UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

SCHEDULE 14A

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

(Amendment No.   )

Filed by the Registrant    x

Filed by a Party other than the Registrant    ¨

Check the appropriate box:

JOHN B. SANFILIPPO & SON, INC.

(Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):

JOHN B. SANFILIPPO & SON, INC.

1703 N. Randall Road

Elgin, Illinois 60123

NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

to be held

on October 30, 2013

TO THE STOCKHOLDERS:

The Annual Meeting of stockholders of John B. Sanfilippo & Son, Inc. will be held on Wednesday, October 30, 2013, at 10:00 A.M., Central Time, at 1707 N. Randall Road, Elgin, Illinois 60123, for the following purposes:

The Annual Meeting may be postponed or adjourned from time to time without any notice other than announcement at the meeting and any and all business for which notice is hereby given may be transacted at any such postponed or adjourned meeting.

The Board of Directors has fixed the close of business on September 3, 2013, as the record date for determination of stockholders entitled to notice of and to vote at the Annual Meeting. A list of these stockholders will be available for inspection for 10 days preceding the meeting at 1707 N. Randall Road, Elgin, Illinois 60123 and will also be available for inspection at the Annual Meeting.

A Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials (the “Internet Notice”) will be mailed to stockholders who were not mailed the printed proxy materials. The Internet Notice provides details regarding the availability of our full proxy materials, including this Proxy Statement and Annual Report, at the website address http://www.proxydocs.com/JBSS. All stockholders were either mailed the Internet Notice or mailed the printed proxy materials which include a proxy card. If a stockholder wishes to vote electronically or by telephone, the stockholder should follow the instructions on how to vote electronically or by telephone that are included on the stockholder’s proxy card or Internet Notice. The internet availability of our proxy materials gives our stockholders fast and convenient access to our proxy materials, reduces the impact on the environment and reduces printing and mailing costs.

Whether or not a stockholder plans to attend the Annual Meeting and vote in person, we request that the stockholder read our proxy materials and submit the stockholder’s proxy vote. A stockholder submitting a proxy vote will not affect the stockholder’s right to attend the Annual Meeting and vote in person.

By Order of the Board of Directors

MICHAEL J. VALENTINE

Secretary

Elgin, Illinois

September 13, 2013

John B. Sanfilippo & Son, Inc.

PROXY STATEMENT

ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

October 30, 2013

This Proxy Statement is furnished in connection with the solicitation by the Board of Directors of John B. Sanfilippo & Son, Inc., a Delaware corporation, of proxies for use at the annual meeting of our stockholders to be held on Wednesday, October 30, 2013, at 10:00 A.M., Central Time, at 1707 N. Randall Road, Elgin, Illinois 60123-7820, and at any postponement or adjournment thereof (the “Annual Meeting”). All shares of our Common Stock, $.01 par value (the “Common Stock”) and our Class A Common Stock, $.01 par value (the “Class A Stock”) entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting which are represented by properly submitted proxies will, unless such proxies have been revoked, be voted in accordance with the instructions given in such proxies.

Any stockholder who has submitted a proxy may revoke it by: (a) delivering a written notice of revocation to our Secretary prior to the exercise of the proxy at the Annual Meeting; (b) duly submitting a subsequent properly executed proxy (by Internet, telephone or mail) so that it is received by 5:00 P.M. Eastern Time on October 29, 2013 or (c) attending the Annual Meeting and voting in person. Any written notice of revocation should be received by our Secretary at 1703 N. Randall Road, Elgin, Illinois 60123-7820, Attention: Secretary, or hand delivered to the Secretary, before the closing of the polls at the Annual Meeting.

Unless the context otherwise requires, references herein to “we”, “us”, “our”, “the company” or “our company” refer to John B. Sanfilippo & Son, Inc. The mailing address of our principal executive offices is 1703 N. Randall Road, Elgin, Illinois 60123-7820.

A Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials (the “Internet Notice”) will be mailed to stockholders who were not mailed the printed proxy materials. The Internet Notice provides details regarding the availability of our full proxy materials, including this Proxy Statement and our annual report, at the Internet website address http://www.proxydocs.com/JBSS. All stockholders holding shares of Common Stock on the record date were either mailed the Internet Notice, or mailed the printed proxy materials which include a proxy card. If a stockholder wishes to vote electronically or by telephone, the stockholder should follow the instructions on how to vote electronically or by telephone that are included on the stockholder’s proxy card or Internet Notice.

This Proxy Statement was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC” or the “Commission”) on September 13, 2013, and we expect to first send the Internet Notice to stockholders on or around September 13, 2013.

Record Date and Shares Outstanding

We had outstanding on September 3, 2013, the record date for determination of stockholders entitled to notice of and to vote at the Annual Meeting, 8,326,009 shares of Common Stock (excluding 117,900 treasury shares, which are neither outstanding nor entitled to vote) and 2,597,426 shares of Class A Stock. The Common Stock is traded on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the ticker “JBSS”. There is no established public trading market for the Class A Stock.

Voting and Quorum

Pursuant to our Restated Certificate of Incorporation (as amended, the “Restated Certificate”), so long as the total number of shares of Class A Stock outstanding is greater than or equal to 12 ¹/₂% of the total number of shares of Class A Stock and Common Stock outstanding, the holders of Common Stock voting as a class are entitled to elect such number (rounded to the next highest number in the case of a fraction) of directors as equals 25% of the total number of directors constituting the full Board of Directors. The holders of Class A Stock voting as a class are entitled to elect the remaining directors. With respect to all matters other than the election of directors or any matters for which class voting is required by law, the holders of Common Stock and the holders of Class A Stock will vote together as a single class, and the holders of Common Stock will be entitled to one vote per share of Common Stock and the holders of Class A Stock will be entitled to 10 votes per share of Class A Stock.

1

Our Restated Certificate does not entitle holders of Common Stock to cumulative voting. However, solely with respect to the election of directors, the Restated Certificate entitles, but does not require, each holder of Class A Stock, in person or by proxy, to either (a) vote the number of shares of Class A Stock owned by such holder for as many persons as there are directors to be elected by holders of Class A Stock (“Class A Directors”), or (b) cumulate said votes (by multiplying the number of shares of Class A Stock owned by such holder by the number of candidates for election as a Class A Director) and either (i) give one candidate all of the cumulated votes, or (ii) distribute the cumulated votes among such candidates as the holder sees fit.

The holders of Common Stock representing a majority of the votes entitled to be cast by stockholders entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting, present in person or represented by proxy, shall constitute a quorum for such meeting in order to transact any business. Where a separate vote by a class is required, a majority of the outstanding shares of such class, present in person or represented by proxy, shall constitute a quorum entitled to take action with respect to that vote on that matter.

Proposals to be Voted Upon and the Board of Directors’ Recommendations

Three proposals are scheduled for stockholder consideration at the Annual Meeting, each of which is described more fully herein:

The vote required and related matters for each of these proposals is as follows:

Proposal 1: Election of Directors

At the Annual Meeting, the holders of Common Stock voting as a class will be entitled to elect three of the nine directors. The holders of Class A Stock voting as a class will be entitled to elect the remaining six directors. Directors elected by holders of both Common Stock and Class A Stock are elected by a plurality of the votes cast for each such class.

The Board of Directors recommends a FOR vote for all of the director nominees listed herein. If a properly submitted, unrevoked proxy does not specifically direct the voting of the shares covered by such proxy, the proxy will be voted FOR the election of all director nominees to be elected by holders of the class of shares covered by such proxy as listed herein.

If any nominee is unable to act as director because of an unexpected occurrence, the proxy holders may vote the proxies for another person or the Board of Directors may reduce the number of directors to be elected.

Proposal 2: Ratification of the Audit Committee’s Appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for the 2014 Fiscal Year

To be approved, the ratification of the Audit Committee’s appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as the company’s Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for the 2014 fiscal year requires the affirmative vote of the holders of shares representing a majority of the votes present or represented by proxy and entitled to vote by the holders of Common Stock and Class A Stock, voting together as one class.

The Board of Directors recommends a FOR vote for the ratification of the Audit Committee’s appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for the 2014 fiscal year. If a properly submitted, unrevoked proxy does not specifically direct the voting of the shares covered by such proxy, the proxy will be voted FOR Proposal 2.

2

Proposal 3: Advisory Vote to Approve Executive Compensation

Pursuant to SEC rules, we are providing our stockholders with an advisory, nonbinding vote to approve the compensation paid to our named executive officers, as described in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis and Summary Compensation Table of this Proxy Statement.

The Board of Directors recommends a FOR vote for the advisory vote to approve executive compensation. If a properly submitted, unrevoked proxy does not specifically direct the voting of the shares covered by such proxy, the proxy will be voted FOR Proposal 3.

Effect of Abstentions

While the Board of Directors recommends that our stockholders vote in accordance with the recommendations set forth above, we also recognize that “abstain” votes are an option for each of the proposals. Please note, however, that abstentions have the following effect:

For purposes of determining whether a quorum exists, abstentions will be counted as present.

Effect of Broker Non-Votes

Under applicable stock exchange rules, brokers and banks have discretionary authority to vote shares without instructions from beneficial owners only on matters considered “routine”, such as the vote to ratify the appointment of the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm (Proposal 2). On “non-routine” matters, such as the election of directors (Proposal 1) and the advisory vote to approve executive compensation (Proposal 3), these brokers and banks do not have discretion to vote uninstructed shares and thus are not entitled to vote on such proposals, resulting in a “broker non-vote” for those shares. Broker non-votes will not be counted for determining whether stockholders have approved a specific proposal; however, they will be counted as present for purposes of determining whether a quorum exists. We encourage all stockholders that hold shares through a broker or bank to provide voting instructions to such parties to ensure that their shares are voted at the Annual Meeting.

Other Proposals

If other matters are properly presented for a vote at the Annual Meeting, the persons named as proxies will vote on such matters in accordance with their best judgment. We have not received notice of other matters that may be properly presented for a vote at the Annual Meeting.

3

SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN

BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT

The following table sets forth information as of September 3, 2013, except where otherwise indicated in the footnotes, with respect to the beneficial ownership of Common Stock and Class A Stock by (a) each individual, group, or entity known by us to be the beneficial owner of more than 5% of the outstanding shares of Common Stock or Class A Stock, (b) each of our directors and nominees for election as a director, (c) each of our named executive officers and (d) all of our directors and executive officers as a group. The information set forth in the table as to directors and executive officers is based upon information furnished to us by them in connection with the preparation of this Proxy Statement. Except where otherwise indicated in the footnotes to this table, the mailing address of each of the stockholders named in the table is: c/o John B. Sanfilippo & Son, Inc., 1703 N. Randall Road, Elgin, Illinois 60123-7820.

4

The members of the Sanfilippo Group are deemed to beneficially own an aggregate of 1,768,496 shares of Class A Stock and 57,381 shares of Common Stock, which includes 68.1% of the total outstanding shares of Class A Stock. The Sanfilippo Group would own 18.1% of the total outstanding shares of Common Stock, assuming the conversion of all such shares of Class A Stock into an equal number of shares of Common Stock. Based on the relative voting rights of the Class A Stock and Common Stock, the Sanfilippo Group has or shares 51.7% of the total outstanding voting power of our common equity, calculated by using 10 votes per share of Class A Stock and assuming that the applicable shares of Class A Stock are not converted into Common Stock. For additional information about our company’s status as a “controlled company” under Nasdaq rules, see “Corporate Governance—Independence of the Board of Directors” below.

5

The beneficial ownership of Jasper B. Sanfilippo and Marian R. Sanfilippo is described in footnotes (3), (4) and (5) above. The beneficial ownership of the remainder of the Sanfilippo Group is as follows:

Jeffrey T. Sanfilippo: The beneficial ownership of Jeffrey T. Sanfilippo includes (a) 18,832 shares of Common Stock held as a co-trustee of the Sanfilippo Family Education Trust, dated October 17, 1997, the beneficiaries of which are the grandchildren of Jasper and Marian Sanfilippo, (b) options to purchase 3,500 shares of Common Stock with an exercise price of $7.95 per share on or within 60 days of September 3, 2013, (c) 7,000 shares of Common Stock held directly by Jeffrey T. Sanfilippo, (d) 21,856 shares of Class A Stock held directly by Jeffrey T. Sanfilippo, (e) 50,170 shares of Class A Stock held as co-trustee of the Jeffrey T. Sanfilippo Irrevocable Trust, dated October 6, 2006 and (f) 1,000 RSUs that are convertible to 1,000 shares of Common Stock on or within 60 days of September 3, 2013. As co-trustee, Jeffrey T. Sanfilippo shares voting and dispositive power over the 18,832 shares of Common Stock held in the Sanfilippo Family Education Trust and the 50,170 shares of Class A Stock held in the Jeffrey T. Sanfilippo Irrevocable Trust, dated October 6, 2006.

Jasper B. Sanfilippo, Jr.: The beneficial ownership of Jasper B. Sanfilippo, Jr. includes (a) options to purchase 3,500 shares of Common Stock with an exercise price of $7.95 per share on or within 60 days of September 3, 2013, (b) 7,000 shares of Common Stock held directly by Jasper B. Sanfilippo, Jr., (c) 1,349,663 shares of Class A Stock held as co-trustee of the Sanfilippo Family 1999 Generation – Skipping Trust Agreement, dated December 31, 1999, (d) 11,856 shares of Class A Stock held directly by Jasper B. Sanfilippo, Jr., (e) 55,701 shares of Class A Stock held as co-trustee of the Jasper B. Sanfilippo, Jr. Irrevocable Trust, dated October 6, 2006 and (f) 1,000 RSUs that are convertible to 1,000 shares of Common Stock on or within 60 days of September 3, 2013. As co-trustee, Jasper B. Sanfilippo, Jr. shares voting and dispositive power over the 55,701 shares of Class A Stock held in the Jasper B. Sanfilippo, Jr. Irrevocable Trust, dated October 6, 2006 and the 1,349,663 shares of Class A Stock held in the Sanfilippo Family 1999 Generation – Skipping Trust Agreement, dated December 31, 1999. 500,000 shares of Class A Stock in the Sanfilippo Family 1999 Generation – Skipping Trust Agreement, dated December 31, 1999 have been pledged to a financial institution.

Lisa A. Sanfilippo: The beneficial ownership of Lisa A. Sanfilippo includes (a) options to purchase 2,500 shares of Common Stock with an exercise price of $7.95 per share on or within 60 days of September 3, 2013 and (b) 50,172 shares of Class A Stock held as co-trustee of the Lisa A. Evon Irrevocable Trust, dated October 6, 2006. As co-trustee, Lisa A. Sanfilippo shares voting and dispositive power over the 50,172 shares of Class A Stock held in the trust.

John E. Sanfilippo: The beneficial ownership of John E. Sanfilippo includes (a) 18,832 shares of Common Stock held as a co-trustee of the Sanfilippo Family Education Trust, dated October 17, 1997, the beneficiaries of which are the grandchildren of Jasper and Marian Sanfilippo, (b) 40,008 shares of Class A Stock held directly by John E. Sanfilippo and (c) 50,170 shares of Class A Stock held as co-trustee of the John E. Sanfilippo Irrevocable Trust, dated October 6, 2006. As co-trustee, John E. Sanfilippo shares voting and dispositive power over the 18,832 shares of Common Stock held in the Sanfilippo Family Education Trust and the 50,170 shares of Class A Stock held in the John E. Sanfilippo Irrevocable Trust, dated October 6, 2006.

James J. Sanfilippo: The beneficial ownership of James J. Sanfilippo includes (a) 1,349,663 shares of Class A Stock held as co-trustee of the Sanfilippo Family 1999 Generation – Skipping Trust Agreement, dated December 31, 1999 and (b) 8,464 shares of Class A Stock held directly by James J. Sanfilippo. As co-trustee, James J. Sanfilippo shares voting and dispositive power over the 1,349,663 shares of Class A Stock held in the Sanfilippo Family 1999 Generation – Skipping Trust Agreement, dated December 31, 1999. 500,000 shares of Class A Stock in the Sanfilippo Family 1999 Generation – Skipping Trust Agreement, dated December 31, 1999 have been pledged to a financial institution.

Jeffrey T. Sanfilippo, Jasper B. Sanfilippo, Jr., Lisa A. Sanfilippo and John E. Sanfilippo, as co-trustees of each of their aforementioned trusts dated October 6, 2006, are also the sole beneficiaries under each of their respective trusts.

6

The beneficiaries of the Sanfilippo Family 1999 Generation – Skipping Trust Agreement, dated December 31, 1999 are the descendants of Marian Sanfilippo, as grantor, which include James J. Sanfilippo and Jasper B. Sanfilippo, Jr., who together are the trustees of that trust, and Jeffrey T. Sanfilippo, John E. Sanfilippo and Lisa A. Sanfilippo.

The information set forth in the table above and in the accompanying footnotes with respect to Marian R. Sanfilippo, Lisa A. Sanfilippo, John E. Sanfilippo and James J. Sanfilippo is based solely on the Schedule 13D filed by the Sanfilippo Group, as amended on April 26, 2012, as well as supplemental information provided to our company by the members of the Sanfilippo Group.

Based on the relative voting rights of the Class A Stock and Common Stock, Michael J. Valentine directly or indirectly controls 22.4%, while Mathias A. Valentine directly controls 1.8% of the total outstanding voting power of our common equity. In addition, the Valentine Group directly controls 24.2% of the total outstanding voting power of our common equity. These percentages assume that the applicable shares of Class A Stock are not converted into Common Stock, and are calculated using 10 votes per share of Class A Stock.

7

Pledging of Shares

The members of the Sanfilippo Group (Jasper B. Sanfilippo, Marian R. Sanfilippo, Jeffrey T. Sanfilippo, Jasper B. Sanfilippo Jr., Lisa A. Sanfilippo, John E. Sanfilippo and James J. Sanfilippo) have, from time to time, pledged their Class A Stock, which they either directly or beneficially own, to various financial institutions. Currently, 500,000 shares of Class A Stock in the Sanfilippo Family 1999 Generation – Skipping Trust Agreement, dated December 31, 1999 have been pledged to a financial institution. If certain members of the Sanfilippo Group default on any of their obligations under any pledge agreements, the related loan documents or any other arrangement pursuant to which they have pledged their shares, the other parties to the agreements may have the right to foreclose upon and sell the pledged shares. Such a sale could cause our stock price to decline. Many of the occurrences that could result in a foreclosure of the pledged shares are out of our control and are unrelated to our operations.

8

PROPOSAL 1: ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

Nine directors are to be elected to serve until the next annual meeting of stockholders and until their respective successors shall be elected and qualified. Three directors are to be elected by the holders of Common Stock voting as a class and the remaining six directors are to be elected by the holders of Class A Stock voting as a class. While the Board of Directors does not contemplate that any nominee for election as a director will not be able to serve, if any of the nominees for election shall be unable or shall fail to serve as a director, the holders of proxies shall vote such proxies for such other person or persons as shall be determined by such holders in their discretion or, so long as such action does not conflict with the provisions of our Restated Certificate relating to the proportion of directors to be elected by the holders of Common Stock, the Board of Directors may, in its discretion, reduce the number of directors to be elected.

The Board of Directors recommends that the stockholders vote “FOR” each of the nominees listed herein.

We believe that each nominee listed below has the qualifications, skills and experience that are consistent with our requirements for the selection of directors and that, as a group, the Board of Directors functions collegially, constructively and effectively together in overseeing our business. Below in each nominee’s individual biography we identify and describe some of the specific qualifications, skills and experience that each nominee provides to the Board of Directors. However, the fact that we do not list a particular qualification, skill or experience for a nominee does not mean that the nominee does not possess that particular qualification, skill or experience.

NOMINEES FOR ELECTION BY THE HOLDERS OF COMMON STOCK

The name of and certain information regarding each nominee for election to our Board of Directors by the holders of Common Stock, as reported to us, is set forth below.

Governor Jim Edgar, Director, age 67 – Gov. Edgar is currently a Distinguished Fellow at the University of Illinois Institute of Government and Public Affairs where he is also a teacher and lecturer. He has been in this position since January 1999. He was also a Resident Fellow at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University during the 1999 fall semester. Gov. Edgar served as Governor of the State of Illinois from January 14, 1991 through January 11, 1999. Prior to his election, Gov. Edgar served as the Illinois Secretary of State from 1981 to 1991. Gov. Edgar’s retirement from public office marked 30 years of state government service. Gov. Edgar currently serves on the board of directors of Horizon Group Properties, Inc. (since 2000), and previously served on the board of directors of Youbet.com, Inc. (from 2002 until June 2010) and Alberto Culver Company (from 2002 to 2011). Gov. Edgar has been a member of our Board of Directors since October 1999 and is a member of our Audit Committee and our Compensation Committee and is the Chairperson of our Corporate Governance Committee (the “Governance Committee”).

The Board of Directors has concluded that Gov. Edgar should serve as a director as a result of his demonstrated leadership and management skills as the former Governor of Illinois. In addition, as a result of his current and past service as a director on the boards of other companies, including a company that manufactures and markets consumer products, Gov. Edgar also provides our Board of Directors with significant expertise in the oversight of consumer-oriented companies and corporate governance procedures and practices.

Ellen C. Taaffe, Director, age 51 – Ms. Taaffe is the President of Smith-Dahmer Associates LLC, a research and brand strategy consulting firm established in 1991. Ms. Taaffe joined Smith-Dahmer Associates LLC following her resignation as Vice President of Brand Marketing and Corporate Officer of Whirlpool Corporation in 2009. Prior to Whirlpool Corporation, Ms. Taaffe served as Senior Vice President of Marketing and Corporate Officer at Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. from 2005 to 2007. Previously, Ms. Taaffe served as Vice President of Health and Wellness Strategy and Programming at PepsiCo from 2003 to 2005. She was Vice President of Marketing for the Convenience Foods Division of Frito-Lay, following PepsiCo’s acquisition of the Quaker Oats Company in 2001, where she was Vice President of Marketing for Quaker Snacks and Side Dishes. At Quaker, Ms. Taaffe held numerous positions in Brand Management and Sales Management from 1984 to 2001. Ms. Taaffe was appointed to our Board of Directors in January 2011 and is a member of our Compensation Committee, our Governance Committee and our Audit Committee.

9

The Board of Directors has concluded that Ms. Taaffe should serve as a director because of her extensive and diverse background in sales and marketing. Specifically, Ms. Taaffe’s experience in brand strategy for international consumer products companies provides us with a valuable resource as we continue to execute our corporate strategies and seek to expand the sales of our products.

Daniel M. Wright, Director, age 75 – Mr. Wright previously worked for Arthur Andersen LLP for 37 years as an auditor, where his clients consisted of privately-held and registered public companies. Mr. Wright was a Partner with Arthur Andersen LLP from 1973 through August 1998, and became a certified public accountant in 1968. Mr. Wright served on the board of directors of RC2 Corporation from 2003 until May 2010, where he was a member of its Audit Committee. Throughout his career, and since his retirement in 1998, Mr. Wright has been active in numerous civic and philanthropic organizations. Mr. Wright has been a member of our Board of Directors since October 2005 and is a member of our Compensation Committee and our Governance Committee and is the Chairperson of our Audit Committee.

The Board of Directors has concluded that Mr. Wright should serve as a director because of the extensive accounting and financial experience that he gained while serving as an auditor for over three decades. Mr. Wright’s in-depth knowledge of the audit and financial reporting requirements of public companies allows Mr. Wright to provide our company with a valuable perspective in accounting and other related matters.

NOMINEES FOR ELECTION BY THE HOLDERS OF CLASS A STOCK

The name of and certain information regarding each nominee for election to our Board of Directors by the holders of Class A Stock, as reported to us, is set forth below.

Jasper B. Sanfilippo, Jr., Chief Operating Officer, President, Assistant Secretary and Director, age 45 – Mr. Sanfilippo was appointed as a member of the Board of Directors in December 2003 upon the recommendation of our senior management and the unanimous approval of the Board of Directors. Mr. Sanfilippo has been employed by us since 1991 and in 2001 was named Executive Vice President Operations, retaining his position as Assistant Secretary, which he assumed in December 1995. He became our Senior Vice President Operations in August 1999 and served as Vice President Operations between December 1995 and August 1999. Prior to that, Mr. Sanfilippo was the General Manager of our Gustine, California facility beginning in October 1995, and from June 1992 to October 1995 he served as Assistant Treasurer and worked in our Financial Relations department. On May 8, 2006 our Board of Directors approved a succession plan finalized and adopted at the Board of Directors meeting held on November 6, 2006. Pursuant to the succession plan, Mr. Sanfilippo was elected as our Chief Operating Officer and President and he has since then continued to hold such positions. In May 2007, Mr. Sanfilippo was named as our Treasurer and held that position until January 2009. Mr. Sanfilippo has previously served on the Board of Directors of the National Pecan Shellers Association, an industry association of which our company is a member. Mr. Sanfilippo is the nephew of Mathias A. Valentine, a director of our company, the brother of Jeffrey T. Sanfilippo, an executive officer and director of the company, the brother of James J. Sanfilippo, a nominee for director of the company and the cousin of Michael J. Valentine, an executive officer and director of our company, and James A. Valentine, an executive officer of our company. Mr. Sanfilippo is also a first cousin by marriage of Timothy R. Donovan, a director of our company.

The Board of Directors has concluded that Mr. Sanfilippo should serve as a director as a result of his extensive knowledge of the nut industry, his operational and management experience and his leadership abilities. In addition, Mr. Sanfilippo brings to our Board of Directors an in-depth knowledge of our company due to his service as an employee since 1992 and his demonstrated leadership in managing the capital expenditures and increasing operational efficiencies of the company. Moreover, Mr. Sanfilippo is well-suited to serve as a director due to his continued engagement in new product development and branding efforts to provide our consumers with innovative product choices.

10

Jeffrey T. Sanfilippo, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Directors, age 50 – Mr. Sanfilippo has been employed by us since 1991 and was named our Executive Vice President Sales and Marketing in January 2001. Mr. Sanfilippo became a director of our company in August 1999 and was elected as our Chairman of the Board of Directors on October 30, 2008. He served as Senior Vice President Sales and Marketing from August 1999 to January 2001 and as General Manager West Coast Operations from September 1991 to September 1993. He served as Vice President West Coast Operations and Sales from October 1993 to September 1995. He served as Vice President Sales and Marketing from October 1995 to August 1999. On May 8, 2006 our Board of Directors approved a succession plan finalized and adopted at the Board of Directors meeting held on November 6, 2006. Pursuant to the succession plan, Mr. Sanfilippo was elected as our Chief Executive Officer and he has since then continued to hold such position. Mr. Sanfilippo is the nephew of Mathias A. Valentine, a director of our company, the brother of Jasper B. Sanfilippo, Jr., an executive officer and director of our company, the brother of James J. Sanfilippo, a nominee for director of our company, and the cousin of Michael J. Valentine, an executive officer and director of our company, and James A. Valentine, an executive officer of our company. Mr. Sanfilippo is also a first cousin by marriage of Timothy R. Donovan, a director of our company. Mr. Sanfilippo earned his Masters of Business Administration through a classroom executive evening program and is an active member of the Chicago chapter of the Young Presidents’ Organization.

The Board of Directors has concluded that Mr. Sanfilippo should serve as a director because, as our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, he has demonstrated a deep understanding of our company, its operations and how to position the company for long-term growth through, among other things, the development and implementation of a comprehensive Strategic Plan. In addition, as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of our company, Mr. Sanfilippo has significant leadership, marketing, product development and financial experience and is well-suited to provide the company with effective guidance in managing our company’s business.

James J. Sanfilippo, Director Nominee, age 51 – Mr. Sanfilippo is a new nominee to our Board of Directors based on the recommendation of the Governance Committee and the Board of Directors. Mr. Sanfilippo is the President and CEO of Clear Lam Packaging, Inc. (“Clear Lam”), a commercial manufacturer of packaging for the food and medical industries. He has served in the role of President and CEO since 1999. Before Clear Lam, Mr. Sanfilippo served as the founder of MAP Systems LLC, a thermoforming packaging business. From 1995 to 1999, Mr. Sanfilippo served as a Vice President and Treasurer of our company where he was responsible for our Illinois operations and contract manufacturing. From 1992 to 1994, Mr. Sanfilippo served as Director of Contract Manufacturing for our company and from 1985 to 1991 served as a Product Manager for our company. Mr. Sanfilippo is the nephew of Mathias A. Valentine, a director of our company, the brother of Jeffrey T. Sanfilippo and Jasper B. Sanfilippo, Jr., both executive officers and directors of our company, the cousin of Michael J. Valentine, an executive officer and director of our company, and James A. Valentine, an executive officer of our company. Mr. Sanfilippo is also a first cousin by marriage of Timothy R. Donovan, a director of our company. Mr. Sanfilippo is an active member of the Chicago chapter of the Young Presidents’ Organization and has been responsible for a number of patents in the packaging industry.

The Board of Directors has determined that Mr. Sanfilippo should serve as a director because of his leadership and management experience as the President and CEO of a major packaging company servicing the food and medical industries. Mr. Sanfilippo also provides our Board with important experience in the contract packaging area and with insight into product offerings and presentations in order to execute our Strategic Plan. In addition, Mr. Sanfilippo offers our Board significant operational and supply chain expertise as well as an appreciation for our company’s operations over the last 25 years.

Mathias A. Valentine, Director, age 80 – Mr. Valentine was employed by us from 1960 until his retirement in January 2006. He was named our President in December 1995. He served as our Secretary from 1969 to December 1995, as our Executive Vice President from 1987 to October 1991 and as our Senior Executive Vice President and Treasurer from October 1991 to December 1995. He has been a member of our Board of Directors since 1969. Mr. Valentine was also a member of our Compensation Committee until April 28, 2004 and was a member of the Stock Option Committee until February 27, 1997 (when that Committee was disbanded). Mr. Valentine retired from our company on January 3, 2006. Mr. Valentine is the father of Michael J. Valentine, a director and an executive officer of our company, and James A. Valentine, an executive officer of our company. Mr. Valentine is the uncle of Jasper B. Sanfilippo, Jr. and Jeffrey T. Sanfilippo, both of whom are executive officers and directors of our company and James J. Sanfilippo, a nominee for director of our company. Mr. Valentine is also the uncle by marriage of Timothy R. Donovan, a director of our company.

The Board of Directors has concluded that Mr. Valentine should serve as a director as a result of his in-depth knowledge of our company and the nut industry and deep appreciation of our company’s values and mission due to his service as an employee from 1960 until 2006, including as our former President. The Board of Directors believes that he provides a unique perspective regarding our company’s history and operations and is well-suited to provide guidance to the company as to the best methods to build our brands and provide long-term stockholder value.

11

Michael J. Valentine, Chief Financial Officer, Group President, Secretary and Director, age 54 – Mr. Valentine has been employed by us since 1987 and in January 2001 was named Executive Vice President Finance, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary. Mr. Valentine was elected as a director of our company in April 1997. Mr. Valentine served as our Senior Vice President and Secretary from August 1999 to January 2001. He served as Vice President and Secretary from December 1995 to August 1999. He served as our Assistant Secretary and General Manager of External Operations from June 1987 and 1990, respectively, to December 1995. On May 8, 2006 our Board of Directors approved a succession plan, which was finalized and adopted at the Board of Directors meeting held on November 6, 2006. Pursuant to the succession plan, Mr. Valentine was elected as our company’s Chief Financial Officer and Group President and he has since then continued to hold such positions. In February 2007, Mr. Valentine was appointed as Secretary of our company. Since 1999 and 2009 Mr. Valentine has served on the Board of Directors of the Peanut and Tree Nut Processors Association and the Board of Directors of the American Peanut Council, respectively, both of which are nut industry associations of which our company is a member. Mr. Valentine is the son of Mathias A. Valentine, a director of our company, the brother of James A. Valentine, an executive officer of our company, and the cousin of Jasper B. Sanfilippo, Jr. and Jeffrey T. Sanfilippo, both of whom are executive officers and directors of our company, and James J. Sanfilippo, a nominee for director of our company. Mr. Valentine is also a first cousin by marriage of Timothy R. Donovan, a director of our company.

The Board of Directors has concluded that Mr. Valentine should serve as a director because of his extensive accounting and financial experience demonstrated through, among other things, obtaining two attractive credit facility amendment arrangements for our company in recent years. He also provides our Board of Directors with valuable knowledge of our company from his service as an employee since 1987 and our Chief Financial Officer since 2001, and an in-depth knowledge of our industry from his service as a member of the board of directors of two industry associations related to our core business. In addition, his position as Group President provides the Board of Directors with critical leadership and management experience.

Timothy R. Donovan, Director, age 57 – Mr. Donovan is the Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Chief Regulatory and Compliance Officer of Caesars Entertainment Corporation, the world’s largest gaming and resort company. Mr. Donovan joined Caesars in April 2009 upon his resignation as Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary for Republic Services, Inc. which merged with Allied Waste Industries where Mr. Donovan held similar positions since April 2007. Mr. Donovan served in various senior positions with Tenneco Inc. (formerly known as Tenneco Automotive Inc.) from July 1999 until his resignation in February 2007, most recently as Executive Vice President, Strategy and Business Development, and General Counsel. In addition to his duties as General Counsel, Mr. Donovan also served as Managing Director of portions of Tenneco’s international operations from May 2001 through July 2005, including Asia (2001 through 2005), Australia (2004 through 2005) and South America (2001 through 2004), as a member of Tenneco’s board of directors from March 2004 until February 2007 and as a member of Tenneco’s Office of the Chief Executive from July 2006 until January 2007. Mr. Donovan was a partner in the law firm of Jenner & Block LLP from 1989 until his resignation in September 1999, and from approximately 1997 through 1999 served as the Chairman of the firm’s Corporate and Securities Department and as a member of its Executive Committee. Mr. Donovan joined Jenner & Block LLP in 1982 after serving as a staff trial attorney at the Chicago District Counsel’s Office of the Internal Revenue Service. Mr. Donovan was elected as a member of our Board of Directors in October 1999 and serves as a member of our Audit Committee, a member of our Governance Committee and the Chairperson of our Compensation Committee. Mr. Donovan is a nephew by marriage of Mr. Mathias A. Valentine, a director of our company, and the first cousin by marriage of Jasper B. Sanfilippo, Jr., Jeffrey T. Sanfilippo, Michael J. Valentine and James A. Valentine, each of whom is an executive officer and certain of whom are also directors of our company and James J. Sanfilippo, a nominee for director of our company.

The Board of Directors has concluded that Mr. Donovan should serve as a director because of the vast experience he has acquired serving as the general counsel for four publicly traded companies. In addition, Mr. Donovan’s experiences while holding executive officer positions for an automobile parts manufacturer have given him numerous insights into manufacturing and supply operations, as well as international operations, that make him an invaluable advisor to our company. Furthermore, as a former senior partner of a national law firm, Mr. Donovan also provides a key perspective as to legal issues facing companies of our size and complexity.

12

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Independence of the Board of Directors

On June 21, 2004, Jasper B. Sanfilippo, his spouse Marian Sanfilippo and their five children (two of whom are directors and executive officers of our company and one of whom is a nominee for director) jointly filed a Schedule 13D indicating their intention to act together as a group. Amendments to the Schedule 13D were filed on March 21, 2007, January 16, 2008, September 10, 2009 and April 27, 2012. The Sanfilippo Group beneficially owns shares entitled to cast 51.7% of votes eligible to be cast on matters submitted to stockholders generally (other than the election of directors which are elected as described above). In addition, Mathias A. Valentine and Michael J. Valentine (both directors and current or former executive officers of the company) filed a Schedule 13D on April 27, 2012 restating their intention to continue to act together as a group. The Valentine Group beneficially owns shares entitled to cast 24.2% of votes eligible to be cast on matters submitted to stockholders generally (other than the election of directors which are elected as described above). On account of (a) the share ownership as described above and (b) the oral understanding between the members of the Sanfilippo Group and the Valentine Group not to cumulate their votes for the election of Class A Directors and to vote in a reciprocal manner for each other’s nominees, under Nasdaq Listing Rule 5615(c)(1), we qualify as a “controlled company.” Pursuant to the provisions of the Nasdaq rules applicable to controlled companies, we are not required to have (a) a majority of independent directors on our Board of Directors, (b) a nominations committee comprised solely of independent directors or (c) a compensation committee comprised solely of independent directors. Nevertheless, four of our nominees for election to the Board of Directors are independent, and our Compensation Committee and Governance Committee are comprised solely of independent directors.

Mathias A. Valentine is an uncle by marriage of Timothy R. Donovan and the Management Team (as defined below) members and James A. Valentine are cousins by marriage of Timothy R. Donovan. However, because Timothy R. Donovan is not considered a “family member” pursuant to the Nasdaq Listing Rules, and, for the reasons discussed below, he qualifies as an independent director pursuant to Nasdaq Listing Rule 5605(a)(2).

Director Independence

The Board of Directors has determined that Timothy R. Donovan, Gov. Jim Edgar, Ellen C. Taaffe and Daniel M. Wright are independent under Nasdaq Listing Rule 5605(a)(2) and that such directors have no material relationships with our company that would compromise their independence. At the Board of Directors meeting held on October 30, 2012, our Board of Directors reviewed the independence of the non-management independent directors in accordance with Nasdaq Listing Rule 5605(a)(2). In carrying out that review, our Board of Directors sought to determine whether there are or have been any relationships which would interfere with Timothy R. Donovan’s, Gov. Jim Edgar’s, Ellen C. Taaffe’s and Daniel M. Wright’s exercise of independent judgment in carrying out their responsibilities as directors. Specifically, our Board of Directors focused on their relationships with employees of our company and whether they, their family members or entities in which they have a significant interest, paid or received payments for property or services to or from our company. In particular, our Board of Directors considered Timothy R. Donovan’s familial relationships with the members of the Management Team, James A. Valentine, Jasper B. Sanfilippo, Mathias A. Valentine and Roseanne Christman (our Director of Creative Services), and unanimously concluded that such relationships did not impact Timothy R. Donovan’s independence because, among other reasons, (a) his relationships with the Management Team, James A. Valentine, Jasper B. Sanfilippo, Mathias A. Valentine and Roseanne Christman are sufficiently distant due to the fact that such relationships to those individuals are all based upon marriage and (b) in his role and experience as general counsel of multiple public companies, he has a full understanding of his responsibilities with respect to being an independent director.

Independence of the Compensation Committee and the Governance Committee

As a controlled company, under applicable Nasdaq Listing Rules, we are not required to maintain independent committees overseeing our compensation and nominating policies and practices. However, as a matter of good corporate governance, the Board of Directors has nevertheless determined that the best interests of our company and its stockholders are served by adopting such practices.

The Compensation Committee is comprised of Timothy R. Donovan, Chairperson, Gov. Jim Edgar, Ellen C. Taaffe and Daniel M. Wright. The Governance Committee is comprised of Gov. Jim Edgar, Chairperson, Timothy R. Donovan, Ellen C. Taaffe and Daniel M. Wright. Each member of the Compensation Committee and Governance Committee is an “independent director” as defined in Section 5605(a)(2) of the Nasdaq Listing Rules. In addition, each member of our Compensation Committee qualifies as (a) independent under Rule 10C-1 of the Exchange Act, (b) a “non-employee director” under Rule 16b-3 of the Exchange Act and (c) an “outside director” under 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”).

13

Independence of the Audit Committee

The Board of Directors has determined that (a) each member of the Audit Committee is an “independent director” as defined in Section 5605(a)(2) of the Nasdaq Listing Rules and (b) each member of the Audit Committee is “independent” for purposes of Section 10A and Rule 10A-3 of the Exchange Act.

Board of Directors—Leadership Structure

The Board of Directors believes it is important to retain its flexibility to allocate the responsibilities of the offices of the Chairman of the Board of Directors (“Chairman”) and the Chief Executive Officer in any way that is in the best interests of our company and stockholders at any given point in time. The Board of Directors believes that the decision as to who should serve as Chairman and as Chief Executive Officer, and whether the offices should be combined or separate, should be assessed periodically by the Board of Directors, and that the Board of Directors should not be constrained by a rigid policy mandating that such positions be separate. The Board of Directors has determined that, in light of the current size of our company, the most efficient leadership structure is to combine the roles of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and have Jeffrey T. Sanfilippo serve as such. Combining the roles of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer helps the Board of Directors make efficient and expeditious decisions, allows our company to tap fully Mr. Sanfilippo’s extensive knowledge of our industry and company and enables him to effectively exercise his proven leadership skills.

Furthermore, we believe that the combined office of the Chairman and the Chief Executive Officer puts an individual in the best position to focus the directors’ attention on the issues of greatest importance to the company and its stockholders, including issues related to strategy (including implementation of our company’s Strategic Plan) and risk management.

The relatively small size of our Board of Directors allows all directors, including the independent directors, to have a very active role in all Board of Directors activities. We have not identified any independent director as the “lead independent director.” Three out of our four independent directors serve as the chairperson of one of the three committees of the Board of Directors and all four independent directors are the only members on these committees. The independent directors, through their committee meetings, hold regular executive sessions without the attendance of management at which discussions are facilitated by the chairperson of the respective committees regarding the committee’s work and responsibilities. The Board of Directors feels that it is unnecessary to distinguish one of the independent directors as a “lead independent director” at this time, although the Board of Directors will periodically assess, if appropriate, whether a lead independent director should be appointed.

Board of Directors—Role in Risk Oversight

Throughout the year, risk is an integral part of the deliberations of the Board of Directors and its committees. Importantly, the Board of Directors reviews and periodically receives updates on and helps formulate our company’s Strategic Plan, taking into account, among other considerations, our company’s risk profile and potential exposures. In addition, the Board of Directors receives regular reports from management regarding specific risks that the Board of Directors or management has identified as important for the Board of Directors’ review and input. The Board of Directors’ risk oversight is also implemented through its committees. Although the Board of Directors as a whole has the responsibility for risk oversight, its committees also help oversee the company’s risk profile and exposures relating to matters within the scope of their authority and report to the Board of Directors about their deliberations and findings.

Specifically, the Compensation Committee reviews risks associated with our compensation programs, to ensure that incentive compensation programs do not encourage inappropriate risk-taking by management or employees. The Compensation Committee determined in fiscal 2013 that the company’s compensation programs do not encourage inappropriate risk-taking and the company’s compensation programs would be unlikely to have a material adverse effect upon the company. The Governance Committee considers risks related to our company’s corporate governance. The Audit Committee considers risks relating to the company’s accounting and finance functions, internal controls, related party transactions and disclosure and financial reporting.

14

The Board of Directors’ role in risk oversight of our company is consistent with our company’s current leadership structure because the combined office of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer enables our current Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Jeffrey T. Sanfilippo, to more efficiently identify and effectively oversee our company’s risks and report his conclusions and recommendations regarding such risks to the full Board of Directors.

In addition, our company has created a Risk Assessment Committee, chaired by William R. Pokrajac, Vice President of Risk Management and Investor Relations, and consisting of James A. Valentine, Chief Information Officer, Christopher H. Gardier, Senior Vice President of Consumer Sales, Michael E. Norsen, Operations Manager, Herbert J. Marros, Director of Financial Reporting and Taxation, Brenda Cannon, Vice President of Food Safety/Quality, Walter S. Kowal, Internal Audit Manager, Thomas J. Fordonski, Senior Vice President, Human Resources and John A. Accardo, Vice President of International Sales, to aid further the Board of Directors and its committees in reviewing the risks which face our company, including risks related to compensation policies and practices, information technology and general enterprise risks. The Risk Assessment Committee meets quarterly and delivers a report to the Board of Directors about their findings and general discussions. With respect to supply procurement risks, our Senior Vice President of Procurement and Commodity Risk Management, Walter R. Tankersley, provides regular updates to management and, from time to time, provides updates to the Board of Directors and the Audit Committee as appropriate.

Board Meetings and Committees

Board of Directors

It is expected that each member of the Board of Directors will be available to attend all regularly scheduled meetings of the Board of Directors and all regularly scheduled meetings of the committees on which a director serves, as well as our annual meeting of stockholders, after taking into consideration the director’s other business and professional commitments. Each director is expected to make his or her best effort to attend all of the special meetings of the Board of Directors and of the committees on which a director serves.

Our Board of Directors held eight meetings during fiscal 2013. All directors attended at least 75% of the meetings of the Board of Directors. All directors attended at least 75% of the meetings of the committees of the Board of Directors on which they served. All directors attended the 2012 annual meeting of stockholders. The separately-designated standing committees of the Board of Directors include the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee and the Governance Committee. Each committee has adopted a charter which governs its activities. These committee charters are available on our website at www.jbssinc.com.

Compensation Committee

The Compensation Committee is comprised of Timothy R. Donovan, Chairperson, Gov. Jim Edgar, Ellen C. Taaffe and Daniel M. Wright. The Compensation Committee held seven meetings during fiscal 2013.

The Compensation Committee reviews and makes recommendations to the Board of Directors with respect to the salaries, equity grants, incentive compensation and other compensation of executive officers and non-management directors (management directors are not separately compensated for their service as directors) other than for certain related parties, the review and approval of which is handled by the Audit Committee. See “Review of Related Party Transactions—Compensation Arrangements” below. The Compensation Committee may solicit recommendations as to compensation of non-management directors and executive officers from other members of the Board of Directors and executive officers. The Compensation Committee reviews market comparisons of the compensation of the Chief Executive Officer and other executive officers that are prepared by its independent compensation consultant and our company.

In carrying out its purposes, the Compensation Committee is authorized to take all actions that it deems necessary or appropriate, it may draw upon and direct such internal resources of the company as it deems necessary, and it may engage such compensation consultants, search firms, legal advisors and other advisors as it deems desirable, at the cost and expense of the company. The Compensation Committee has the sole authority to retain and terminate any such consultant, firm or advisor, including the sole authority to determine fees and terms of retention. The Compensation Committee is also authorized to establish a subcommittee, delegate to it the responsibilities provided for under the Compensation Committee’s charter, and grant to it as much authority, including the full authority of the Compensation Committee, as the Compensation Committee deems necessary or appropriate, so long as the member or members of such subcommittee are independent directors as contemplated by the Compensation Committee’s charter.

15

In fiscal 2013, the Compensation Committee directly engaged Meridian Compensation Partners, LLC (“Meridian”), an independent compensation consultant, to, among other things, review the proposed fiscal 2013 base salaries, conduct certain market analysis, review the SVA Plan and its related targets, advise the Compensation Committee with respect to granting fiscal 2013 equity awards pursuant to the 2008 Equity Incentive Plan, as amended (the “2008 Plan”), and generally advise the Compensation Committee on the compensation of our executive officers and our non-management directors.

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

During fiscal 2013, Timothy R. Donovan (the Chairperson of the Compensation Committee), Gov. Jim Edgar, Ellen C. Taaffe and Daniel M. Wright served as the sole members of the Compensation Committee. Neither Gov. Jim Edgar, Daniel M. Wright, Ellen C. Taaffe nor Timothy R. Donovan (a) was, during the fiscal year, an officer or employee of the company, (b) was formerly an officer of the company or (c) had any related party transactions with the company other than those disclosed in “Review of Related Party Transactions” below.

No executive officer of our company served on the board of directors or the compensation committee of another company which had any of its officers or directors serving on our Compensation Committee or on our Board of Directors at any time during fiscal 2013.

Corporate Governance Committee

The Governance Committee was formed in order to, among other things, make director nominee recommendations to the Board of Directors and to assist our company in refining its corporate governance policies and procedures. The Governance Committee is comprised of Gov. Jim Edgar, Chairperson, Timothy R. Donovan, Ellen C. Taaffe and Daniel M. Wright. The Governance Committee held four meetings during fiscal 2013.

The Governance Committee reviews candidates considered for election to the Board of Directors. The Governance Committee reviews and makes recommendations on matters related to the practices, policies and procedures of the Board of Directors and the committees of the Board of Directors. The Governance Committee has the lead role in shaping our overall system of corporate governance. As part of its duties, the Governance Committee assesses the size, structure and composition of the Board of Directors and committees of the Board of Directors, including director qualifications and director succession planning, and coordinates the performance evaluation of the Board of Directors and the committees of the Board of Directors.

Audit Committee

The Audit Committee provides oversight on matters relating to accounting, financial reporting, internal control, auditing, and regulatory compliance. The Audit Committee also has the sole authority to: (a) retain and terminate the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm that audits our annual consolidated financial statements, (b) evaluate the independence of the auditors and (c) arrange with the auditors the scope of their audit. Additionally, the Audit Committee reviews our audited financial statements with management and the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm, recommends whether such audited financial statements should be included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K and prepares a report to stockholders to be included in this Proxy Statement. Further, the Audit Committee reviews related party transactions as more specifically described under “Review of Related Party Transactions” below.

The Audit Committee is comprised of the independent directors Daniel M. Wright, Chairperson, Timothy R. Donovan, Gov. Jim Edgar and Ellen C. Taaffe. The Audit Committee held six meetings during fiscal 2013.

The Board of Directors has determined that Mr. Wright, the Chairperson of the Audit Committee, and Mr. Donovan, a member of the Audit Committee, are “audit committee financial experts” as defined by the SEC. With respect to its assessment of whether Messrs. Wright and Donovan are “audit committee financial experts”, the Board of Directors considered, among other things, Messrs. Wright and Donovan’s experience as described under “Nominees for Election by the Holders of Common Stock” and “Nominees for Election by the Holders of Class A Stock”, respectively.

16

Stockholder Communication with Directors

We recognize the importance of providing our stockholders with the ability to communicate with members of the Board of Directors. Accordingly, we have established a policy for stockholder communications with directors. This policy is not intended to cover communications of complaints regarding accounting or auditing matters, with respect to which we have established the “Anonymous Incident Reporting System for Accounting and Auditing Matters”, which is posted on our website at www.jbssinc.com. Stockholders wishing to communicate with the Board of Directors as a whole, or with certain directors individually, may do so by sending a written communication to the following address:

John B. Sanfilippo & Son, Inc.

Stockholder Communications with Directors

Attn: Corporate Secretary

1703 N. Randall Road

Elgin, Illinois 60123-7820

Each stockholder communication should include an indication of the submitting stockholder’s status as a valid stockholder in order to submit such communication. Each such communication will be received for handling by our Secretary for the sole purpose of determining whether the contents represent a communication to the Board of Directors or to an individual director. The Secretary will maintain originals of each communication received and will provide copies to the addressee(s) and any appropriate committee(s) or director(s) based on the expressed desire of the communicating stockholder. The Board of Directors, the committee(s) or the applicable individual director(s) may elect to respond to the communication as each deems appropriate.

DIRECTOR NOMINATIONS

Director Qualifications

While there is no single set of characteristics required to be possessed by each member of the Board of Directors, the Governance Committee will consider whether to nominate a candidate for director based on a variety of criteria, including, but not limited to: (a) the candidate’s personal integrity; (b) whether the candidate has demonstrated achievement in one or more forms of business, professional, governmental, communal, scientific or educational endeavors sufficient to enable the candidate to make a significant and immediate contribution to the Board of Directors’ discussion and decision-making regarding the array of complex issues facing our company; (c) the candidate’s level of familiarity with our business and competitive environment; (d) the candidate’s ability to function effectively in an oversight role; (e) the candidate’s understanding of the issues affecting a public company of a size and complexity similar to our company; and (f) whether the candidate has, and is prepared to devote, adequate time to the Board of Directors and its committees. Under exceptional and limited circumstances, the Governance Committee may approve the candidacy of a candidate notwithstanding the foregoing criteria if the Governance Committee believes the service of such a nominee is in our best interests and those of our stockholders.

In selecting candidates, the Governance Committee and the Board of Directors take diversity into account, seeking to ensure a representation of varied perspectives and experience, although neither the Governance Committee nor the Board of Directors has prescribed specific standards for diversity or adopted a specific diversity policy.

However, the Governance Committee considers certain items to be minimum requirements for nomination to our Board of Directors. Those requirements are: (a) a commitment to the duties and responsibilities of a director; (b) the ability to contribute meaningfully to the Board of Directors’ supervisory management of the company and its officers; and (c) an outstanding record of integrity in prior professional activities.

In addition, the Governance Committee ensures that:

17

In selecting a nominee for our Board of Directors, the Governance Committee may receive suggestions from many different groups including, but not limited to, the company’s current and former executive officers and directors, and such suggestions may or may not be in response to a request from the Governance Committee. As described below, the Governance Committee will also consider nominations from stockholders. From time to time, the Governance Committee may engage a third party for a fee to assist it in identifying potential director candidates.

After identifying a potential director nominee and deciding to further pursue the potential nominee, the Governance Committee will then evaluate the potential nominee by using information collected from a variety of sources. Those sources include, but are not limited to, publicly available information, information provided by knowledgeable members of the company and information provided by the potential candidate. The Governance Committee may contact the potential nominee to determine his or her interest and willingness to serve as a director and may conduct one or more in-person or telephonic interviews with the potential candidate. The Governance Committee may contact references of the potential candidate or other members of the professional community who may have relevant knowledge of the potential candidate’s qualifications and successes. The Governance Committee may compare the potential candidate’s information to all such information collected for other potential candidates.

Director Succession Planning

From time to time, the holders of Class A Stock have discussed with the Governance Committee director succession planning and processes with respect to the Class A Directors. In doing so, the holders of Class A Stock have identified potential director candidates, considered their characteristics with the criteria listed in “Director Qualifications” above and evaluated their specific skills among a number of factors the holders of Class A Stock consider important. As part of these discussions, the holders of Class A Stock determined that it would be in the best interest of stockholders to nominate the slate of Class A Directors as set forth under Proposal 1, which includes Jeffrey T. Sanfilippo, Jasper B. Sanfilippo, Jr., James J. Sanfilippo, Timothy R. Donovan, Mathias A. Valentine and Michael J. Valentine. The Governance Committee intends to continue these discussions and processes with the holders of Class A Stock on an ongoing basis, as necessary.

Nominations of Directors by Stockholders

The Governance Committee does not solicit, but will consider, nominees for director submitted by holders of our Common Stock and Class A Stock. The Governance Committee follows the same process and uses the same criteria for evaluating candidates proposed by stockholders as it uses for all other candidates, although the number of shares held by the proposing stockholder and the length of time such shares have been held may be considered by the Governance Committee.

Stockholders wishing to have the Governance Committee consider a director nominee may do so by sending notice of the nominee’s name, biographical information and qualifications to:

Governance Committee

c/o Corporate Secretary

John B. Sanfilippo & Son, Inc.

1703 N. Randall Road, Elgin, Illinois 60123-7820

Under our company’s Bylaws and applicable law, all director nominations submitted by our stockholders must provide (a) all information relating to the nominee that is required to be disclosed in a solicitation of proxies for the election of directors in an election contest, or as is otherwise required, pursuant to and in accordance with Regulation 14A under the Exchange Act, (b) the nominee’s written consent to being named in the proxy statement as a nominee and to serving as a director, if elected, and (c) the submitting stockholder’s written consent to being named in the proxy statement as the stockholder recommending the director nomination. In addition, such notice of a nominee shall include, as to the stockholder giving the notice and the beneficial owner, if any, on whose behalf the nomination or proposal is made (a) the name and address of such stockholder, as they appear on our company’s books, and of such beneficial owner, (b) the class and number of shares of stock of our company which are owned beneficially and of record by such stockholder and such beneficial owner, (c) a representation that the stockholder is a holder of record of the stock of our company entitled to vote at such meeting and intends to appear in person or by proxy at the meeting to propose the nominee, and (d) a representation of whether the stockholder or the beneficial owner, if any, intends to or is part of a group which intends to (i) deliver a proxy statement and/or form of proxy to holders of at least the percentage of our company’s outstanding capital stock required to elect the nominee and/or (ii) otherwise solicit proxies from stockholders in support of the nominee’s election. The foregoing requirements will be deemed satisfied by the stockholder if that stockholder has notified our company of his, her or its intention to present a nomination at an annual meeting in compliance with the applicable rules and regulations under the Exchange Act and such stockholder’s nomination has been included in a proxy statement that has been prepared by our company to solicit proxies for such annual meeting. Our company may require any proposed nominee to furnish such other information as it may reasonably require in order to determine the eligibility of such proposed nominee to serve as a director of our company.

18

Please see “Stockholder Proposals for the 2014 Annual Meeting” below for the notice deadlines for stockholder’s director nominations to be considered for inclusion in our company’s proxy materials and stockholder’s director nominations to be presented at the 2014 annual meeting (but not to be included in our company’s proxy materials).

PROPOSAL 2: RATIFY THE AUDIT COMMITTEE’S APPOINTMENT OF PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS

LLP AS OUR INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM FOR THE 2014 FISCAL YEAR

The Audit Committee of the Board of Directors has appointed PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm to examine our consolidated financial statements for the 2014 fiscal year, and to render other professional services as required, in accordance with our pre-approval policies and procedures described below. The Audit Committee and the Board of Directors, as a matter of company policy, are submitting the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP to stockholders for ratification.

If the stockholders do not vote on an advisory basis in favor of the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our company’s Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm, the Audit Committee will reconsider whether to engage PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP but may ultimately determine to engage PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP or another audit firm without re-submitting the matter to stockholders. Even if the stockholders vote in favor of the selection of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, the Audit Committee may, in its sole discretion, terminate the engagement of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP and direct the appointment of another Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm at any time during the year.

Representatives of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP will be present at the Annual Meeting, will have the opportunity to make a statement if they so desire, and are expected to be available to respond to appropriate questions.

Aggregate fees billed by our Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, for audit services related to the most recent two fiscal years, and for other professional services billed in the most recent two fiscal years, were as follows:

19

Reports on our Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm’s projects and services are presented to the Audit Committee on a regular basis. The Audit Committee is solely responsible for the engagement of our Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm. The Audit Committee has established pre-approval policies and procedures in order for our Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm to perform all audit services and permitted non-audit services. These pre-approval policies and procedures allow for pre-approval of certain designated services, depending on the type of service. All services not subject to general pre-approval must be specifically pre-approved by the Audit Committee. Under the pre-approval policies and procedures, the Audit Committee may delegate pre-approval responsibilities to its chairperson or any other member or members. All of the fees described above were approved by the Audit Committee pursuant to our pre-approval policies and procedures.

The Board of Directors recommends a vote “FOR” ratification of the Audit Committee’s appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for the 2014 fiscal year.

AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORT

The Audit Committee has reviewed and discussed with management and PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, the company’s Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for fiscal 2013, the company’s audited financial statements as of and for the year ended June 27, 2013. Management is responsible for the company’s financial reporting process, including maintaining a system of internal controls, and is responsible for preparing the consolidated financial statements in accordance with United States generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”). PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP is responsible for auditing those financial statements and for giving an opinion regarding the conformity of the financial statements with GAAP. Additionally, in accordance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the Audit Committee reviewed and discussed with management, the company’s internal auditors and PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, management’s report on the operating effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, including PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP’s related report.

The Audit Committee has also discussed with PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP the matters required by revised Auditing Standard No. 16 Communications with Audit Committees and other relevant auditing standards adopted by the PCAOB. In addition, the Audit Committee has received and reviewed the written disclosures and letter from PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP regarding PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP’s communications with the Audit Committee concerning independence, as required by Ethics and Independence Rule 3526, Communication with Audit Committees Concerning Independence, as adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (such Ethics and Independence Rule superseded Independence Standard No. 1, Independence Discussions with Audit Committees). Also, the Audit Committee has discussed with PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP the independence of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, including whether PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP’s independence is compatible with PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP providing non-audit services to the company. Based on the foregoing discussions and reviews, the Audit Committee is satisfied with the independence of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP.

In reliance on the reviews and discussions described above and the report of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, the Audit Committee recommended to the Board of Directors, and the Board of Directors approved, the inclusion of the audited financial statements in the company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 27, 2013, for filing with the Commission.

Respectfully submitted by all of the members of the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors.

Daniel M. Wright, Chairperson

Timothy R. Donovan

Governor Jim Edgar

Ellen C. Taaffe

The information contained in the preceding report shall not be deemed to be “soliciting material” or to be “filed” with the Commission, nor shall such information be incorporated by reference into any future filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that we specifically incorporate it by reference in such filing.

20

PROPOSAL 3: ADVISORY VOTE TO APPROVE EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

As required by SEC rules, we are providing our stockholders with an advisory, nonbinding vote to approve the compensation paid to our named executive officers, as we have described it in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis and Summary Compensation Table of this Proxy Statement.

As described in detail in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis section, the Compensation Committee oversees our executive compensation program. The Compensation Committee recommends changes to the executive compensation program and recommends the awards of executive compensation to be paid as appropriate to reflect our performance and to promote the main objectives of the program. These objectives include helping us attract, motivate, reward and retain superior leaders who are capable of creating sustained, lasting value for our stockholders, and to promote a performance-based culture that is intended to align the interests of our executives with those of our stockholders.

Highlights of our program include:

We are asking our stockholders to indicate their support for the compensation paid to our named executive officers by casting a FOR vote on this proposal. We believe that the information we have provided in this Proxy Statement demonstrates that our executive compensation program was designed appropriately in light of our goals and business and is adequately working to ensure that executives’ interests are aligned with our stockholders’ interests to support long-term value creation.

You may vote for or against the following resolution, or you may abstain. This vote is not intended to address any specific item or the policies generally regarding executive compensation, but rather the overall compensation paid to our named executive officers.

While this vote is advisory and not binding on our company, the Board of Directors and the Compensation Committee will consider the outcome of the vote, along with other relevant factors, when considering future executive compensation decisions. For information on how our Compensation Committee considered the 2012 advisory vote on executive compensation, see “Response to the 2012 Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation” as set forth below. If any stockholder wishes to communicate with the Board of Directors regarding executive compensation, the Board of Directors can be contacted using the procedures outlined in “Stockholder Communications with Directors” as set forth in this Proxy Statement.

The Board of Directors recommends a vote FOR the advisory vote to approve executive compensation.

21

COMPENSATION OF DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

Compensation of Directors

During fiscal 2013, compensation to directors who were not current employees of our company was paid at the rate of $35,000 per year plus $1,600 for each Board of Directors or committee meeting attended and $1,100 for telephonic meetings of the Board of Directors or committee meetings in which they participated. The yearly rate was increased from $31,200 to $35,000 during the third quarter of fiscal 2013. In addition, the Audit Committee Chairperson and Compensation Committee Chairperson were paid at the rate of $10,400 per year. The Governance Committee Chairperson was paid at a rate of $5,200 per year. Directors are also reimbursed for their reasonable expenses incurred in attending such meetings. Directors who are current employees of our company receive no additional compensation for their services as directors.

Under the 2008 Plan, a director who is not a current employee of our company, our subsidiary, or any of their affiliates (an “Outside Director”) is eligible to participate in the 2008 Plan. On October 30, 2012, the Compensation Committee approved a grant of 3,049 RSUs to each of our six Outside Directors, with a grant date of November 14, 2012. These RSUs will vest on October 30, 2013, and once vested, they can be paid to the director in an equal number of shares of Common Stock upon vesting or become payable in an equal number of shares of Common Stock after the director ceases being a member of the Board of Directors.

The aggregate compensation paid to or earned by Outside Directors during fiscal 2013 was $670,924, as detailed in the following table:

Director Compensation for Fiscal Year 2013

22

During fiscal 2013, the company paid premiums on certain life insurance policies that were previously assigned to the company in 2003. The premiums paid were for life insurance policies on the lives of Jasper B. Sanfilippo, Mathias A. Valentine and their respective spouses. These payments were not related to the services of Jasper B. Sanfilippo or Mathias A. Valentine as Outside Directors. See “Certain Insurance Policy Arrangements” below.

COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

The following is a discussion and analysis of the compensation paid to the following persons (collectively, the “named executive officers”) during the 2013 fiscal year:

Publicly Traded and Family-Owned with Independent Committees

In 1922, Gaspare Sanfilippo and his son, John Sanfilippo, founded our company as a small storefront pecan shelling operation located in Chicago, Illinois. In 1959, our company began to diversify by beginning to roast a variety of nut types. In 1963, Jasper B. Sanfilippo, Gaspare Sanfilippo’s grandson and our former Chairman of the Board of Directors assumed the management of our company. Over the next forty years, Jasper B. Sanfilippo, along with Mathias A. Valentine, Jasper B. Sanfilippo’s brother-in-law and current member of the Board of Directors, expanded our company from a storefront operation in Chicago, Illinois, to a publicly traded nut company with operations located in Illinois, Texas, Georgia, California and North Carolina.

Unlike most other publicly traded companies, our company remains largely family owned and controlled. As discussed elsewhere in this Proxy Statement, the Sanfilippo and Valentine Groups control 51.7% and 24.2%, respectively, of the voting control of our company. In addition, our Board of Directors and management continue to be largely comprised of members of the Sanfilippo and Valentine families. The Sanfilippo Group and Valentine Group, collectively, have the ability to nominate and elect six out of the nine directors on our company’s Board of Directors.

We qualify as a “controlled company” under Nasdaq Listing Rule 5615(c)(1) because (a) the Sanfilippo Group has the ability to direct 51.7% of voting control of our company and (b) the Sanfilippo Group and the Valentine Group have an oral understanding not to cumulate votes for the election of Class A Directors and to vote in a reciprocal manner for each other’s nominees. In accordance with the provisions of the Nasdaq rules applicable to controlled companies, we are not required to have a compensation committee comprised solely of independent directors. Even though our company is not required to have an independent compensation committee, we have, nonetheless, decided to comply voluntarily with the Nasdaq provision. Accordingly, our Compensation Committee is comprised of Timothy R. Donovan, Chairperson, Gov. Jim Edgar, Ellen C. Taaffe and Daniel M. Wright, all of whom are independent directors under Nasdaq rules. These independent directors meet in executive session to discuss the compensation of our executive officers. As discussed below, when making decisions regarding the compensation of the named executive officers and other members of our executive team, the Compensation Committee considers the unique structure of our company.

23

Executive Summary

Our company’s fiscal 2013 financial results improved significantly over a successful fiscal 2012. In fiscal 2013, our company achieved record net sales of $734.3 million and improved profitability driven primarily by sales volume growth for most major nut types and efficiency improvements. As a result, our earnings per diluted share increased to $1.98 in fiscal 2013 from $1.58 for fiscal 2012. Accordingly, our investors enjoyed a significant appreciation in the value of our Common Stock, as our stock price increased from $16.87 on June 28, 2012 to $19.86 on June 27, 2013, an increase of 17.7%. Our financial performance also allowed us to pay a $1.00 per share special dividend to our stockholders during fiscal 2013. We believe that these results would not have been possible without a skilled and motivated team of executive officers.

Our compensation programs are designed to reward our executive officers for our company’s performance. In fiscal 2013, we continued to implement a number of compensation measures to reinforce our company’s performance with the pay of our executive officers. Most notably, due to our strong operating performance, the executive officers earned cash incentive compensation significantly above targets set by the Compensation Committee under the company’s Sanfilippo Value-Added Plan, or “SVA Plan”. In addition, we continued our practice of evaluating our executive officers’ performance when setting their salaries and awarding equity.

We believe that our stockholders agree with the design and implementation of our pay for performance compensation programs. For fiscal 2012, approximately 99.6% of votes cast in our advisory vote to approve executive compensation supported the compensation paid to our named executive officers.

The Role of the Compensation Committee

The Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors administers our company’s executive compensation program. In that regard, the purposes of the Compensation Committee, among others, are as follows:

24

Our company’s compensation philosophy is designed to align executive compensation with our company’s objectives, management initiatives and business financial performance. In making decisions with respect to executive compensation, the Board of Directors and the Compensation Committee apply the following key principles:

With respect to all areas of compensation, the Compensation Committee regularly communicates with management. For example, the Compensation Committee invites certain members of our senior management to be present for a significant portion of every Compensation Committee meeting. This allows the Compensation Committee to solicit management’s input regarding various compensation matters, such as management’s views regarding salary increases, equity compensation (such as RSUs or stock options) and the components of the SVA Plan. The Compensation Committee then meets in executive session without management to deliberate and decide on compensation matters.

Overview of Fiscal 2013 Executive Compensation Program

Our total compensation program for the named executive officers and other executive officers in fiscal 2013 consisted of both cash compensation and equity-based compensation in the form of RSUs. Each executive officer’s annual cash compensation is comprised of a base salary and an opportunity to earn an annual incentive award under the SVA Plan. The SVA Plan rewards participants for year-over-year improvement in our net operating profit after tax minus a capital charge. In addition, to be competitive in the marketplace we offer standard benefits available to all salaried employees, we provide life insurance for all named executive officers and participation in our Supplemental Retirement Plan (“SERP”) for certain named executive officers.

Operating Principles

The Compensation Committee broadly considered the factors more specifically set forth below when setting compensation for our named executive officers in fiscal 2013.

Management Philosophy. The Management Team, which consists of Jeffrey T. Sanfilippo, Michael J. Valentine and Jasper B. Sanfilippo, Jr. (the “Management Team”), has established an executive committee comprised of all of the named executive officers, as well as certain other executive officers (the “Executive Committee”). The members of this Executive Committee work together to manage our company’s affairs, which includes meeting regularly to discuss various aspects of our company’s operations and strategic goals. The Management Team adopted this collaborative approach to management for several reasons, including (a) the Management Team’s belief that input from the Executive Committee members is essential to our company’s success and (b) the Management Team’s belief that the familial relationship between the Management Team members lends itself naturally to a collaborative approach to management. The Compensation Committee supports the Management Team’s overall team-oriented approach to managing our company. Accordingly, at the Management Team’s request, the Compensation Committee generally determined that the Management Team members’ compensation should all be equal for fiscal 2013.

25

Food Industry Comparison Group. When setting compensation for the named executive officers for fiscal 2013, the Compensation Committee compared elements of compensation (base salary, incentive compensation and equity grants) against the compensation reported for the named executive officers of a select group of companies engaged in the food business which are generally similar in size to our company (the “Food Industry Comparison Group”) as a reference in setting overall compensation competitiveness. For fiscal 2013, the Food Industry Comparison Group was comprised of 12 publicly traded companies with annual sales between approximately $200 million and $2.7 billion. The Compensation Committee’s independent consultant prepared the reports regarding the Food Industry Comparison Group. For fiscal 2013, the Food Industry Comparison Group consisted of the following companies:

B&G Foods, Inc.

Boulder Brands, Inc.

Cal-Maine Foods, Inc.

Calavo Growers, Inc.

Diamond Foods, Inc.

Farmer Bros. Co.

Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, Inc.

J & J Snack Foods Corp.

Lancaster Colony Corporation

Overhill Farms, Inc.

Snyder’s-Lance, Inc.

Tootsie Roll Industries, Inc.

In setting compensation, the Compensation Committee recognized that, among other things, the roles of the named executive officers in the Food Industry Comparison Group may not fully align with the roles and responsibilities of our named executive officers due to our collaborative approach to management and our business needs. For example, our Chief Financial Officer also serves as Group President. At many companies within the Food Industry Comparison Group, there is no specific officer who handles commodity procurement, a critical aspect of our business. In addition, market data for the Management Team was viewed relative to the average of the top three officers at each company in the Food Industry Comparison Group due to our collaborative approach to management, as opposed to a more traditional approach of individually comparing the pay of each member of the Management Team to the other individual corresponding top three officers of the companies in the Food Industry Comparison Group.

Individual Performance. Notwithstanding the Management Team’s collaborative approach to management, the Compensation Committee considered the individual performance of each member of the Management Team, as well as the other executive officers, when it set and awarded compensation for fiscal 2013.

Independent Consultant. In fiscal 2013, the Compensation Committee utilized Meridian as its independent compensation consultant to provide guidance regarding the compensation of our named executive officers and our Outside Directors. For fiscal 2013, the Meridian reviewed the various components of compensation for our named executive officers, as well as the proposed changes in such compensation, and advised the Compensation Committee regarding how the changes compared to the Food Industry Comparison Group. Meridian provided no other services to our company in fiscal year 2013. The Compensation Committee determined that the work of the independent consultant has not raised any conflict of interest issues.

When determining pay levels for the Management Team, the Compensation Committee examines the competitive market data and individual performance of the three Management Team officers, and deliberates in executive session without any members of management present. When determining pay levels for the other executive offices that are not members of the Management Team, the Compensation Committee takes into account the competitive external market data, individual performance and also the recommendations from the Management Team.

Direct Compensation

Base Salary

The Compensation Committee recommends to the Board of Directors for approval the level of base salary for named executive officers, including the Chief Executive Officer, and the other executive officers. When determining the base salaries of our named executive officers and executive officers for fiscal 2013, the Compensation Committee considered the following factors:

26

In connection with setting the base salaries for fiscal 2013, the Compensation Committee, with the input from the Management Team for executive officers, reviewed the individual performance of our company’s management. The reviews consisted of the Compensation Committee members’ observations of the Chief Executive Officer and other executive officers’ performance throughout the fiscal year and specifically with respect to each individual officer’s (a) roles and functions, and the fulfillment thereof and (b) positive contribution to our overall performance. The Compensation Committee also took into account its desire to migrate, over a period of years, the base salaries of the Management Team closer to the 50th percentile of the Food Industry Comparison Group, provided such moves were supported by the overall performance of our company and the individual performance of each member of the Management Team.

Based upon all of the foregoing factors, our Compensation Committee approved a 13.6% increase in the salaries paid to the Management Team for fiscal 2013. The uniform increase to the base salary of the Management Team was approved in part because of the Management Team’s collaborative approach to management outlined above and the Compensation Committee’s desire to bring the base salaries of the Management Team closer to the 50th percentile of the Food Industry Comparison Group. The Compensation Committee also considered the sustained performance of our company into account in approving the salary increases for the Management Team. The increases for James A. Valentine and Walter R. Tankersley of 4.5% and 3.5%, respectively, were proposed by our company’s management based on each named executive officer’s individual performance and the overall performance of our company.

After taking these increases into account, base salaries for the Management Team (Jeffrey T. Sanfilippo, Michael J. Valentine and Jasper B. Sanfilippo, Jr.) are, in the aggregate, still below the 50th percentile for the Food Industry Comparison Group while base salaries for the remaining named executive officers are above the 50th percentile for the Food Industry Comparison Group.

Annual Incentive Compensation—Sanfilippo Value-Added Plan

As described in greater detail below, the general structure of the SVA Plan results in a cash payment to each participant calculated as follows:

The SVA Plan rewards plan participants with cash incentive compensation for year-over-year improvement in economic profit. Economic profit is our net operating profit after taxes minus a charge for capital. The charge for capital is determined by multiplying the weighted average cost of capital (10%) by the invested capital in the business (such year-over-year improvement hereinafter referred to as “SVA”), as illustrated below:

Overall SVA improvement occurs when the net operating profit after taxes less the capital charge increases on a year-over-year basis. Actual incentive compensation will be determined by comparing the SVA improvement amount relative to SVA improvement goals set for the fiscal year.

27

The Compensation Committee believes that using year-over-year SVA improvement in the SVA Plan motivates the plan participants to improve our company’s financial performance and more effectively manage its working and fixed capital by encouraging the productive use of capital resources relative to their cost. For example, the Compensation Committee, from time to time, receives information from the Management Team on the impact of certain business decisions relative to SVA. The Compensation Committee has also receives information, from time to time, about the positive overall relationship between SVA improvement and the price of our Common Stock. For fiscal 2013, the SVA Plan participants included members of the Executive Committee and over 180 other salaried personnel.

SVA Targets and Payments

The Compensation Committee, with the assistance of Meridian, its independent consultant, and the Management Team, established the SVA improvement goals for fiscal 2013. The Compensation Committee set three parameters for the SVA payout: the Threshold, or Minimum improvement goal, the Target goal and the Maximum goal.

SVA improvement amounts that fall in between the Threshold, Target, and Maximum goals are interpolated between each respective amount. For example, a SVA improvement level which was exactly in between the Target and Maximum goals would result in a 150% payout, or 1.5x multiplier of the participant’s target award. Each participant receives the same SVA improvement multiplier.

The goals for SVA improvement and results are shown below:

For fiscal 2013, the Compensation Committee established each SVA Plan participant’s target award by multiplying the participant’s base salary by a set percentage, or “Target Salary Percentage.” For fiscal 2013, each SVA Plan participant had a Target Salary Percentage ranging from 5% to 70% of their base salary. The Compensation Committee determined the Target Salary Percentage based on recommendations from management as to the participant’s overall responsibilities and title. For fiscal 2013, each member of the Management Team received a 70% Target Salary Percentage and James A. Valentine and Walter R. Tankersley received a 60% Target Salary Percentage.

28

The table below summarizes the SVA Payments for the 2013 fiscal year for our named executive officers, based on the respective base salaries, Target Salary Percentages and SVA Improvement Multiple:

Individual Performance Payouts for the Management Team

For fiscal 2013, the SVA Payment Declared also included of an individual performance component for the members of the Management Team. 20% of the total SVA Payment Declared was subject to the Compensation Committee’s discretion based on the Management Team members’ individual performance. The Compensation Committee reviewed proposed individual goals, which consisted of operational and business initiatives in furtherance of the company’s Strategic Plan or the company’s overall performance, before approving the goals in early fiscal 2013. Based on the Compensation Committee’s evaluation of the personal performance of each individual, the Compensation Committee could award a range from the full 20% of the total SVA Payment Declared, or not award any of the 20%. The Compensation Committee believes that this formal evaluation process has resulted in the Management Team’s overall improved performance and improved understanding of the Compensation Committee’s expectations regarding certain performance matters beyond those specifically addressed via SVA.

For fiscal 2013, each member of the Management Team had three individual goals – two of which were the same for each member, namely “Corporate Leadership” and “Corporate Strategy”.

More specifically, the Corporate Leadership individuals goal consisted of (a) creating a stronger culture of discipline that reinforces expectations and accountability, (b) ensuring that distinct job responsibilities and policies were communicated, understood and followed and (c) focusing on performance goals, safe quality food compliance, good manufacturing practices, pricing, trade spending, product development prioritization and customer management.

The Corporate Strategy individual goals consisted of (a) aligning and prioritizing financial, operational and marketing/sales resources to achieve performance goals, (b) building the company’s brands globally (c) differentiating Fisher and expanding its distribution and (d) re-launching Orchard Valley Harvest to gain new distribution and build market share.

The third individual goal for Jeffrey T. Sanfilippo was “Board Development”, which consisted of optimizing the value of the meetings of the Board of Directors and enhancing communication, education and strategic planning. The third individual goal for Michael J. Valentine was “Financial”, which consisted of managing and increasing inventory turns on raw materials. The third individual goal for Jasper B. Sanfilippo, Jr. was “Operations”, which consisted of meeting or exceeding spending reductions.

29

These individual goals for each member of the Management Team are considered on a subjective basis by the Compensation Committee and no single individual goal was determinative in establishing such member’s individual performance payout nor was any specific individual goal considered material to the ultimate determination of the individual performance payout. In addition, the Compensation Committee did not assign any specific weight to the achievement of any individual goal nor did it use any formulas to determine how to award the 20% of the individual performance payout.

For fiscal 2013, after review of each of the Management Team’s individual goals and their individual performance, the Compensation Committee awarded the full 20% of the individual portion of incentive compensation to members of the Management Team. As a whole, each member of the management team received $429,505 from the non-discretionary component of the SVA Plan and $107,376 in incentive compensation from the individual performance component of the SVA Plan.

Long-Term Incentives—Equity Awards Under the 2008 Plan

As described under “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management”, the Management Team, and the 13D “groups” to which they belong, have a large ownership interest in our company. The Compensation Committee recognizes that the Management Team’s large equity holdings in our company have resulted in the alignment of the Management Team’s interests with those of our stockholders. As a result, the Compensation Committee’s philosophy with respect to both the total amount of equity granted and equity as a compensation component has generally been more conservative as compared to our peers in the Food Industry Comparison Group. Thus, grants of equity awards to the named executive officers were below the 50th percentile of the Food Industry Comparison Group in fiscal 2013.

In deciding the number of RSUs to grant an Executive Committee member in fiscal 2013, the Compensation Committee considered the responsibilities of each executive officer and our performance in the prior fiscal year. Due to the Management Team’s collaborative approach to management, each member of the Management Team was granted the same number of RSUs. The Compensation Committee typically approves the equity awards to be granted for any given fiscal year at the Compensation Committee meeting held at or around the annual meeting of stockholders. Annual equity award grant dates are set on the 10th business day after the grant approval date – this date was chosen for administrative, compliance and governance reasons. For the fiscal 2013 RSU award grant, the Compensation Committee approved the grant on October 30, 2012, with a grant date of November 14, 2012.

Stock Ownership Guidelines

Generally, executive officers and outside directors must hold a minimum of 10,500 shares of our company’s Common Stock or Class A Stock (including any earned but unvested RSUs) before any Common Stock can be sold or equity awards exercised for cash. The minimum amount is 20,000 shares for members of the Management Team.

All Other Compensation

In addition to the direct compensation described above, our company offers certain other benefits to our executive officers, including the named executive officers, which consist of life insurance, company-sponsored retirement plans and limited perquisites.

Life Insurance We provide our named executive officers with life insurance.

Company-Sponsored Retirement Plans Our company offers retirement plans for eligible employees, as follows:

401(k) Plan. The company’s 401(k) Plan is a tax-qualified defined-contribution retirement plan. All non-union, salaried employees who are 21 years of age or older, and have completed one year of service, including the named executive officers, are eligible to participate and receive a company match in our 401(k) Plan. All participants in our 401(k) Plan may receive company matching contributions of 100% of the employee’s contribution up to 3% of an employee’s salary and 50% of the next 2% of an employee’s salary; however, the match may not exceed 4% of an employee’s total salary. The Compensation Committee approves these matching percentages and limits annually. Our company contributed $43,124 as matching funds under the 401(k) Plan for fiscal 2013 for the named executive officers as a group, which are set forth in more detail in the “All Other Compensation for Fiscal Year 2013” table below.

30

SERP. On August 2, 2007 the CNG Committee approved a restated Supplemental Retirement Plan for certain named executive officers and key employees of our company. The restated SERP changes the plan adopted on August 25, 2005 to, among other things, clarify certain actuarial provisions and incorporate new Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) requirements. The current SERP participants are Jasper B. Sanfilippo and Mathias A. Valentine, as former employees, members of the Management Team and James A. Valentine, a named executive officer. The purpose of the SERP is to provide unfunded, non-qualified deferred compensation benefits to participants upon retirement, disability or death. The Compensation Committee believes that the SERP is a useful tool in motivating employees that are key to our company’s success and helps to ensure that the benefits provided by our company are competitive with the market. The current plan participants were chosen by our CNG Committee (prior to the creation of a separate Compensation Committee) based upon numerous factors, including the participant’s seniority, role within our company, and demonstrated commitment and dedication to our company. Participants with at least five years of employment with us are eligible to receive monthly benefits from the SERP after separating from service with our company, provided such participant’s employment is not terminated for “cause” (as defined in the SERP). For more information about the SERP please see pages 33-34 and 37-38 in this Proxy Statement.

Perquisites Our company provides a minimal amount of perquisites to the named executive officers, including members of the Management Team. The perquisites provided in fiscal 2013 were airline club memberships, travel expenses for spouses on business trips, and personal use of company vehicles or a direct car allowance. We have provided additional information on perquisites in the table entitled “All Other Compensation for Fiscal Year 2013.”

Response to the 2012 Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation

In 2012, the stockholders of our company had the opportunity, pursuant to SEC regulations, to have an advisory vote to approve the compensation paid to the named executive officers. The results of the vote were as follows:

Based on the above results, approximately 99.6% of our voting shares supported the compensation paid to our named executive officers. The Compensation Committee considered these results in light of our company’s corporate structure, and determined that no significant changes were required to our company’s compensation program as a result of the vote.

Policy With Respect to Qualifying Compensation for Tax Deductibility and Accounting Matters

Our company’s ability to deduct compensation paid to covered employees (as defined in the Section 162(m) of the Code (“Section 162(m)”), including certain named executive officers, for tax purposes is generally limited by Section 162(m) to $1.0 million annually. However, this limitation does not apply to performance-based compensation if certain conditions are satisfied as set forth in more detail in Section 162(m). We view preserving the tax deductibility of compensation, pursuant to Section 162(m), as an important objective, but not the only objective, in establishing executive compensation. The Compensation Committee has designed our compensation programs with the goal of preserving the tax deductibility, pursuant to Section 162(m), of performance-based compensation granted to covered employees.

The Compensation Committee, as necessary in its judgment, reviews projections of the estimated accounting (pro forma expense) and tax impacts of all material elements of the executive compensation program. Generally, the accounting expenses are accrued over the requisite service period of the particular pay element (generally equal to the performance period) and our company realizes a tax deduction upon the payment to or realization by the executive. We account for our equity awards under FASB ASC Topic 718 and we use the Black-Scholes option pricing formula for determining the “grant date fair value” of our stock options at grant.

31

COMPENSATION OF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

Summary Compensation Table

The Summary Compensation Table provides the total compensation for the last three completed fiscal years for each of our company’s named executive officers.

Summary Compensation Table for Fiscal Year 2013

32

All Other Compensation for Fiscal Year 2013⁽¹⁾

Company-Sponsored Retirement Plans

A purpose of the SERP is to provide the Management Team and James A. Valentine (collectively, the “SERP Future Participants”) with a meaningful retirement benefit. The SERP is an unfunded plan. If a participant in the SERP, after serving our company for at least five years, separates from service to our company at or after the age of 65, benefits will be payable to the participant for life. Monthly installments will be paid at a rate equal to (a) one-twelfth (1/12th) of 50% of the participant’s highest consecutive five year average annual base salary, bonus and non-equity incentive compensation earned during the participant’s final 10 years of service, multiplied by (b) the number of full years the participant was employed by the company divided by the greater of (i) 20 or (ii) the number of full years the participant would have been employed if he had been employed by the company from his hire date through attainment of age 65 (which quotient shall not exceed 1.0). In the event that the participant’s benefits commence after he turns 65 years old, the participant’s benefit as otherwise computed under the SERP shall be adjusted for the time value of money (interest only) from age 65 to his age at actual retirement. If the participant has a beneficiary (the existence of a beneficiary is determined at the time the benefits commence), the benefits will be in the form of a joint and 100% contingent annuitant benefit, which is the actuarial equivalent of the participant’s life-only benefit. If a participant separates from service to our company prior to the age of 65 and has achieved 10 years of service to us, certain reduced early retirement benefits may be available. All of the named executive officers eligible to participate in the SERP have already achieved 10 years of service to us, but none are 65 or older. Payments under the SERP are subject to a deduction for social security and other offset amounts. The SERP participants are responsible for their portion of such payments.

33

The present value of the accumulated benefits for each of the executive officers in the table below is based upon the following: (a) in determining the number of years of credited service at retirement age, the retirement age is 60—65 years old; (b) the annual retirement payment is 50% of the executive’s current compensation; (c) the discount rate is 4.90% and (d) the IRS 2013 Mortality Table Post-retirement was used to determine life expectancy after the retirement date. A further discussion of the assumptions used in calculating the amounts shown in the table below can be found in Note 13 to our audited consolidated financial statements for the year ended June 27, 2013, included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Commission on August 28, 2013.

Pension Benefits Table for Fiscal Year 2013

Grants of Plan-Based Awards

Our company’s plan-based awards for certain executives, including the named executive officers, consist of equity-based awards (RSUs and previously, stock options) under our 2008 Plan and non-equity incentive compensation payments under our SVA Plan. The following table provides fiscal 2013 information for the named executive officers’ equity based awards under our 2008 Plan and non-equity incentive compensation payments under our SVA Plan. Under the terms of the SVA Plan, the Compensation Committee may reduce the incentive compensation payments to the Management Team by a factor of up to 20% based upon the Compensation Committee’s assessment of each member of the Management Team’s achievement of his individual objectives for the fiscal year. With respect to awards of RSUs under our company’s 2008 Plan, the table below includes the grant date of each award, the number of RSUs granted, the closing price of our company’s Common Stock on the date of grant and the resulting grant date fair value of the RSUs.

34

Grants of Plan-Based Awards for Fiscal Year 2013

35

Outstanding Equity Awards

The following table provides information on outstanding equity-based awards held by the named executive officers as of June 27, 2013. For stock options, the table shows the number of options that a named executive officer holds, the options’ exercise price and the options’ expiration date. For RSUs, the table shows the number of RSUs that have not vested and their market value.

Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year End 2013