Notice of the 2011 Annual Meeting and Proxy Statement
	Pitney Bowes Inc.
	World Headquarters
	1 Elmcroft Road
	Stamford, Connecticut 06926-0700
	(203) 356-5000

To the Stockholders:

Notice of Meeting:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2

3

Proxy Statement

The Annual Meeting and Voting

Our board of directors is soliciting proxies to be used at the annual meeting of stockholders to be held on May 9, 2011, at 9:00 a.m. at the company’s World Headquarters, 1 Elmcroft Road, Stamford, Connecticut, and at any adjournment or postponement of the meeting. This proxy statement contains information about the items being voted on at the annual meeting.

Annual Meeting Admission

An admission ticket, which is required for entry into the annual meeting, is attached to your proxy card if you hold shares directly in your name as a stockholder of record. If you plan to attend the annual meeting, please submit your proxy but keep the admission ticket and bring it to the annual meeting.

If your shares are held in the name of a bank, broker or nominee and you plan to attend the meeting, you must present proof of your ownership of Pitney Bowes stock (such as a bank or brokerage account statement) to be admitted to the meeting.

If you have received a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials (a “Notice”), your Notice is your admission ticket. If you plan to attend the annual meeting, please submit your proxy, but keep the Notice and bring it to the annual meeting.

Stockholders also must present a form of photo identification, such as a driver’s license, in order to be admitted to the annual meeting. No cameras, recording equipment, large bags, or packages will be permitted in the annual meeting.

Who is entitled to vote?

Record stockholders of Pitney Bowes common stock and $2.12 convertible preference stock at the close of business on March 18, 2011 (the record date) can vote at the meeting. As of the record date _________ shares of Pitney Bowes common stock and _________ shares of $2.12 convertible preference stock were issued and outstanding. Each stockholder has one vote for each share of common stock owned as of the record date, and 16.53 votes for each share of $2.12 convertible preference stock owned as of the record date.

How do I vote?

If you are a registered stockholder (which means you hold shares in your name), you may choose one of three methods to grant your proxy to have your shares voted: (i) you may grant your proxy on-line via the Internet by accessing the following website and following the instructions provided: www.proxyvote.com; (ii) you may grant your proxy by telephone (1-800-690-6903); or (iii) if you received your annual meeting material by mail, you may grant your proxy by completing and mailing the proxy card. Alternatively, you may attend the meeting and vote in person.

If you hold your shares through a broker, bank, trustee or other nominee, you are a beneficial owner and should refer to instructions provided by that entity on voting methods.

May I change my vote?

If you are a registered stockholder, you may change your vote at any time before your proxy is voted at the meeting by any of the following methods: (i) you may send in a revised proxy dated later than the first proxy; (ii) you may vote in person at the meeting; or (iii) you may notify the corporate secretary in writing prior to the meeting that you have revoked your proxy. Attendance at the meeting alone will not revoke your proxy.

If you hold your shares through a broker, bank, trustee or other nominee, you are a beneficial owner and should refer to instructions provided by that entity on how to change your vote.

What constitutes a quorum?

A majority of the shares entitled to vote constitutes a quorum. If you grant your proxy by Internet, telephone or proxy card, you will be considered part of the

4

quorum. Abstentions and broker non-votes are included in the count to determine a quorum. If a quorum is present, director candidates receiving the affirmative vote of a majority of votes cast will be elected. Proposals 2 and 4, 5 and 6 will be approved if a quorum is present and a majority of the votes cast by the stockholders are voted for the proposal. Proposals 3(a), 3(b), 3(c) and 3(d) will be approved if a quorum is present and at least 80% of the voting power of all of the shares entitled to vote generally in the election of directors, voting together as a single class, is voted in favor of the proposal.

How are votes counted?

Brokers, banks and other nominees are not permitted to vote on the election of directors, amendments to our Restated Certificate of Incorporation and Amended and Restated By-laws or executive compensation matters without instructions from the beneficial owner, as discussed in more detail below. Your vote is important. Therefore, if your shares are held through a broker, bank or other nominee, please instruct your broker, bank or other nominee on how to vote your shares. Unless you provide instructions to your broker, banker or other nominee on how to vote your shares, your shares will not be voted for proposals 1, 3, 4, 5 or 6.

Under New York Stock Exchange rules, if your broker holds your shares in its “street” name, the broker may vote your shares in its discretion on proposal 2 if it does not receive instructions from you.

If your broker does not have discretionary voting authority or if you abstain on one or more agenda items, the effect would be as follows:

Proposal 1:

Broker non-votes would not be votes cast and therefore would not be counted either for or against. As a result, broker non-votes would have no effect. If you choose to abstain in the election of directors, the abstention will have no effect.

Proposal 2:

If you choose to abstain in the ratification of the Audit Committee’s selection of the independent accountants for 2011, the abstention will have no effect.

Proposal 3 (including Proposal 3(a), Proposal 3(b), Proposal 3(c) and Proposal 3(d)):

If you choose to abstain with respect to the amendments to the Restated Certificate of Incorporation (“Certificate”) and the Amended and Restated By-laws (“By-laws”) to remove supermajority vote requirements for removing any director from office, in the case of Proposal 3(a); for certain business combinations, in the case of Proposal 3(b); for amending certain provisions of the Certificate, in the case of Proposal 3(c); and/or for amending certain provisions of the By-laws, in the case of Proposal 3(d); it will have the same effect in each case as a vote against the proposal. Broker non-votes will have the same effect in each case as a vote against the proposal.

Proposal 4:

The vote on executive compensation is an advisory vote and the results will not be binding on the board of directors or the company. The board of directors will review the results and take them into consideration when making future decisions regarding executive compensation. If you choose to abstain, the abstention will have no effect. Broker non-votes would not be votes cast and therefore would not be counted either for or against. As a result, broker non-votes would have no effect.

Proposal 5:

The vote on the frequency of the vote on executive compensation is an advisory vote and the results will not be binding on the board of directors or the company. The board of directors will review the results and take them into consideration when making future decisions regarding executive compensation. If you choose to abstain, the abstention will have no effect. Broker non-votes would not be votes cast and therefore would not be counted either for or against. As a result, broker non-votes would have no effect.

Proposal 6 (including Proposal 6(a) and Proposal 6(b)):

If you choose to abstain in the approval of the material terms of the performance goals in the Pitney Bowes Key Employee Incentive Plan pursuant to Internal Revenue Code Section 162(m), in the case of Proposal 6(a) and/or the terms of the performance goals in the Pitney Bowes Inc. 2007 Stock Plan, in the case of Proposal 6(b), the abstention will have no effect. Broker non-votes would not be votes cast and therefore would not be counted either for or against. As a result, broker non-votes would have no effect.

How do Dividend Reinvestment Plan participants or employees with shares in the 401(k) plans vote by proxy?

If you are a stockholder of record and participate in the company’s Dividend Reinvestment Plan, or the company’s employee 401(k) plans, your proxy includes the number of shares acquired through the Dividend Reinvestment Plan and/or credited to your 401(k) plan account.

Shares held in the company’s 401(k) plans are voted by the plan trustee in accordance with voting instructions received from plan participants. The plans direct the trustee to vote shares for which no instructions are

5

received in the same proportion (for, against or abstain) indicated by the voting instructions given by participants in the plans.

Who will count the votes?

Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc. (“Broadridge”) will tabulate the votes and act as Inspector of Election.

Multiple Copies of Annual Report to Stockholders

In addition to furnishing proxy materials over the Internet, the company takes advantage of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s “householding” rules to reduce the delivery cost of materials. Under such rules, only one Notice or, if paper copies are requested, only one proxy statement, annual report to stockholders including the report on Form 10-K are delivered to multiple stockholders sharing an address unless the company has received contrary instructions from one or more of the stockholders. If a stockholder sharing an address wishes to receive a separate Notice or copy of the proxy materials, he or she may so request by contacting Broadridge Householding Department by phone at 1-800-579-1639 or by mail to Broadridge Householding Department, 51 Mercedes Way, Edgewood, New York 11717. A separate copy will be promptly provided following receipt of a stockholder’s request, and such stockholder will receive separate materials in the future. Any stockholder currently sharing an address with another stockholder but nonetheless receiving separate copies of the materials may request delivery of a single copy in the future by contacting Broadridge Householding Department at the number or address shown above. Additional copies of our annual report to stockholders, including the report on Form 10-K or proxy statement will be sent to stockholders free of charge upon written request to Investor Relations, Pitney Bowes Inc., 1 Elmcroft Road, MSC 63-02, Stamford, CT 06926-0700. If you own shares of stock through a bank, broker, trustee or other nominee and receive more than one Pitney Bowes annual report, please contact that entity to eliminate duplicate mailings.

Electronic Delivery of Annual Report and Proxy Statement

This proxy statement and our 2010 annual report may be viewed online at www.proxyvote.com. If you are a stockholder of record and receive the annual meeting material by mail, you can elect to receive future annual reports and proxy statements electronically or by following the instructions provided if you grant your proxy by Internet or by telephone. If you choose this option, you will receive an e-mail for future meetings listing the website locations of these documents and your choice will remain in effect until you notify us that you wish to resume mail delivery of these documents. If you hold your Pitney Bowes stock through a bank, broker, trustee or other nominee, you should refer to the information provided by that entity for instructions on how to elect this option.

Stockholder Proposals and Other Business for the 2012 Annual Meeting

If a stockholder wants to submit a proposal for inclusion in the company’s proxy material for the 2012 annual meeting, which is scheduled to be held on Monday, May 14, 2012, it must be received by the corporate secretary by November 26, 2011. Also, under our By-laws, a stockholder can present other business at an annual meeting, including the nomination of candidates for director, only if written notice of the business or candidates is received by the corporate secretary by February 9, 2012. There are other procedural requirements in the By-laws pertaining to stockholder proposals and director nominations. The By-laws are posted on the company’s Corporate Governance website at www.pb.com under the caption “Our Company-Leadership & Governance.”

Corporate Governance

Stockholders are encouraged to visit the company’s Corporate Governance website at www.pb.com under the caption “Our Company” for information concerning the company’s governance practices, including the Governance Principles of the Board of Directors, charters of the committees of the board, and the directors’ Code of Business Conduct and Ethics. The company’s Business Practices Guidelines, which is the company’s Code of Ethics for employees, including the company’s chief executive officer and chief financial officer, is also available on the company’s Leadership & Governance website. We intend to disclose future amendments or waivers to certain provisions of the directors’ Code of Business Conduct and Ethics or the Business Practices Guidelines on our website within four business days following the date of such amendment or waiver.

Board of Directors

Leadership Structure

The company’s chief executive officer also serves as the chairman of the board of directors. The board of directors has a Lead Director who is an independent member of the board of directors. In determining the appropriate leadership structure, the board of directors considered a number of factors, including the

6

effectiveness of the role of independent Lead Director, the candor and dynamics of discussion among the directors and between directors and management, the facility with which directors influence the content of board meeting agendas, and the significance attributed by the company’s external constituents in the worldwide postal markets to the title of chairman.

The board of directors established well-defined responsibilities, qualifications and selection criteria, and term and term limits with respect to the position of Lead Director. This information is set forth in detail in the Governance Principles of the Board of Directors, which can be found on the company’s website at www.pb.com under the caption “Our Company-Leadership & Governance.” A description of the Lead Director responsibilities and characteristics appears below. Additional information may be found in the Governance Principles of the Board of Directors.

The Lead Director should be a member of the Governance Committee. In cases where the board of directors appoints a Lead Director who is not a member of the Governance Committee, the Lead Director will be appointed as an additional member of the Governance Committee to serve during his or her term(s) as Lead Director.

In May 2008, the board of directors appointed James H. Keyes, one of the independent directors, to serve as the board’s Lead Director for an initial term of two years. In May 2010, the board of directors appointed Mr. Keyes to serve as Lead Director for an additional one-year term.

The board of directors believes that the leadership structure it has chosen for Pitney Bowes is appropriate in light of the constructive and candid nature of the discussion at board and committee meetings, as well as the directors’ freedom to participate in the agenda-setting process, the directors’ access to members of senior management outside the presence of the chief executive officer, and the robust role of the Lead Director.

Responsibilities and Characteristics of the Lead Director

The Lead Director chairs meetings of the board of directors in executive session; acts as chairman of the board in situations where the chairman and chief executive officer is unable to serve in that capacity; briefs the chief executive officer, as needed, following discussions by the board in executive session; reviews and provides comment, as appropriate, concerning proposed agendas for meetings of the board of directors; reviews and provides comment, as appropriate, on draft minutes of board of directors meetings prior to their distribution to the full board; communicates informally with the other directors between meetings of the board to foster free and open dialog among directors; reviews and responds, as appropriate, in accordance with guidelines established by the board of directors to communications from stockholders and other interested parties; partners with the Chair of the Governance Committee to provide performance and other feedback to the chief executive officer following the annual joint meeting of the Governance and Executive Compensation Committees; and partners with the Chair of the Executive Compensation Committee to provide compensation information to the chief executive officer following meetings of the board of directors where compensation action is taken with respect to the chief executive officer.

The Lead Director must exhibit the following characteristics and skills: diplomacy, sound judgment, the ability to work collaboratively, to communicate effectively, with clarity and candor, and to recognize and act in accordance with an appropriate balance between (i) active mentor to the chief executive officer and communications aide to the board of directors, and (ii) maintaining an oversight (rather than management) perspective as a member of the board of directors.

Role of the Board of Directors in Risk Oversight

The board of the directors is responsible for oversight of the company’s risk assessment and risk management process. The enterprise risk management process was established to identify, assess, monitor and address risks across the entire company and its business operations. Management is responsible for risk management, including identification and mitigation planning. The description, assessments, mitigation plan and status for each enterprise risk are developed and monitored by management, including management “risk owners” and an oversight management risk committee.

Oversight responsibility for each of the company’s identified enterprise wide risks is assigned, upon the recommendation of the Governance Committee and approval by the board of directors, to either a specific committee of the board, or to the full board. Each committee, with the exception of the Executive Committee, is responsible for oversight of one or more of the company’s risks. The assignments are made based upon, in each case, the type of enterprise risk and the linkage of the subject matter to the responsibilities of the committee as described in its charter or the nature of the enterprise risk warranting review by the full board. For example, the Finance Committee oversees risks relating to liquidity, and the Audit Committee oversees risks relating to internal controls. Each enterprise risk and its related mitigation plan is reviewed by either the board of directors or the designated board committee on an annual basis.

The Audit Committee is responsible for overseeing and reviewing on an ongoing basis the overall process by which management identifies and manages the company’s risks. On an annual basis the board of directors receives a report on the status of all enterprise risks and their related plans.

7

Management monitors the company’s risks and determines, from time to time, whether new risks should be added either due to changes in the external environment, changes in the company’s business, or for other reasons. Management also determines whether previously identified risks should be combined with new, emerging risks.

The process for the board’s oversight of mitigation of the company’s enterprise risks was developed in 2006 by the Governance Committee and presented to the board of directors for review and adoption and is reviewed and updated as appropriate from time to time.

Director Independence

The board of directors has conducted its annual review of the independence of each director under the New York Stock Exchange listing standards and the standards of independence, which are set forth in the Governance Principles of the Board of Directors which are available on the company’s website at www.pb.com under the caption “Our Company-Leadership & Governance.”

Based upon its review, the board of directors has concluded in its business judgment that the following directors are independent: Rodney C. Adkins, Linda G. Alvarado, Anne M. Busquet, Anne Sutherland Fuchs, Ernie Green, James H. Keyes, Eduardo R. Menascé, Michael I. Roth, David L. Shedlarz, David B. Snow, Jr. and Robert E. Weissman.

In making this determination, the board of directors considered that in the ordinary course of business, transactions may occur between Pitney Bowes and its subsidiaries and companies or other entities at which some of our directors are executive officers. Under the company’s independence standards, business transactions meeting the following criteria are not considered to be material transactions that would impair a director’s independence.

The director is an employee or executive officer of another company that does business with Pitney Bowes and our annual payments to or from that company in each of the last three fiscal years are in an amount less than the greater of $1 million or two percent of the annual consolidated gross revenues of the company by which the director is employed.

During 2010, Messrs. Adkins, Roth, and Snow were employed at corporations with which Pitney Bowes engages in ordinary course of business transactions. We reviewed all transactions with each of these entities and determined these transactions were made in the ordinary course of business and were below the threshold set forth in our director independence standards referenced above.

Communications with the Board of Directors

The board of directors has established procedures by which stockholders and other interested parties may communicate with the Lead Director, the Audit Committee chair, the independent directors, or the board. Such parties may communicate with the Lead Director via e-mail at lead.director@pb.com, with the Audit Committee chair via e-mail at audit.chair@pb.com or they may write to one or more directors, care of the Corporate Secretary, Pitney Bowes Inc., 1 Elmcroft Road, MSC 65-19, Stamford, CT 06926-0700.

The board of directors has instructed the corporate secretary to assist the Lead Director, the Audit Committee chair and the board in reviewing all electronic and written communications, as described above, as follows:

Except as provided above, the corporate secretary will forward written communications to the full board of directors or to any individual director or directors to whom the communication is directed unless the communication is threatening, illegal or similarly inappropriate. Advertisements, solicitations for periodical or other subscriptions, and other similar communications generally will not be forwarded to the directors.

It is the longstanding practice and the policy of the board of directors that the directors attend the annual meeting of stockholders. All directors attended the May 2010 annual meeting.

8

Board Committees and Meeting Attendance

During 2010, each director attended at least 75% of the total number of board meetings and meetings held by the board committees on which he or she served. The board of directors met seven times in 2010, and the independent directors met in executive session, without any member of management in attendance, six times.

Members of the board of directors serve on one or more of the seven committees described below. Mr. Martin serves as the chair of the Executive Committee. The members of all other board committees are independent directors pursuant to New York Stock Exchange independence standards. Each committee of the board operates in accordance with a charter. All board committee charters are posted on the company’s website at www.pb.com under the caption “Our Company-Leadership & Governance” and are available in print to stockholders who request them. The members of each of the board committees are set forth in the following chart. As the need arises, the board may utilize ad hoc committees of the board to consider specific issues.

The Audit Committee, which met six times in 2010, monitors the financial reporting standards and practices of the company and the company’s internal financial controls to confirm compliance with the policies and objectives established by the board of directors and oversees the company’s ethics and compliance programs. The committee appoints independent accountants to conduct the annual audits, and discusses with the company’s independent accountants the scope of their examinations, with particular attention to areas where either the committee or the independent accountants believe special emphasis should be directed. The committee reviews the annual financial statements and independent accountant’s report, invites the independent accountant’s recommendations on internal controls and on other matters, and reviews the evaluation given and corrective action taken by management. It reviews the independence of the independent accountants and approves their fees. It also reviews the company’s internal accounting controls and the scope and results of the company’s internal auditing activities, and submits reports and proposals on these matters to the board. The committee is also responsible for overseeing the process by which management identifies and manages the company’s risks. In addition, it oversees management of one or more specific risks as described on pages 7 and 8 of this proxy statement under the title “Role of the Board in Risk Oversight.” The committee meets in executive session with the independent accountants and internal auditor at each committee meeting. The committee’s charter, which was last amended in February 2010, is available on the company’s website at www.pb.com under the heading “Our Company-Leadership & Governance.”

The board of directors has determined that the following members of the Audit Committee, James H. Keyes, Michael I. Roth, David L. Shedlarz and Robert E. Weissman, are “audit committee financial experts,”

9

as that term is defined by regulation of the Securities and Exchange Commission. All audit committee members are independent as independence for audit committee members is defined in the New York Stock Exchange standards.

The Corporate Responsibility Committee, which met three times in 2010, monitored the company’s corporate social responsibility, workforce relations, brand reputation, procurement, product stewardship, environmental health and safety, and operational continuity. In addition, it oversaw management of one or more specific risks as described further under the heading “Role of the Board in Risk Oversight” on pages 7 and 8 of this proxy statement.

The Executive Committee, which met once in 2010, can act, to the extent permitted by applicable law and the company’s Restated Certificate of Incorporation and its Bylaws, on all matters concerning management of the business which may arise between scheduled board of directors meetings and as described in the committee’s charter.

The Executive Compensation Committee, or the Committee, which met eight times in 2010, is responsible for the company’s executive compensation policies and programs. The Committee chair frequently consults with, and the Committee periodically meets in executive session with, Frederic W. Cook & Co., Inc., which we refer to as FWC, its outside consultant. The Committee recommends to all of the independent directors for final approval policies, programs and specific actions regarding the compensation of the chairman and the chief executive officer, and approves the same for all of the executive officers of the company. The Committee also recommends the “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” for inclusion in the company’s proxy statement, in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission, and reviews and approves allocations of shares in the company’s employee stock plans in connection with the granting of stock options and other stock awards. In addition, it oversees management of one or more specific risks as described further under “Role of the Board in Risk Oversight” on pages 7 and 8 of this proxy statement. The Committee’s charter, which was last amended in February 2011, is available on the company’s website at www.pb.com under the heading “Our Company-Leadership & Governance.”

The Finance Committee, which met five times in 2010, reviews the company’s financial condition and evaluates significant financial policies and activities, oversees the company’s major retirement programs, advises management and recommends financial action to the board of directors. The committee’s duties include monitoring the company’s current and projected financial condition, reviewing and approving major investment decisions, and overseeing the financial operations of the company’s retirement, savings, and post-retirement benefit plans and retirement funds to confirm that plan liabilities are adequately funded and plan assets are prudently managed. The committee recommends for approval by the board of directors the establishment of new plans and any amendments that materially affect cost, benefit coverages, or liabilities of the plans. In addition, it oversees management of one or more specific risks as described further under “Role of the Board in Risk Oversight” on pages 7 and 8 of this proxy statement.

The Governance Committee, which met six times in 2010, recommends nominees for election to the board of directors, determines the duties of and recommends membership in the board committees, reviews executives’ potential for growth, reviews and recommends to the board of directors the amount and form of compensation to non-employee members of the board, and, with the chief executive officer, is responsible for succession planning and ensuring management continuity. The Governance Principles of the Board of Directors, which are posted on the company’s website at www.pb.com under the caption “Our Company-Leadership & Governance,” include additional information about succession planning. The committee reviews and evaluates the effectiveness of board administration and its governing documents, and reviews and monitors company programs and policies relating to directors. The committee reviews related-person transactions in accordance with company policy. In addition, it oversees management of one or more specific risks as described further under “Role of the Board in Risk Oversight” on pages 7 and 8 of this proxy statement.

The Governance Committee generally identifies qualified candidates for nomination for election to the board of directors from a variety of sources, including other board members, management, and stockholders. The committee also may retain a third-party search firm to assist the committee members in identifying and evaluating potential nominees to the board of directors.

Stockholders wishing to recommend a candidate for consideration by the Governance Committee may do so by writing to the Corporate Secretary, Pitney Bowes Inc., 1 Elmcroft Road, MSC 65-19, Stamford, CT 06926-0700. Recommendations submitted for consideration by the committee in preparation for the 2012 annual meeting of stockholders must be received by January 3, 2012, and must contain the following information: (i) the name and address of the stockholder; (ii) the name and address of the person to be nominated; (iii) a representation that the stockholder is a holder of the company’s stock entitled to vote at the meeting; (iv) a statement in support of the stockholder’s recommendation, including a description of the

10

candidate’s qualifications; (v) information regarding the candidate as would be required to be included in a proxy statement filed in accordance with the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission; and (vi) the candidate’s written, signed consent to serve if elected.

The Governance Committee evaluates candidates recommended by stockholders based on the same criteria it uses to evaluate candidates from other sources. The Governance Principles of the Board of Directors, which are posted on the company’s Corporate Governance website at www.pb.com under the caption “Our Company-Leadership & Governance,” include a description of director qualifications. A discussion of the specific experience and qualifications identified by the committee for directors and nominees may be found under “Director Qualifications” on page 17 of this proxy statement.

If the Governance Committee believes that a potential candidate may be appropriate for recommendation to the board of directors, there is generally a mutual exploration process, during which the committee seeks to learn more about the candidate’s qualifications, background and interest in serving on the board of directors, and the candidate has the opportunity to learn more about the company, the board, and its governance practices. The final selection of the board’s nominees is within the sole discretion of the board of directors.

Alternatively, as referenced on page 6 of this proxy statement, stockholders intending to appear at a stockholders’ meeting in order to nominate a candidate for election by the stockholders at the meeting (in cases where the board of directors does not intend to nominate the candidate or where the Governance Committee was not requested to consider his or her candidacy) must comply with the procedures in Article II, Section 6 of the company’s By-laws. The By-laws are posted on the company’s Corporate Governance website at www.pb.com under the caption “Our Company-Leadership & Governance.”

The Technology Committee, which met two times in 2010, monitored the company’s information technology strategy, significant product development activities (including software initiatives), and new technology investments. In addition, it oversaw management of one or more specific risks as described further under “Role of the Board in Risk Oversight” on pages 7 and 8 of this proxy statement.

Revised Board Committee Structure for 2011

On February 14, 2011, the board of directors approved a change in the board committee structure, effective as of March 1, 2011. The Governance Committee recommended the change in structure to reduce the administrative burdens of supporting seven committees while continuing to support the effectiveness of the committees’ oversight role and support of the board functions. The Corporate Responsibility Committee and the Technology Committee were discontinued and matters overseen by them, as appropriate, were reassigned to other committees or to the full board. As of March 1, 2011, members of the board of directors will serve on the committees as described below.

11

Directors’ Compensation

Role of Governance Committee in Determining Director Compensation. In accordance with the Governance Principles of the Board, the Governance Committee reviews and recommends to the board of directors the amount and form of compensation to non-employee members of the board of directors. The Governance Committee reviews the director compensation policy periodically and consults from time to time with a compensation consultant, selected and retained by the committee, as to the competitiveness of the program. In 2006, the Governance Committee reviewed peer group and market data provided by Steven Hall & Partners in considering and determining non-employee director compensation effective January 1, 2007. The following is a summary of the director compensation program.

Directors’ Fees. During 2010, each director who was not an employee of the company received an annual fee of $65,000 and a meeting fee of $1,500 for each board and committee meeting attended. Committee chairs (except for the Audit Committee chair) receive an additional $1,500 for each committee meeting that they chair, and the Audit Committee chair receives an additional $2,000 for each Audit Committee meeting chaired. The Lead Director receives an additional annual retainer of $10,000. All directors are reimbursed for their out-of-pocket expenses incurred in attending board and committee meetings.

The board of directors maintains directors’ stock ownership guidelines, requiring, among other things, that each director accumulate and retain a minimum of 7,500 shares of company common stock within five years of becoming a director of Pitney Bowes. All members of the board of directors are in compliance with these guidelines. The directors’ stock ownership guidelines are available on the company’s Corporate Governance website at www.pb.com under the caption “Our Company-Leadership & Governance.”

Directors’ Stock Plan. Under the Directors’ Stock Plan, in 2010 each director who was not an employee of the company received an award of 2,200 shares of restricted stock which are fully vested upon grant. The shares carry full voting and dividend rights but, unless certain conditions are met, may not be transferred or alienated until the later of (i) termination of service as a director, or, if earlier, the date of a change of control (as defined in the Directors’ Stock Plan), and (ii) the expiration of the six-month period following the grant of such shares. The Directors’ Stock Plan permits certain dispositions of stock granted under the restricted stock program provided that the director effecting the disposition had accumulated and will retain 7,500 shares of common stock. Permitted dispositions are limited to: (i) transfer to a family member or family trust or partnership; and (ii) donations to charity after the expiration of six months from date of grant. The original restrictions would continue to apply to the donee except that a charitable donee would not be bound by the restriction relating to termination of service from the board of directors.

Ownership of shares granted under the Directors’ Stock Plan is reflected in the table on page 15 of this proxy statement showing security ownership of directors and executive officers.

Directors’ Deferred Incentive Savings Plan. The company maintains a Directors’ Deferred Incentive Savings Plan under which directors may defer all or part of the cash portion of their compensation. Deferred amounts will be notionally “invested” in any combination of several institutional investment funds. The investment choices available to directors under this plan are the same as those offered to employees under the company’s 401(k) plan. Deferral elections made with respect to plan years prior to 2004 also included as an investment choice the ability to invest in options to purchase common stock of the company.

Stock options selected by directors as an investment vehicle for deferred compensation were granted through the Directors’ Stock Plan. The Directors’ Stock Plan permits the exercise of stock options granted after October 11, 1999 during the full remaining term of the stock option by directors who have terminated service on the board of directors, provided that service on the board is terminated: (i) after ten years of service on the board; (ii) due to director’s death or disability; or (iii) due to the director having attained mandatory directors’ retirement age. The stock options may be exercised for three months following termination for any other reason. The Directors’ Stock Plan also permits the donation of vested stock options, regardless of the date of grant, to family members and family trusts or partnerships. All outstanding stock options are fully vested.

Directors’ Retirement Plan. The company’s Directors’ Retirement Plan was discontinued, and the benefits previously earned by directors were frozen as of May 12, 1997.

Under this plan, there is no benefit paid to a director who served for less than five years as of May 12, 1997. A director who had met the five-year minimum vesting requirement as of May 12, 1997 will receive an annual retirement benefit calculated as 50% of the director’s retainer in effect as of May 12, 1997, and a director with more than five years of service at retirement will receive an additional ten percent of such retainer for each year of service over five, to a maximum of 100% of such retainer for ten or more years of service. The annual retainer fee in effect as of May 12, 1997, was

12

$30,000. The annual retirement benefit is paid for life. Linda G. Alvarado is the only current director who is eligible to receive a retirement benefit under the plan after termination of service on the board of directors. She had completed five years of service as a director as of the date the plan was frozen, and will therefore receive an annual benefit of $15,000.

13

Certain Relationships and Related-Person Transactions

The board of directors has a written “Policy on Approval and Ratification of Related-Person Transactions” which states that the Governance Committee of the board of directors of Pitney Bowes Inc. is responsible for reviewing and approving any related-person transactions between Pitney Bowes and its directors, nominees for director, executive officers, beneficial owners of more than five percent of any class of Pitney Bowes voting stock and their “immediate family members” as defined by the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“related persons”). It is the expectation and policy of the board of directors that all related-person transactions will be at arms’ length and on terms that are fair to the company.

Under the related-person transaction approval policy, any newly proposed transaction between Pitney Bowes and a related person must be submitted to the Governance Committee for approval if the amount involved in the transaction is greater than $120,000. Any related-person transactions that have not been pre-approved by the Governance Committee must be submitted for ratification as soon as they are identified. Ongoing related-person transactions are reviewed on an annual basis. The material facts of the transaction and the related person’s interest in the transaction must be disclosed to the Governance Committee.

If the proposed transaction involves a related person who is a Pitney Bowes director or an immediate family member of a director, that director may not participate in the deliberations or vote regarding approval or ratification of the transaction but may be counted for the purposes of determining a quorum.

The following related-person transactions do not require approval by the Governance Committee:

The Governance Committee may delegate authority to approve related-person transactions to one or more of its members. The member to whom such authority is delegated must report, for informational purposes only, any approval or ratification decisions to the Governance Committee at its next scheduled meeting.

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

During 2010, there were no compensation committee interlocks and no insider participation in Executive Compensation Committee decisions that were required to be reported under the rules and regulations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

14

15

Beneficial Ownership

The only persons or groups known to the company to be the beneficial owners of more than five percent of any class of the company’s voting securities are reflected in the chart below. The following information is based solely upon Schedules 13G and amendments thereto filed by the entities shown with the Securities and Exchange Commission as of the date appearing below.

16

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

Directors and persons who are considered “officers” of the company for purposes of Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and greater than ten percent stockholders (“Reporting Persons”) are required to file reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission showing their holdings of and transactions in the company’s securities. It is generally the practice of the company to file the forms on behalf of its Reporting Persons who are directors or officers. The company believes that all such forms have been timely filed for 2010.

Proposal 1: Election of Directors

Director Qualifications

The board of directors believes that, as a whole, the board should include individuals with a diverse range of experience to give the board depth and breadth in the mix of skills represented for the board to oversee management on behalf of the company’s stockholders. In addition, the board of directors believes that there are certain attributes that each director should possess, as described below. Therefore, the board of directors and the Governance Committee consider the qualifications of directors and nominees both individually and in the context of the overall composition of the board of directors.

The board of directors, with the assistance of the Governance Committee, is responsible for assembling appropriate experience and capabilities within its membership as a whole, including financial literacy and expertise needed for the Audit Committee as required by applicable law and New York Stock Exchange listing standards. Among the other criteria applicable to all directors, which are set forth in the Governance Principles of the Board of Directors, are integrity and ethics, business acumen, sound judgment, and the ability to commit sufficient time and attention to the activities of the board of directors, as well as the absence of any conflicts with the company’s interests. The Governance Committee is responsible for reviewing and revising, as needed, criteria for the selection of directors. It also reviews and updates, from time to time, the board candidate profile used in the context of a director search, in light of the current and anticipated needs of the company and the experience and talent then represented on the board of directors. The Governance Committee reviews the qualifications of director candidates in light of the criteria approved by the board of directors and recommends candidates to the board for election by the stockholders at the Annual Stockholders Meeting.

The Governance Committee seeks to include individuals with a variety of occupational and personal backgrounds on the board of directors in order to obtain a range of viewpoints and perspectives and to enhance the diversity of the board of directors in such areas as experience and geography, as well as race, gender, ethnicity and age.

Among other things, the board of directors has determined that it is important that the board should include members with the following skills and experiences:

The Governance Committee assesses the effectiveness of its criteria when evaluating and recommending new candidates.

Each director brings experience and skills that complement those of the other directors. The board of directors believes that all the directors nominated for election or continuing to serve are highly qualified, and have the attributes, skills and experience required for service on the board of directors. Additional information about each director is included with biographical information for each appearing below.

17

Nominees for Election

Prior to the 2010 Annual Meeting of Stockholders our board of directors was divided into three classes. Each class consisted, as nearly as possible, of one-third of the total number of directors, and each class had a three-year term ending in successive years. At the 2010 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, a proposal by our board of directors to amend the company’s Certificate and the company’s By-laws to phase out the classification of the board of directors, to provide instead for the annual election of directors, and to make such other conforming and technical changes to the Certificate and By-laws as may be necessary or appropriate was approved by the stockholders. The amended Certificate effecting such changes was filed with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware on May 12, 2010. The amended Certificate provides for the annual election of directors beginning at the 2011 Annual Meeting of Stockholders. However, any director elected by the stockholders of the company to a three-year term prior to the 2011 Annual Meeting of Stockholders may complete the term to which he or she has been elected.

The board of directors presently has twelve members. There are four directors whose term of office expires in 2011. Each of the nominees for election at the 2011 Annual Meeting of Stockholders is currently a director of the company and was selected by the board of directors as a nominee in accordance with the recommendation of the Governance Committee. If elected at the 2011 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, each of the nominees would serve until the 2012 Annual Meeting of Stockholders and until his successor is elected and has qualified, or until such director’s death, resignation or removal.

Ms. Busquet, Ms. Fuchs, Messrs. Keyes, Shedlarz and Snow were elected in 2009 to three-year terms expiring at the 2012 annual meeting.

Ms. Alvarado, Messrs. Green, McFarlane and Menascé were elected last year to three-year terms expiring at the 2013 annual meeting. After Mr. McFarlane’s death in December 2010, the board of directors was reduced to twelve members.

For the 2011 annual meeting, the Governance Committee recommended to the board of directors, and the board approved, the nomination of Messrs. Adkins, Martin, Roth and Weissman to one-year terms expiring at the 2012 annual meeting.

Information about each nominee for director and each incumbent director, including the nominee’s or incumbent’s age, as of March 1, 2011, is set forth beginning on page 19 of this proxy statement. Unless otherwise indicated, each nominee or incumbent has held his or her present position for at least five years.

Should you choose not to vote for a nominee, you may list on the proxy the name of the nominee for whom you choose not to vote and mark your proxy under proposal 1 for all other nominees, or grant your proxy by telephone or the Internet as described on the proxy voting instruction card. Should any nominee become unable to accept nomination or election as a director (which is not now anticipated), the persons named in the enclosed proxy will vote for such substitute nominee as may be selected by the board of directors, unless the size of the board is reduced. At the annual meeting, proxies cannot be voted for more than the four director nominees.

Vote Required

In accordance with the company’s By-laws, in an uncontested election, a majority of the votes cast is required for the election of directors. This means that any nominee for director in this election who fails to receive a majority of votes cast in the affirmative must tender his or her resignation for consideration by the Governance Committee. The Governance Committee will recommend to the board of directors the action to be taken with respect to such offer of resignation. The board of directors will act on the Governance Committee’s recommendation and publicly disclose its decision within 90 days from the date of the certification of the election results.

18

The board of directors recommends that stockholders vote FOR the election of the following nominees:

NOMINEES FOR ELECTION TO TERMS EXPIRING AT THE 2012 ANNUAL MEETING

19

INCUMBENT DIRECTORS WHOSE TERMS EXPIRE AT THE 2013 ANNUAL MEETING

INCUMBENT DIRECTORS WHOSE TERMS EXPIRE AT THE 2012 ANNUAL MEETING

20

21

Report of the Audit Committee

The Audit Committee functions pursuant to a charter that is reviewed annually and was last amended in February 2010. The committee represents and assists the board of directors in overseeing the financial reporting process and the integrity of the company’s financial statements. The committee is responsible for retaining the independent accountants and pre-approving the services they will perform, and for reviewing the performance of the independent accountants and the company’s internal audit function. The board of directors, in its business judgment, has determined that all five of the members of the committee are “independent,” as required by applicable listing standards of the New York Stock Exchange.

In the performance of its responsibilities, the committee has reviewed and discussed the audited financial statements with management and the independent accountants. The committee has also discussed with the independent accountants the matters required to be discussed under the rules adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. Finally, the committee has received the written disclosures and the letter from the independent accountants required by applicable requirements of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding the independent accountant’s communications with the audit committee concerning independence, and has discussed with the independent accountants their independence.

Based upon the review of information received and discussions as described in this report, the committee recommended to the board of directors that the audited financial statements be included in the company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 28, 2011.

By the Audit Committee of the board of directors,

David L. Shedlarz, Chair
Anne M. Busquet
James H. Keyes
Michael I. Roth
Robert E. Weissman

Proposal 2: Ratification of Independent Accountants for 2011

The Audit Committee has appointed Pricewaterhouse-Coopers LLP (“PricewaterhouseCoopers”) as the independent accountants for Pitney Bowes for 2011. Although not required by law, as a matter of good corporate governance this matter is being submitted to the stockholders for ratification. If this proposal is not ratified at the annual meeting by the affirmative vote of a majority of the votes cast, the Audit Committee intends to reconsider its appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers as its independent accountants. PricewaterhouseCoopers has no direct or indirect financial interest in Pitney Bowes or any of its subsidiaries. A representative from PricewaterhouseCoopers will attend the annual meeting and will be available to respond to appropriate questions and will have the opportunity to make a statement if he or she desires to do so.

Principal Accountant Fees and Services

Aggregate fees billed for professional services rendered for the company by PricewaterhouseCoopers for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, were (in millions):

The Audit fees for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 were for services rendered for the audits of the consolidated financial statements and internal control over financial reporting of the company and selected subsidiaries, statutory audits, issuance of comfort letters, consents, income tax provision procedures, and assistance with review of documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The Audit-Related fees for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 were for assurance and related services related to employee benefit plan audits, due diligence related to mergers and acquisitions, and consultations concerning financial accounting and reporting standards.

The Tax fees for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 were for services related to tax compliance, including the preparation and/or review of tax returns and claims for refunds.

The Audit Committee has adopted policies and procedures to pre-approve all services to be performed by PricewaterhouseCoopers. Specifically the committee’s policy is to pre-approve the use of PricewaterhouseCoopers for audit services as well as detailed, specific types of services within the following categories of audit-related and non-audit services: merger and acquisition due diligence and audit services; employee benefit plan audits; tax services; and procedures required to meet certain regulatory requirements. The committee will not approve any service prohibited by regulation and does not anticipate approving any service in addition to the categories

22

described above. In each case, the committee’s policy is to pre-approve a specific annual budget by category for such audit, audit-related and tax services which the company anticipates obtaining from PricewaterhouseCoopers, and has required management to report the actual fees (versus budgeted fees) to the committee on a periodic basis throughout the year. In addition, any new, unbudgeted engagement for audit services or within one of the other pre-approved categories described above must be pre-approved by the committee or its chair. In 2010, all services provided by PricewaterhouseCoopers were pre- approved and no accounting services were approved through a waiver of the pre-approval requirements.

Vote Required

Ratification of the appointment of Pitney Bowes’ independent accountants requires the affirmative vote of a majority of votes cast.

The board of directors recommends that stockholders vote FOR the ratification of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as the company’s independent accountants for 2011.

Proposal 3: Amendments to the Restated Certificate of Incorporation and Amended and Restated By-laws to Remove Supermajority Vote Requirements for the Following Actions:

Proposal 3(a): Removing any director from office

Proposal 3(b): Certain business combinations

Proposal 3(c): Amending certain provisions of the Certificate

Proposal 3(d): Amending certain provisions of the By-laws

On February 14, 2011, the board of directors voted to approve, and to recommend to our stockholders that they approve, amendments to the company’s Certificate and the company’s By-laws to remove the supermajority voting requirements described below and replace them with majority vote requirements.

Subject to certain exceptions, currently the Certificate and the By-laws require the affirmative vote of the holders of at least 80% of the voting power of all shares of the company entitled to vote generally in the election of directors, voting together as a single class (the “Supermajority Requirement”), for the following corporate actions:

Supermajority vote requirements are intended to provide protection against self-interested action by large stockholders and to encourage a person seeking control of a company to negotiate with its board of directors to reach terms that are fair and provide the best results for all stockholders. However, as corporate governance standards have evolved, some investors and commentators now view these provisions as limiting a board’s accountability to stockholders and the ability of stockholders to effectively participate in corporate governance. At the 2010 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, holders of our voting stock approved a stockholder proposal requesting the company take the steps necessary to remove the supermajority vote requirements in the Certificate and the By-laws.

The board of directors considered the arguments in favor of and against removing the Supermajority Requirements from the Certificate and the By-laws, including the views of stockholders who approved the stockholder proposal last year, and determined that it is in the best interests of the company and its stockholders to remove the Supermajority Requirements pursuant to the amendments to the Certificate and the By-laws presented in the following proposals. The voting requirements in the Certificate exclusively related to the company’s preferred stock or preference stock would not be amended.

Proposal 3(a): Removing any director from office

Stockholders are requested in this Proposal 3(a) to approve the amendment of Article Seventh, Section (d) of the Certificate and Article II, Section 5 of the By-laws to remove the Supermajority Requirement for removing any director from office and replace it with the requirement of the affirmative vote of the holders of at least a majority of the voting power of all shares of the company entitled to vote generally in the election of directors, voting together as a single class.

23

Proposal 3(b): Certain business combinations

Stockholders are requested in this Proposal 3(b) to approve the amendment of Article Tenth, Section 1(A) of the Certificate to remove the Supermajority Requirement for certain business combinations and replace it with the requirement of the affirmative vote of the holders of at least a majority of the voting power of all shares of the company entitled to vote generally in the election of directors, voting together as a single class. The amended voting requirement would continue to be required in addition to any affirmative vote required by law or the Certificate.

Proposal 3(c): Amending certain provisions of the Certificate

Stockholders are requested in this Proposal 3(c) to approve the amendment of Article Seventh, Section (e), Article Eighth, Article Ninth and Article Tenth, Section 6 of the Certificate to remove the Supermajority Requirements for altering, amending, adopting any provision inconsistent with or repealing certain provisions in the Certificate related to:

The proposed amendment would replace the Supermajority Requirements for the forgoing actions with the requirement of the affirmative vote of the holders of at least a majority of the voting power of all shares of the company entitled to vote generally in the election of directors, voting together as a single class.

Proposal 3(d): Amending certain provisions of the By-laws

Stockholders are requested in this Proposal 3(d) to approve the amendment of Article Ninth of the Certificate to remove the Supermajority Requirements for altering, amending, adopting any provision inconsistent with or repealing certain provisions in the By-laws related to:

The proposed amendment would replace the Supermajority Requirements for the forgoing actions with the requirement of the affirmative vote of the holders of at least a majority of the voting power of all shares of the company entitled to vote generally in the election of directors, voting together as a single class. The proposed amendment would also clarify that the stockholder voting requirement does not apply to the amendment of these provisions of the By-laws by the board of directors.

The descriptions set forth above are summaries of the proposed changes to the Certificate and By-laws. Annex A to these proxy materials shows the changes to the relevant sections of the Certificate and the By-laws proposed by each of the forgoing proposals, in each case with deletions indicated by strike-outs and additions indicated by double underlining. If any of the foregoing proposals are approved by the stockholders, the company will amend its Certificate and By-laws to reflect the amendments that are approved.

Vote Required

As required by the Certificate, each proposal to amend the Certificate and/or By-laws discussed above will be approved if at least 80% of the voting power of all of the shares entitled to vote generally in the election of directors, voting together as a single class, is voted in favor of such proposal.

The board of directors recommends that stockholders vote FOR each of the proposals to amend the Certificate and By-laws to remove the supermajority vote requirements described above and replace them with majority vote requirements.

Proposal 4: Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation

We are asking stockholders to approve an advisory resolution on the company’s executive compensation as reported in this proxy statement. This proposal, commonly known as a “say-on-pay” proposal and required by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and

24

Consumer Protection Act of 2010, or Dodd-Frank Act, provides our stockholders with the opportunity to express their views, on an advisory (non-binding) basis, on our executive compensation for our named executive officers for fiscal year 2010 as described in “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” or “CD&A” beginning on page 29 of this proxy statement, as well as the Summary Compensation Table and other related compensation tables and narratives, on pages 44 through 65 of this proxy statement.

The Committee and the board of directors believe that the compensation program described in the CD&A is an effective incentive for the achievement of positive results, appropriately aligning pay and performance and enabling the company to attract and retain talented executives.

As discussed in the CD&A, the Committee has structured our executive compensation program based on the following five central principles:

Our executive compensation programs have a number of features designed to promote these objectives:

We urge stockholders to read the CD&A beginning on page 29 of this proxy statement, which describes in more detail how our executive compensation policies and procedures operate and are designed to achieve our compensation objectives, as well as the Summary Compensation Table and other related compensation tables and narratives on pages 44 through 65, which provide detailed information on the compensation of our named executive officers.

Since the third quarter of 2009, management has been focusing on an initiative called Strategic Transformation, the goal of which is to improve operating efficiencies, the way we go to market and how we interact with customers while also reducing our cost structure to make it more flexible. This initiative allowed us to take many steps over the past year to become more agile, efficient and responsive to the changing needs of our customers. While revenues were down 3% for fiscal year 2010 compared to the previous year, management continued to position the company for profitable growth even as it dealt with a second straight year of challenging global economic and business conditions, especially for mail intensive enterprises. During the same period our Strategic Transformation initiative exceeded its goals and we solidified our growth strategies, completing the work of identifying what management believes to be our most attractive market opportunities. We also continued to invest in new products and solutions which enhance customer communications allowing our customers to grow their business.

Other significant accomplishments relating to fiscal year 2010 include:

25

We urge stockholders to read our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 28, 2011, which describes our business and 2010 financial results in more detail.

In accordance with recently adopted Section 14A of the Exchange Act, and as a matter of good corporate governance, we are asking stockholders to indicate their support for our named executive officer compensation. This vote is not intended to address any specific item of compensation, but rather the overall compensation for our named executive officers. Accordingly, we are asking our stockholders to vote on the following advisory resolution at the 2011 Annual Meeting:

RESOLVED, that the stockholders of Pitney Bowes Inc. approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation of the company’s named executive officers disclosed in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, the Summary Compensation Table and the related compensation tables, notes and narrative in this proxy statement for the company’s 2011 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

This advisory resolution, commonly referred to as a “say-on-pay” resolution, is non-binding on the board of directors. Although non-binding, our board of directors and the Committee will carefully review and consider the voting results when making future decisions regarding our executive compensation program.

Vote Required

The vote on executive compensation is an advisory vote and the results will not be binding on the board of directors or the company. The affirmative vote of the majority of the votes cast will constitute the stockholders’ non-binding approval with respect to our executive compensation programs.

The board of directors recommends that stockholders vote FOR the approval of the advisory resolution on executive compensation.

Proposal 5: Advisory Vote on the Frequency of Future Advisory Votes on Executive Compensation

In addition to the advisory vote on executive compensation in Proposal 4 above, the Dodd-Frank Act also enables our stockholders to express their preference for having a “say-on-pay” vote every one, two or three years, or to abstain. This advisory (non-binding) “frequency” vote is required once every six years beginning with the 2011 annual meeting.

After careful consideration, the board of directors has determined that holding an advisory vote on executive compensation every year is the most appropriate policy for the company at this time, and recommends that stockholders vote for future advisory votes on executive compensation to occur every year.

While our executive compensation programs are designed to promote a long-term connection between pay and performance, the board of directors recognizes that executive compensation disclosures are made annually. Given that the “say-on-pay” advisory vote provisions are new, holding an annual advisory vote on executive compensation provides the board of directors with more direct and immediate feedback on our compensation. However, stockholders should note that because the advisory vote on executive compensation occurs well after the beginning of the compensation year, and because the different elements of our executive compensation programs are designed to operate in an integrated manner and to complement one another, in many cases it may not be appropriate or feasible to change our executive compensation programs in consideration of any one year’s advisory vote on executive compensation by the time of the following year’s annual meeting of stockholders.

We understand that our stockholders may have different views as to what is an appropriate frequency for advisory votes on executive compensation, and we will carefully review the voting results on this proposal. Stockholders will be able to specify one of four choices for this proposal on the proxy card: one year, two years, three years, or abstain. (Stockholders are not voting to approve or disapprove the board of directors’ recommendation.)

This advisory vote on the frequency of future advisory votes on executive compensation is non-binding on the board of directors. Notwithstanding the recommendation of the board of directors and the outcome of the

26

stockholder vote, the board of directors may in the future decide to conduct advisory votes on a more or less frequent basis and may vary its practice based on factors such as discussions with stockholders and the adoption of material changes to compensation programs.

Vote Required

The vote on the frequency of future advisory votes on executive compensation is an advisory vote and the results will not be binding on the board of directors or the company. The affirmative vote of the majority of votes cast will constitute the stockholders’ non-binding approval with respect to the frequency of future advisory votes on executive compensation.

Our board of directors recommends that you vote to conduct future advisory votes on executive compensation EVERY YEAR.

Proposal 6: Approval of the Material Terms of the Performance Goals Pursuant to Internal Revenue Code Section 162(m) for the following Incentive Plans:

Proposal 6(a) Pitney Bowes Inc. Key Employees Incentive Plan

Proposal 6(b) Pitney Bowes Inc. 2007 Stock Plan

The Pitney Bowes Inc. awards under its incentive plans are intended to be granted in a way designed to retain or attract, and to provide additional incentive to eligible employees in order to align their efforts with the company and its stockholders, including through the ownership of shares of the company.

The Pitney Bowes Inc. Key Employees Incentive Plan (the “KEIP”) is designed to provide additional cash incentives for key employees of the company through awards related to the achievement of certain performance criteria. The awards are short-term incentives (in the form of annual cash incentives), long- term cash based incentives (e.g., Cash Incentive Units (“CIUs”)), and such other cash incentives as the company deems reasonable and appropriate (e.g., retention awards).

The Pitney Bowes Inc. 2007 Stock Plan (the “Stock Plan”) is designed to align the interest of employees with those of the stockholders through the ownership of stock in the company and to attract, motivate and retain experienced and highly qualified employees who will contribute to the company’s success.

Awards of options and stock appreciation rights granted under the Stock Plan are intended to qualify for the performance-based compensation exception under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”) pursuant to their respective expected terms. In addition, awards granted under the KEIP and awards of restricted stock, stock units or other stock awards granted under the Stock Plan (“Equity Awards”) may qualify under Section 162(m) of the Code if they are granted with appropriate performance conditions. In order to continue to allow awards granted under the KEIP and the Equity Awards granted under the Stock Plan to qualify as tax-deductible performance-based compensation under Section 162(m) of the Code, the company is asking stockholders to approve the material terms of the performance goals under both the KEIP and the Stock Plan. Stockholders are not being asked to approve any amendment to the KEIP or the Stock Plan or to approve the KEIP or the Stock Plan themselves.

In general, Section 162(m) of the Code places a limit on the deductibility for federal income tax purposes of the compensation paid to a company’s Chief Executive Officer or any of its three other most highly compensated executive officers (other than its Chief Financial Officer). Under Section 162(m) of the Code compensation paid to such persons in excess of $1 million in a taxable year is not generally deductible. However, compensation that qualifies as “performance-based” under Section 162(m) of the Code does not count against the $1 million limitation. One of the requirements of “performance-based” compensation for purposes of Section 162(m) of the Code is that the material terms of the performance goal under which compensation may be paid be disclosed to and approved by the company’s stockholders. For purposes of Section 162(m) of the Code the material terms include (a) the employees eligible to receive compensation, (b) a description of the business criteria on which the performance goal is based and (c) the maximum amount of compensation that can be paid to an employee under the performance goal. Each of these aspects of the Stock Plan and the KEIP is discussed below, and stockholder approval of this Proposal will be deemed to constitute approval of each of these aspects of the Stock Plan and the KEIP for purposes of the approval requirements of Section 162(m) of the Code.

Stockholder approval of the performance goals under the KEIP or for the Equity Awards under the Stock Plan is only one of several requirements under Section 162(m) of the Code that must be satisfied for amounts realized under the KEIP or for the Equity Awards of the Stock Plan in order to qualify for the “performance-

27

based” compensation exemption under Section 162(m) of the Code. Submission of the material terms of the performance goals for the KEIP or for the Equity Awards under the Stock Plan for stockholder approval should not be viewed as a guarantee that the company can deduct all compensation under the KEIP or under the Equity Awards of the Stock Plan. Nothing in this proposal precludes the company, the Committee or the board of directors, as applicable, from making any payment or granting awards under either the KEIP or the Stock Plan that do not qualify for tax deductibility under Section 162(m) of the Code.

Performance Goals. Performance goals under both the KEIP and the Stock Plan are one or more objective performance goals established by the Committee at the time the grant is made, relating to the attainment of targets for one or any combination of the following criteria with respect to the company, any of its subsidiaries, divisions, departments or units or any combination thereof:

Performance goals are set by the Committee within the time period prescribed by Section 162(m) of the Code.

The board of directors believes that it is in the best interests of the company and its stockholders to enable the company to implement compensation arrangements that qualify as fully tax deductible performance-based compensation in the KEIP and in the Stock Plan. The board of directors is therefore asking stockholders to approve, for purposes of Section 162(m) of the Code, the material terms of the performance goals in both the KEIP and the Stock Plan set forth herein.

Proposal 6(a) Pitney Bowes Inc. Key Employees Incentive Plan

Eligible Employees. Key employees of the company, generally meaning management and executive-level employees, are eligible for grants under the KEIP. The KEIP provides flexibility in creating incentive packages for specific individuals as well as various groups of key employees. The Committee determines who is a key employee. There are currently 8 employees of the company potentially subject to the performance requirements under 162(m) of the Code.

Maximum Compensation. With respect to employees subject to the performance requirements under 162(m) of the Code, no payment will be made for an award granted under the KEIP until the Committee certifies that the applicable performance goals have been attained. Amounts paid on awards granted to “covered employees” during any fiscal year of the company will not exceed $4,000,000 for annual cash awards and $8,000,000 for long-term cash awards, including CIUs.

Description of Principal features of the KEIP

The KEIP is a cash incentive compensation plan administered by the Committee which has discretion to determine the type, terms and conditions and recipients of awards granted under the KEIP. Awards granted to participants in the KEIP may be in the form of annual incentives, CIUs or any other form of award permitted under the KEIP, and will be made subject to the achievement of one or more pre-determined performance goals.

Annual incentives are annual cash payments of specified percentages of base salary, which are paid based upon the achievement of pre-determined corporate, unit and/or individual performance objectives. CIUs represent a right to receive cash, contingent upon the extent to which specified performance criteria are achieved during the related three-year period.

The KEIP does not have a stated term but may be terminated by the board of directors at any time. The board of directors may amend the KEIP to conform to any change in applicable law or for any other reason.

A summary description of the other terms of the KEIP can be found on page 22 of our 2006 proxy statement filed with the SEC on March 23, 2006, and such summary description is incorporated herein by reference.

28

Awards under the KEIP

Please refer to the Summary Compensation Table on pages 45 and 46 of this proxy statement for the amounts paid under the KEIP for the past three fiscal years to the named executive officers. For fiscal year 2010, all executive officers as a group were paid $8,590,536 under the KEIP. Because payments in the KEIP for fiscal 2011 will be determined by comparing actual performance to the performance targets set by the Committee, it is not possible to state the amounts that will be paid under the KEIP in fiscal 2011.

Proposal 6(b) Pitney Bowes Inc. 2007 Stock Plan

Eligible Employees. All employees of the company are eligible to receive awards under the Stock Plan, but awards are generally limited to management and executive-level employees. There are currently 8 employees of the company potentially subject to the performance requirements under Section 162(m) of the Code.

Maximum Compensation. Of the maximum number of shares available for issuance under the Stock Plan, no more than 7,500,000 shares may be issued pursuant to grants other than options or SARs in the aggregate during the term of the plan. A participant may receive multiple awards under the Stock Plan. A maximum of 600,000 shares that are the subject of awards may be granted under the Stock Plan to an individual during any calendar year.

Description of Principal features of the Stock Plan

The Stock Plan is an “omnibus” stock plan that provides for a variety of equity award vehicles to maintain flexibility. The Stock Plan permits the grant of stock options, stock appreciation rights or SARs, restricted stock awards, restricted stock units, stock awards and other stock-based awards.

Participants at the vice president level and above are generally granted a combination of stock options and restricted stock units or RSUs and participants at the manager and director levels are generally granted RSUs. In unique circumstances where needed for attracting, retaining and motivating executive talent, restricted stock may be awarded.

All of the full-time employees of the company and its affiliates are eligible to participate in the Stock Plan. From time to time, the Committee will determine who will be granted awards, the number of shares subject to such grants and all other terms of awards.

The Stock Plan has a term of seven years expiring on December 31, 2014, unless terminated earlier by the board of directors. The board of directors may at any time and from time to time and in any respect amend or modify the Stock Plan.

A summary description of the other terms of the Stock Plan can be found on pages 24 through 29 of our 2007 proxy statement filed with the SEC in April 3, 2007, and such summary description is incorporated herein by reference.

Awards under the Stock Plan

Please refer to the Summary Compensation Table on pages 45 and 46 of this proxy statement for the amounts paid under the Stock Plan for the past three fiscal years to the named executive officers. For fiscal year 2010, all executive officers as a group were granted $5,686,040 in stock options and RSUs under the Stock Plan.

Vote Required

Approval of the material terms of the performance goals in each of the KEIP and the Stock Plan pursuant to Section 162(m) of the Code requires the affirmative vote of a majority of votes cast.

A requirement of Section 162(m) of the Code is that the plan’s performance goals be approved at least once every five years to maintain tax deductibility of awards made under the KEIP and the Stock Plan. The Stock Plan was last approved at our 2007 Annual Meeting of Stockholders. This means that in our view, if Proposal 6(b) is not approved with respect to the Stock Plan, we must get an approval from stockholders no later than the 2012 Annual Meeting of Stockholders or risk losing the tax advantages of Section 162(m) of the Code with respect to the Stock Plan. An affirmative vote of the majority of the votes cast for Proposal 6(b) is expected to extend compliance with Section 162(m) of the Code until May 2016.

The board of directors recommends that stockholders vote FOR each of Proposal 6(a) and 6(b).

Report of the Executive Compensation Committee

The Executive Compensation Committee of the board of directors 1) has reviewed and discussed with management the section included below in this proxy statement entitled “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” and 2) based on the review and discussions referred to in item 1) above, the Committee has recommended to the board of directors that the CD&A be included in the company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 and this proxy statement.

29

By the Executive Compensation Committee of the board of directors,

James H. Keyes, Chair
Anne Sutherland Fuchs
Eduardo R. Menascé
David B. Snow, Jr.
Robert E. Weissman

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

The following discussion and analysis contains statements regarding company performance targets and goals. These targets and goals are disclosed in the limited context of our compensation programs and should not be understood to be statements of management’s expectations or estimates of results or other guidance. Investors should not apply these statements to other contexts.

Executive Summary

Overview

This CD&A, describes the material components of our executive compensation program for our named executive officers. The named executive officers for 2010 are:

Our key compensation goals are to attract, retain and motivate high performing executives with a commitment to the long-term success of our business. Our compensation package design also builds executive capability for the future.

Our compensation program is based on five central principles: