Even Before Shooting of Insurance CEO, Spending on Executive Security Was Booming

The fatal shooting of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson last week has put a new found spotlight on executive security, an issue that hasn’t previously received much attention in conversations about how corporations accommodate their C-suites.

More than 25% of companies that are members of the Fortune 500 disclose they are funding security for the top ranks of their executives. In a sign that corporate America recognized the potential for violence against executives even before Thompson’s death, the median spending on personal security by those companies doubled in the last three years to nearly $100,000.

Naturally, the costs of personal security for corporate shot-callers can vary wildly, depending on the situation. Take Elon Musk, for instance. The Tesla founder with a love for the limelight has a personal security force of 20 people that a New York Times article likened to a mini-Secret Service. (Given the amount of time he has spent with President-elect Donald Trump lately, the analogy seems appropriate.)

Meanwhile, as of last year, Meta had ramped up its security spending on chairman and CEO Mark Zuckerberg by 40% to $14 million. The company spends a total of $24 million annually on security for its executives.

As for health insurance providers, the news of Thompson’s death clearly struck a chord. The parent company of United Healthcare, UnitedHealth Group, took down images of its corporate executives from the company’s website almost immediately after the incident. Soon enough, the company had scrubbed names and biographical details from the site. UnitedHealth rival Medica also said it had removed information about its leadership from the company’s website.

A survey of issuers’ public filings indicates companies take at least two major factors into account when evaluating spending on security for their executives. First, what line of business are they in? Second, what information do they have about direct threats made against their executives?

For example, defense contractor Northrop Grumman said in its latest proxy statement it spent more than $200,000 on personal security for CEO Kathy J. Warden during the prior year. Northrop Grumman noted that its conclusion to pay for Warden’s protection was due to “the nature of our business” and was “based on security threat information obtained and an ongoing dialogue with law enforcement and security specialists.”

In its proxy statement filed in April, Warner Bros. Discovery Inc. revealed it had stepped up security for CEO David Zaslav in 2023. According to reviews performed by “internal and external security professionals,” the “high-profile” nature of Zaslav’s job necessitated stronger protections for him at his residence and when he travels for business. “We believe these security measures are for the benefit of the Company and our stockholders because of the importance of Mr. Zaslav and his leadership to WBD and we believe that the scope and costs of these security programs are appropriate and necessary,” the company said.

In sum, it sounds like executive security is at least an eight-figure industry now. In the light of the latest headlines, expect that total to balloon in the coming months.