Mangum—$850,000, Mr. Hyde—$675,000, Mr. Kelly—$1,125,000, Ms. Tornay—$550,000, and Mr. Schuessler—$475,000.

In fiscal year 2010, the LTIs granted to the executives included stock options as well as performance-based restricted stock units (performance units), with 25% of the LTI value allocated to stock options and 75% allocated to performance units at target levels. In order to determine the number of stock options to grant, we established a per share value equal to 40% of the fair market value of a share of our Common Stock on the grant date ($42.18) which resulted in a per share value of $16.872. We then divide the dollar amount of the stock option portion of the LTI grant by the per share value ($16.872) to determine the number of stock options that would be granted at the $42.18 strike price. In order to determine the number of performance units to grant, we established a per share value equal to 90% of the fair market value of a share of our Common Stock on the grant date ($42.18) which resulted in a per share value of $37.96. We then divide the dollar amount of the performance unit portion of the LTI grant by the per share value ($37.96) to determine the number of performance units that would be granted at the target level. Any fractional shares are rounded up to the nearest whole share. The 40% and 90% figures set forth above were derived by the independent consultant and represent the risk-adjusted present value of the grants consistent with the methodology used to develop the market data for long-term incentives.

For example, if an executive’s LTI grant value was $200,000, we would have multiplied $200,000 by 25% to derive the portion of the grant to be allocated to stock options ($50,000), reserving the remaining 75% of the grant value ($150,000) to be allocated to performance units. Then, we would have divided the stock option allocation by the estimated per-option grant value of $16.872, and the performance-based restricted stock allocation by the estimated per-share grant value of $37.962. As a result, the executive would have received 2,964 options at an exercise price of $42.18 and 3,952 performance shares at target level.

(a) Stock Options. We believe stock options provide an incentive for long term creation of shareholder value. Stock options only have value to the extent the price of the Company’s stock appreciates relative to the exercise price. The exercise price is the closing price of the stock on the grant date. We do not grant discounted options or re-price existing options. The granted stock options vest over a four-year period at a rate of 25% per year. During fiscal year 2010, the Compensation Committee approved the following stock option grants for each of the Named Executive Officers:

(b) Performance-Based Restricted Stock Units (Performance Units). In addition to stock options, we issue performance units under our long term incentive program in order to motivate employees, to reward the achievement of specified financial or market goals, and encourage increased stock ownership by executives. Performance units are converted into a restricted stock grant only if the Company’s performance during the fiscal year exceeds pre-established goals. The total amount of performance units awarded to each NEO at target is described above and then allocated equally between three criteria: diluted EPS, revenue and operating margin results.

28

These metrics were chosen based upon the following rationale:

Long Term Incentive – Performance-Based Restricted Stock Plan

For fiscal year 2010, the Compensation Committee approved a modification to our performance unit program as compared to prior years to bring the range of opportunity provided under them closer to market norms. This modification was to increase the maximum opportunity to 200%. This change is reflected in the following table applicable to the grant of performance units:

The following is a table summarizing the target performance units granted during fiscal year 2010.

Depending on the diluted EPS, revenue and operating margin results, the executives could earn from 0% to 200% of the applicable target amount.

29

(i) Portion Attributable to Diluted EPS Results

The following table contains the diluted EPS goals and the applicable reward amounts for fiscal year 2010. The diluted EPS goals exclude the impact of restructuring, other non-recurring charges and changes in foreign currency and include Money Transfer Services through November 2009.

The metric at target was established at a level that reflected growth over fiscal year 2009 results. The actual diluted EPS result for the Company for fiscal year 2010 on a GAAP basis was $2.48, which represents a 439% increase from fiscal year 2009 GAAP EPS of $0.46. Factoring in the adjustments described above, diluted EPS for fiscal 2010 was $2.4969. Using straight line interpolation, the payout was approximately 105%. This resulted in each of the executives, who were employees on July 29, 2010, receiving the following number of performance units: Mr. Garcia – 22,110; Mr. Mangum – 5,873; Mr. Hyde – 4,664; Ms. Tornay – 3,800; and Mr. Schuessler – 3,282.

(ii) Portion Attributable to Revenue Results

The following table contains the revenue goals and the applicable award amounts for fiscal year 2010. The revenue goals exclude the impact of restructuring, other non-recurring charges and changes in foreign currency and include Money Transfer Services through November 2009.

The metric at target was established at a level that reflected growth over fiscal year 2009 results. The actual revenue for the Company for fiscal year 2010 on a GAAP basis was $1,642, rounded to the nearest $1 million, which represents an increase of 12.3% over fiscal year 2009 GAAP revenue of $1,462 million. Factoring in the adjustments described above, revenue for fiscal year 2010 was $1,683 million. Using straight line interpolation, the payout was approximately 95.2%. This resulted in each of the executives, who were employees on July 29, 2010, receiving the following number of performance units: Mr. Garcia – 20,064; Mr. Mangum – 5,330; Mr. Hyde – 4,232; Ms. Tornay – 3,449; and Mr. Schuessler – 2,978.

30

(iii) Portion Attributable to Operating Margin Results

The following table contains the operating margin goals and the applicable award amounts for fiscal year 2010. The operating margin goals exclude the impact of restructuring, other non-recurring charges and changes in foreign currency and include Money Transfer Services through November 2009.

The actual operating margin result for the Company for fiscal year 2010 on a GAAP basis was 19.7%, which represents a slight decrease from fiscal year 2009 GAAP operating margin of 20%. Factoring in the adjustments described above, operating margin for fiscal 2010 was 19.1%. Using straight line interpolation, the payout was approximately 71.9%. This resulted in each of the executives, who were employees on July 29, 2010, receiving the following number of performance units: Mr. Garcia – 15,163; Mr. Mangum – 4,028; Mr. Hyde –3,198; Ms. Tornay – 2,606; and Mr. Schuessler – 2,251.

(iv) Conversion of Performance Units into a Restricted Stock Grant

Once the results were certified, the Committee determined the number of performance units earned by each executive and such units were converted on a 1-for-1 basis into shares of restricted stock on July 29, 2010. Such shares of restricted stock vest in accordance with the following schedule: 25% vested on July 29, 2010 and the remaining 75% of the shares will vest in three equal installments over the next three years. The following table summarizes the conversion of the performance shares to restricted stock for each executive, which equates to approximately 90.7% of the targeted grant for each:

(4) Retirement Benefits. The only retirement benefit provided to all of our executives consists of the Company’s 401(k) plan. We also maintain a pension plan that was available to all employees but was closed to new employees hired after June 1, 1998. Ms. Tornay is the only Named Executive Officer who was hired before such time and, therefore, is the only Named Executive Officer who participates in the pension plan. Additional information regarding the pension plan is contained in the Compensation Tables and Narratives section under the heading “Pension Benefits.”

(5) Other Benefits. The Named Executive Officers are eligible to participate in other health and welfare programs that are available to substantially all full-time salaried employees. The only other benefits are limited perquisites and certain tax gross-ups, which are set forth in footnote (3) to the Summary Compensation Table contained in the Compensation Tables and Narratives section.

31

We offer employment agreements to a limited number of key employees, which includes all of the Named Executive Officers (except for Mr. Kelly whose employment agreement was terminated on April 21, 2010 and replaced with a Transition and Separation Agreement which is described in more detail below). We believe this is necessary in order to retain and attract highly-qualified executives, but we also believe that the employment agreements provide benefit to the Company. Each of the Named Executive Officers who is a party to an employment agreement has agreed not to disclose confidential information or compete with us, and not to solicit our customers or recruit our employees, for a period of 24 months following the termination of his or her employment. In exchange, we offer limited income and benefit protections to the executive. Commencing with fiscal year 2010, all employment agreements with new executives have had and will continue to have a defined term.

On April 21, 2010, Mr. Kelly entered into a Transition and Settlement Agreement which replaced his former employment agreement. His last day of employment with the Company was June 1, 2010, and he ceased to be an executive officer on April 21, 2010. Mr. Garcia, our Chief Executive Officer, is also a party to a Key Position Agreement. Additional information regarding the terms of these agreements is contained in the Compensation Tables and Narratives section under the heading “Employment Agreements.”

Our current policy regarding the timing of equity grants, which has been in place for several years, is to make the annual grant to all eligible employees on the next business day following the filing of our annual report on Form 10-K based upon the closing price of the Common Stock on that day.

Our insider trading policy prohibits directors and employees from engaging in any transaction in which they profit if the value of the Company’s Common Stock falls.

Perquisites are a relatively minor aspect of the compensation program. We believe the limited perquisites we offer are consistent with other companies. The perquisites offered by the Company are set forth in footnote (3) to the Summary Compensation Table contained in the Compensation Tables and Narratives section. We believe that, considered both individually and in the aggregate, the perquisites we offer to our Named Executive Officers are reasonable and appropriate.

The Compensation Committee has implemented stock ownership guidelines for executives. This fosters Common Stock ownership and aligns the interests of our executives with our shareholders. Within five years of the later of (1) June 1, 2007 or (2) the executive’s initial appointment to his or her position, each executive should own shares valued as a percentage of base salary as follows: CEO—5 times base salary, and the other executives—2 times base salary.

Section 162(m) of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code places a limit of $1,000,000 on the amount of compensation that we may deduct in any one year with respect to any one of our Named Executive Officers. However, qualifying performance-based compensation will not be subject to the deduction limit if certain requirements are met. To maintain flexibility in compensating our executives, the Compensation Committee reserves the right to use its judgment to authorize compensation payments that may be subject to the limit when the Compensation Committee believes that such payments are appropriate. Accordingly, certain components of our executive compensation program are designed to be qualifying performance-based compensation under 162(m) while others are not.

32

There are very limited circumstances under which we gross-up a benefit to compensate an executive for the taxes payable on such benefit. We do gross-up a portion of the amounts paid in connection with the executive’s attendance at the Company’s President’s Club and Chairman’s Club award trips and certain sums paid in connection with foreign relocation or assignment. Historically, we have provided a gross-up for excise taxes that may be due with respect to the change of control provisions contained in some of the employment agreements, which is described in the Compensation Tables and Narratives section under the sub-heading “Summary of Employment Agreements.” Commencing with fiscal year 2011, however, we will no longer be including such a gross-up provision in employment agreements with new executives.

To remain competitive in the recruitment and retention of executive talent, the Compensation Committee approved changes to some elements of the compensation program for fiscal year 2011 to embrace market practices. Concerning base pay, we are providing increases to the Named Executive Officers for fiscal year 2011. Mr. Garcia’s base pay will increase 5.3% from $950,000 to $1,000,000; Mr. Mangum’s base pay will increase 12.5% from $400,000 to $450,000; Mr. Hyde’s base pay will increase 3% from $400,000 to $412,000; Ms. Tornay’s base pay will increase 2.9% from $350,000 to $360,000, and Mr. Schuessler’s base pay will increase 4.6% from $325,000 to $340,000. For the incentive plans, the EPS, revenue and operating margin metrics coupled with a sharing ratio (short term incentive/long term incentive payouts as a function of earnings) associated with the plans were developed to protect shareholder interest while remaining market competitive.

COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT

The Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed the foregoing section entitled “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” with management. Based on such review and discussion, the Committee recommended to the Board of Directors that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this proxy statement, which is to be incorporated by reference into our annual report on Form 10-K for fiscal year 2010.

COMPENSATION COMMITTEE

Edwin H. Burba, Jr., Chairperson

Alex W. Hart

William I Jacobs

Raymond L. Killian

Ruth Ann Marshall

COMPENSATION TABLES AND NARRATIVES

The following table presents certain summary information concerning compensation paid or accrued by the Company for services rendered in all capacities during the fiscal year ended May 31, 2010 (“2010 fiscal year”), during the fiscal year ended May 31, 2009 (“2009 fiscal year”), and during the fiscal year ended May 31, 2008 (“2008 fiscal year”) for (i) the principal executive officer of the Company; (ii) the principal financial officer of the Company, (iii) each of the three other most highly compensated executive officers of the Company who were acting as executive officers at the end of the last completed fiscal year and (iv) one additional individual for whom disclosure would have been required but for the fact that the individual was not serving as an executive officer of the Company at the end of the 2010 fiscal year. The persons referenced in (i) through (iv) above are our “Named Executive Officers.”

33

SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE

34

ALL OTHER COMPENSATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010

** The amounts included in this column for the executives other than Mr. Hyde are for compensation associated with attendance at the Company’s President’s Club and/or Chairman’s Club award trips. For Mr. Hyde this total includes amounts for rent and utilities, home furnishings, and airfare for his spouse and child, all related to a foreign assignment.

35

B. Grants of Plan-Based Awards

The following table sets forth information concerning grants of plan-based awards during the 2010 fiscal year to the Named Executive Officers, all of which were made pursuant to the Amended and Restated 2005 Incentive Plan.

GRANTS OF PLAN-BASED AWARDS