Table of Contents

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:

EQUIFAX INC.

(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)

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

Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):

Table of Contents

1550 Peachtree Street, N.W.

Atlanta, Georgia 30309

www.equifax.com

March 21, 2012

Dear Shareholder:

You are cordially invited to attend the 2012 Annual Meeting of Shareholders of Equifax Inc. to be held at 9:30 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time on Thursday, May 3, 2012 at our principal executive offices located at the address shown above.

The accompanying notice of the meeting and proxy statement describe the matters to be acted upon at the annual meeting. We also will report on matters of interest to our shareholders.

Your vote is important to us. Whether or not you plan to attend the annual meeting in person, we encourage you to vote so that your shares will be represented and voted at the meeting. You may vote by proxy on the Internet, by telephone, or by completing and mailing the enclosed proxy card in the return envelope provided. You may also vote in person at the annual meeting. Additional information about voting your shares is included in the proxy statement.

Thank you for your continued support of Equifax.

Sincerely,

Richard F. Smith

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

Table of Contents

1550 Peachtree Street, N.W.

Atlanta, Georgia 30309

NOTICE OF 2012 ANNUAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS

May 3, 2012

9:30 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time

To the shareholders of Equifax Inc.:

Notice is hereby given that the 2012 annual meeting of shareholders (the “Annual Meeting”) of Equifax Inc., a Georgia corporation (“Equifax” or the “Company”) will be held on Thursday, May 3, 2012 at 9:30 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time at the Company’s principal executive offices located at the address shown above for the following purposes, as more fully described in the accompanying proxy statement (the “Proxy Statement”):

Only shareholders of record as of the close of business on March 5, 2012 are entitled to receive notice of, to attend and to vote at, the Annual Meeting. Shares represented by properly executed proxies will be voted in accordance with the instructions specified therein.

We are pleased to continue to take advantage of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) rule that allows companies to furnish proxy materials to their shareholders over the Internet. As a result, we are mailing to most of our shareholders a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials (the “Notice”) instead of a paper copy of this Proxy Statement and our 2011 Annual Report. We believe that this process allows us to provide our shareholders with the information they need in a timelier manner, while reducing the environmental impact and lowering the costs of printing and distributing our proxy materials. The Notice contains instructions on how to access those documents over the Internet. The Notice also contains instructions on how to request a paper copy of our proxy materials, including the Proxy Statement, our 2011 Annual Report and a form of proxy card or voting instruction card. All shareholders who have previously requested paper copies of our proxy materials will continue to receive a paper copy of the proxy materials by mail.

Your vote is important. Whether or not you plan to attend the meeting in person, please complete, sign, date and return the proxy card or voting instruction card as instructed or vote by telephone or using the Internet as instructed on the proxy card, voting instruction card or the Notice.

Sincerely,

Dean C. Arvidson

Corporate Secretary

Atlanta, Georgia

March 21, 2012

Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held on May 3, 2012: The Company’s Proxy Statement and 2011 Annual Report, which includes the Company’s consolidated financial statements, are available at www.proxyvote.com.

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

i

Table of Contents

1550 Peachtree Street, N.W.

Atlanta, Georgia 30309

PROXY STATEMENT

FOR

2012 ANNUAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS

GENERAL INFORMATION

Proxy Solicitation

Proxies in the form furnished are being solicited by the Board for the 2012 Annual Meeting of Shareholders. A Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials was first sent, and the accompanying notice of meeting, this Proxy Statement and the form of proxy card are first being made available to shareholders on or about March 21, 2012.

All shares represented by proxies received will be voted in accordance with instructions contained in the proxies. The Board recommends a vote:

In the absence of voting instructions to the contrary, shares represented by validly executed and dated proxies or voting instruction cards will be voted in accordance with the foregoing recommendations.

On or about March 21, 2012, we will mail a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials to our shareholders who have not previously requested electronic access to our proxy materials or the receipt of paper proxy materials advising them that they can access this Proxy Statement, the 2011 Annual Report and voting instructions over the Internet at www.proxyvote.com. You may then access these materials and vote your shares over the Internet or by telephone. The Notice contains a 12-digit control number that you will need to vote your shares over the Internet or by telephone. Please keep the Notice for your reference through the meeting date.

Alternatively, you may request that a printed copy of the proxy materials be mailed to you. If you want to receive a paper copy of the proxy materials, you may request one over the Internet at www.proxyvote.com, by calling toll-free 1-800-579-1639 or by sending an email to sendmaterial@proxyvote.com. There is no charge to you for requesting a copy. Please make your request for a copy on or before April 19, 2012 to facilitate timely delivery. If you previously elected to receive our proxy materials electronically, we will continue to send these materials to you via email unless you change your election.

The Company has retained Phoenix Advisory Partners, LLC to assist in soliciting proxies for an annual fee not to exceed $7,000 plus expenses, and will bear the cost of soliciting proxies. Directors, officers and other Company associates also may solicit proxies by telephone or otherwise. Brokers and other nominees will be requested to solicit proxies or authorizations from beneficial owners and will be reimbursed for their reasonable expenses.

Shareholders Entitled to Vote; Attendance at the Meeting

Company shareholders of record at the close of business on March 5, 2012 are entitled to notice of, and to vote at, the meeting. As of such date, there were 120,182,226 shares of Company common stock outstanding, each entitled to one vote.

1

Table of Contents

If your shares are held in the name of a bank, broker or other holder of record (also known as “street name”) and you wish to attend the meeting, you must present proof of ownership as of the record date, such as the Notice of Internet Availability of proxy materials or the voting instructions card that is sent to you or a current bank or brokerage account statement, to be admitted. The Company also may request appropriate identification as a condition of admission.

Quorum; Required Vote

The holders of a majority of the shares entitled to vote at the meeting must be present in person or represented by proxy to constitute a quorum. Abstentions and shares that brokers do not have the authority to vote in the absence of timely instructions from the beneficial owners (“broker non-votes”) will be treated as present for the purposes of determining a quorum. Under the rules of the New York Stock Exchange (the “NYSE”), Proposal 2 is the only proposal upon which brokers may vote in the absence of timely instructions from beneficial owners.

Directors are elected by a majority of the votes cast at the meeting in uncontested elections, such as the one at the meeting. Abstentions and broker non-votes will not be counted as votes cast and, accordingly, will have no effect on the outcome of the vote for directors. Under our Bylaws, if in an uncontested election for directors a nominee does not receive a majority of the votes cast “For” the nominee, the nominee shall offer his or her resignation. The independent members of the Board will determine and publicly report the action to be taken with respect to the resignation offer.

Approval of Proposals 2 and 3 requires that the votes that shareholders cast “For” must exceed the votes that shareholders cast “Against” to approve. Abstentions and (with regard to Proposal 3 only) broker non-votes will not be counted as votes cast and, accordingly, will have no effect on the outcome of the vote for Proposals 2 and 3.

Although the advisory vote on Proposal 3 is non-binding, as provided by law, our Board will review the results of the votes and, consistent with our record of shareholder engagement, will take the results into account in making future determination decisions concerning executive compensation.

The Company is not aware, as of the date of this Proxy Statement, of any other matters to be voted on at the Annual Meeting. If any other matters are properly brought before the meeting for a vote, all shares represented at the meeting will be voted in the discretion of the persons named as proxies on the proxy card on such matters (other than shares that are voted by the holder in person at the meeting).

How to Vote

Shareholders of record.    Shareholders of record may attend and cast their votes at the meeting. In addition, shareholders of record may cast their vote by proxy and participants in the Company benefit plans described below may submit their voting instructions by:

Votes cast through the Internet and telephone voting procedures are authenticated by use of a personal identification number. This procedure allows shareholders to appoint a proxy, and the various Company benefit plan participants to provide voting instructions, and to confirm that their actions have been properly recorded. Specific instructions to be followed are set forth on the enclosed proxy card. If you vote through the Internet or by telephone, you do not need to return your proxy card.

Beneficial owners.    If you are the beneficial owner of shares held in “street name,” you have the right to direct your bank, broker or other nominee on how to vote your shares by using the voting instruction form provided to you by them, or by following their instructions for voting through the Internet or by telephone. In the

2

Table of Contents

alternative, you may vote in person at the meeting if you obtain a valid proxy from your bank, broker or other nominee and present it at the meeting. In order for your shares to be voted on all matters presented at the meeting, we urge all shareholders whose shares are held in street name by a bank, brokerage firm or other nominee to provide voting instructions to such record holder.

Participants in the Equifax Inc. 401(k) Plan and the Equifax Canada Retirement Savings Program for Salaried Employees (collectively, the “Company Plans”).    Participants in the Company Plans may instruct the applicable plan trustee how to vote all shares of Company common stock allocated to their accounts. To allow sufficient time for the plan trustees to vote, the trustees must receive your voting instructions no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time on May 1, 2012. The 401(k) Plan trustee will vote shares for which it has not received instructions in the same proportion as the shares for which it has received instructions. The Canada Retirement Savings Program trustee will only vote those plan shares for which voting instructions are received prior to this deadline. Participants in the Company Plans may not vote the shares owned through such plans after this deadline, including at the Annual Meeting.

Revocation of Proxies or Change of Instructions

A proxy given by a shareholder of record may be revoked at any time before it is voted by sending written notice of revocation to the Corporate Secretary of the Company at the address set forth below, by delivering a proxy (by one of the methods described above) bearing a later date, or by voting in person at the meeting. Participants in the plans described above may change their voting instructions by delivering new voting instructions by one of the methods described above.

If you are the beneficial owner of shares held in “street name,” you may submit new voting instructions in the manner provided by your bank, broker or other nominee, or you may vote in person at the Annual Meeting in the manner described above under “How to Vote.”

Multiple Company shareholders who share an address may receive only one copy of this Proxy Statement and the 2011 Annual Report from their bank, broker or other nominee, unless contrary instructions are received. We will deliver promptly a separate copy of this Proxy Statement and the 2011 Annual Report to any shareholder who resides at a shared address and to which a single copy of the documents was delivered, if the shareholder makes a request by contacting the Office of Corporate Secretary, Equifax Inc., P.O. Box 4081, Atlanta, Georgia 30302, telephone (404) 885-8000, or by sending an email to corpsec@equifax.com. Beneficial owners sharing an address who are receiving multiple copies of this proxy statement and the 2011 Annual Report and who wish to receive a single copy in the future will need to contact their bank, broker or other nominee.

Voting Results

You can find the official results of voting at the meeting in our Current Report on Form 8-K to be filed within four business days after the Annual Meeting. If the official results are not available at that time, we will provide preliminary voting results in the Form 8-K and will provide the final results in an amendment to the Form 8-K as soon as they become available.

Other Matters

The Board is not aware of any matters to be presented at the Annual Meeting other than those set forth in the accompanying notice. If any other matters properly come before the meeting, the persons named in the proxy card will vote on such matters in accordance with their best judgment.

3

Table of Contents

OWNERSHIP OF EQUIFAX COMMON STOCK

Securities Owned by Certain Beneficial Owners

The following table contains information as of March 5, 2012, unless otherwise indicated, with respect to the beneficial ownership of the Company’s common stock by each person the Company believes beneficially holds more than 5% of the outstanding shares of the Company’s common stock, based solely on the Company’s review of SEC filings.

Securities Owned by Directors and Management

The table below contains information as of March 5, 2012, concerning the beneficial ownership of Company common stock by (i) each director and nominee, (ii) each named executive officer listed in the Summary Compensation Table on page 47, and (iii) all Company directors, nominees and executive officers as a group. None of these shares were pledged. All persons named below can be reached at P.O. Box 4081, Atlanta, Georgia 30302.

4

Table of Contents

Equity Compensation Plan Information

The table below summarizes our equity information as of December 31, 2011. Information is included for equity compensation plans approved by Company shareholders and equity compensation plans not approved by our shareholders.

See Part II, Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” of our 2011 Annual Report on Form 10-K in the notes to Consolidated Financial Statements at Note 9, “Stock-Based Compensation,” for further information regarding our equity compensation plans.

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) requires the Company’s directors, executive officers, and persons who own more than ten percent of a registered class of the Company’s equity securities, to file reports of securities ownership and changes in such ownership with the SEC. Directors, officers and greater than ten percent shareholders are also required by SEC rules to furnish the Company with copies of all Section 16(a) forms they file. Based solely upon a review of the copies of such forms furnished to the Company or written representations that no Forms 5 were required, the Company believes that all Section 16(a) filing requirements were timely met in 2011.

5

Table of Contents

DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

General

The Board oversees, counsels and directs management in the long-term interests of the Company and our shareholders. The Board’s responsibilities include:

Our Board is comprised of nine members each of who is serving an annual term expiring at the Annual Meeting. The Board has determined that nine to 12 directors is currently the appropriate size for our Board. The Board believes this range is sufficient to ensure the presence of directors with diverse experience and skills, without hindering effective decision-making or diminishing individual responsibility. The Board also believes this range is flexible enough to permit the recruitment, if circumstances so warrant, of any outstanding director candidate in whom the Board may become interested. The Governance Committee periodically reviews the size of the Board and recommends changes as appropriate.

Leadership Structure of the Board

In accordance with our Bylaws, the Board elects our CEO and our Chairman of the Board, and each of these positions may be held by the same person or may be held by two persons. Under the Board’s Mission Statement and Guidelines on Significant Corporate Governance Issues (the “Corporate Governance Guidelines”), the Board does not have a policy, one way or another, on whether the roles of the Chairman and the CEO should be separate and, if it is to be separate, whether the Chairman should be selected from among the non-employee directors or be an employee. If the Chairman is not an independent director, however, the Corporate Governance Guidelines require that a Presiding Director shall be recommended by the Governance Committee and elected by a majority of independent directors. The Governance Committee charter provides that it shall recommend to the Board the corporate governance structure of the Company.

The Chairman of the Board is responsible for chairing Board and shareholder meetings, setting the agenda for Board meetings and providing information to the Board members in advance of meetings and between meetings. The duties of the Presiding Director as provided in the Corporate Governance Guidelines include the following:

6

Table of Contents

All directors may interact directly with the Chairman and CEO and provide input on presentations by management at Board and Committee meetings, and each has complete access to our management and employees.

The Governance Committee and the Board have determined that our current Board structure, combining the Chairman and CEO positions and utilizing a Presiding Director, is the most appropriate leadership structure for the Company and its shareholders at the present time. Combining the Chairman and CEO roles fosters clear accountability, effective decision-making, alignment with corporate strategy, direct oversight of management, full engagement of the independent directors, and continuity of leadership. As the officer ultimately responsible for the day-to-day operation of the Company and for execution of its strategy, the Board believes that the CEO is the director best qualified to act as Chairman of the Board and to lead Board discussions regarding the performance of the Company.

The Company’s governance practices provide for strong independent leadership and oversight, independent discussion among directors, and independent evaluation of, and communication with, members of our senior leadership team. These governance practices are reflected in the Corporate Governance Guidelines and the various charters of the Board Committees which are described below. Some of the relevant practices include:

The Board’s Role in Risk Oversight

Our Board oversees an enterprise-wide risk management program which is designed to support the achievement of our organizational and strategic objectives, to identify and manage risks, to improve long-term organizational performance and to enhance shareholder value. On an annual basis, the Board (1) performs an enterprise risk assessment with management to review the principal risks facing the Company, monitors the steps management is taking to map and mitigate these risks; and (2) sets the level of risk appropriate for the Company in business strategy reviews. Risks are assessed throughout the business, focusing on two primary areas: (i) financial, operational and strategic risk, and (ii) ethical, legal and compliance risk. Each business unit and corporate support unit has primary responsibility for assessing risks within their respective areas of responsibility and mitigating those risks. The CEO and our senior leadership team receive comprehensive periodic reports on the most significant risks from these units and from the head of our internal audit department.

In addition, each of our Board committees considers the risks within its areas of responsibility. For example, the Audit Committee reviews risks related to financial reporting; discusses material violations, if any, of Company ethics and compliance policies brought to its attention; considers the Company’s annual audit risk assessment which identifies internal control risks and drives the internal and external audit plan for the ensuing year; and considers the impact of risk on our financial position and the adequacy of our risk-related internal controls. The Compensation, Human Resources & Management Succession Committee (the “Compensation Committee”) reviews compensation, human resource and management succession risks. The Governance Committee focuses on corporate governance risks, including evaluation of our leadership and risk oversight structure to ensure that it remains the optimal structure for our Company and shareholders. The Technology Committee enhances the Board’s focus on technology-related risks and opportunities.

7

Table of Contents

The Board believes that the administration of the Board’s risk oversight function has not affected its leadership structure.

In 2011, the Compensation Committee evaluated the current risk profile of our executive and broad-based compensation programs. The Committee reviewed our material compensation programs and noted numerous ways in which risk is effectively managed or mitigated. This evaluation, which was conducted with the assistance of management and the Committee’s outside compensation consultant, covered a wide range of practices and policies. All plans were deemed to have substantial risk mitigators which, in the most material incentive plans, include a balanced mix of fixed and variable pay and short-term and long-term incentives; use of multiple performance measures including corporate, business unit and individual performance weightings in incentive plans; a portfolio of long-term equity incentives; caps, discretion in payment, oversight by non-plan participants, significant stock ownership guidelines, pre-approval requirements for executive stock transactions; and the existence of anti-hedging and recoupment policies.

In addition, the Compensation Committee analyzed the overall enterprise risks and how compensation programs impacted individual behavior that could exacerbate these enterprise risks. Board and management processes are in place to oversee risk associated with global compensation programs and practices, including, but not limited to, monthly and quarterly business reviews; alignment of compensation plan goals with our annual and long-term strategic goals and performance expectations; review of enterprise risk management by the Board as part of the annual strategy and budget reviews; and other appropriate internal controls.

In light of these analyses, the Compensation Committee believes that the structure of our compensation programs provides multiple, effective safeguards to protect against excessive risk-taking.

The Board’s Role in CEO and Executive Succession Planning

Our Board is accountable for the development, implementation and continual review of a succession plan for the CEO and other executive officers. Board members are expected to have a thorough understanding of the characteristics necessary for a CEO to execute a long-term strategy that optimizes operating performance, profitability and shareholder value creation. As part of its responsibilities under its charter, the Compensation Committee oversees the succession planning process for the CEO and the senior leadership team. The process ensures that critical business capabilities are safeguarded, executive development is accelerated, and strategic talent is leveraged to focus on current and new business imperatives. The ongoing succession process is designed to reduce vacancy, readiness and transition risks and develop strong leadership quality and executive bench strength. The specific criteria for the CEO position are aligned with our long-term Growth Playbook, and succession and development plans are monitored for each of the CEO’s direct reports including high potential internal CEO succession candidates, all of whom have ongoing exposure to the Board and are reviewed annually with the Board by the CEO and the Chief Human Resources Officer. The Committee and the Board also review the foregoing in executive session on a regular basis.

Meetings of the Board and its Committees

During 2011, the Board held six meetings; the Audit Committee met five times; the Compensation Committee met six times; the Executive Committee did not meet; the Governance Committee met four times; and the Technology Committee met four times. All director nominees attended 75% or more of the aggregate of the meetings of the Board and of the committees of the Board on which such directors served.

Attendance of Directors at 2011 Annual Meeting of Shareholders

All directors are expected to attend the Company’s annual meeting of shareholders. All of the Company’s directors as of March 21, 2012 attended the 2011 annual meeting of shareholders.

8

Table of Contents

Board Committees

The Board appoints committees to help carry out its duties and work on key issues in greater detail than is generally possible at Board meetings. Committees regularly review the results of their meetings with the Board. The Board has five standing committees, all of which are composed of independent directors as defined in the NYSE rules. Each committee operates pursuant to a written charter which is available as described below under “Corporate Governance Guidelines” on page 11. The charters for each of our Board committees are available on our website at: www.equifax.com/about_equifax/corporate_governance/committee_charters/en_us.

Below is a table showing the current members of each Board committee:

The Audit Committee has sole authority to appoint, review and discharge the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm. The committee reviews and approves in advance the services provided by our independent registered public accounting firm, reviews and discusses the independence of that firm, oversees the internal audit function, reviews our internal accounting controls and financial reporting process, and administers our Code of Ethics and Business Conduct. The committee reviews the Company’s guidelines and policies related to enterprise risk assessment and risk management, and management’s plan for risk mitigation or remediation. The committee meets separately with the internal and external auditors to ensure full and frank communications with the committee. The Board has determined that Messrs. Copeland, Daleo and Feidler are each “financially literate” under NYSE rules and an “audit committee financial expert” under the rules of the SEC.

The Audit Committee has appointed Ernst & Young LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2012, and is recommending that our shareholders approve this appointment at the Annual Meeting. See Proposal 2 on page 24 and the Audit Committee Report on page 63.

The Compensation, Human Resources & Management Succession Committee determines the compensation for our executive officers, establishes our compensation policies and practices, and reviews annual performance under our employee incentive plans. The Compensation Committee also provides assistance to the Governance Committee from time to time in connection with its review of director compensation. The Compensation Committee also advises management and the Board on succession planning and other significant human resources matters.

Role of Compensation Committee and Management in Determining Executive Compensation. The Compensation Committee reviews and makes decisions about executive policies and plans, including the amount of base salary, cash bonus and long-term incentive awarded to our named executive officers. Our Chairman and CEO and other executives may assist the Committee from time to time in its evaluation of compensation elements or program design or by providing mathematical calculations, historical information, year-over-year comparisons and clarification regarding job duties and performance. The Compensation Committee also considers the recommendations and competitive data provided by the compensation consultant and makes decisions, as it deems appropriate, on executive compensation based on its assessment of individual performance and achievement of goals both by the individual and the Company.

9

Table of Contents

The CEO’s performance is reviewed by the Compensation Committee with input from the other non-employee members of the Board. The CEO annually reviews the performance of each other executive officer who reports to him, including the named executive officers listed in the Summary Compensation Table on page 47. The conclusions reached and recommendations made based on these reviews, including with respect to salary adjustments and annual award amounts, are presented to the Compensation Committee for approval. Members of management play various additional roles in this process:

The Compensation Committee considers these recommendations and exercises discretion in modifying any recommended adjustments or awards to executives based on considerations it deems appropriate. Although members of our management team participate in the executive compensation process, the Compensation Committee also meets regularly in executive session without any members of the management team present. The Compensation Committee makes the final determination of the executive compensation package provided to each of our named executive officers, with input from the non-employee members of the Board in executive session with respect to CEO compensation.

Compensation Consultant Services and Fees. The Compensation Committee has the sole authority from the Board for the appointment, compensation and oversight of the Company’s outside compensation consultant. During 2011, the Compensation Committee’s consultant was a partner at Meridian Compensation Partners LLC (“Meridian”), an independent executive compensation consulting firm. During 2011, the Compensation Committee retained the consultant, without any management recommendation, to provide advice with respect to compensation for named executive officers and other officers which included the following services:

For 2011, all fees paid to Meridian were in support of the Compensation Committee in connection with its review of executive compensation.

10

Table of Contents

The Executive Committee is authorized to exercise the powers of the Board in managing our business and property during the intervals between Board meetings, subject to Board discretion and applicable law.

The Governance Committee reviews and makes recommendations to the Board regarding nominees for director; recommends to the Board, and monitors compliance with, our Corporate Governance Guidelines and other corporate governance matters; conducts an annual review of the effectiveness of our Board; makes recommendations to the Board with respect to Board and committee organization, membership and function; and exercises oversight of Board compensation. Our process for receiving and evaluating Board member nominations from our shareholders is summarized under the captions “Director Qualifications and Nomination Process” on page 12 and “Shareholder Proposals and Director Nominations for 2013 Annual Meeting” on page 64.

The Technology Committee assesses our technology development strategies and makes recommendations to the Board as to scope, direction, quality, investment levels and execution of technology strategies; oversees the execution of technology strategies formulated by management and technology risk and opportunities; provides guidance on technology as it may pertain to, among other things, investments, mergers, acquisitions and divestitures, research and development investments, and key competitor and partnership strategies.

Corporate Governance Guidelines

The Governance Committee is responsible for overseeing the Corporate Governance Guidelines adopted by the Board and annually reviews them and makes recommendations to the Board concerning corporate governance matters. The Board may amend, waive, suspend, or repeal any of these guidelines at any time, with or without public notice, as it deems necessary or appropriate in the exercise of the Board’s judgment or fiduciary duties.

Among other matters, the Corporate Governance Guidelines include the following items concerning the Board:

Our Corporate Governance Guidelines are posted at www.equifax.com/about_equifax/governance_principals/en_us.

Code of Ethics

We have adopted codes of ethics and business conduct applicable to our directors, officers and employees, available at www.equifax.com/about_equifax/corporate_governance/en_us, or in print upon request to the Office of Corporate Secretary, Equifax, P.O. Box 4081, Atlanta, Georgia 30302, telephone (404) 885-8000, or by sending an email to corpsec@equifax.com. Any amendment or waiver of a provision of these codes of ethics or business conduct that applies to any Equifax director or executive officer will also be disclosed on this website.

Director Independence

The Board has determined that all directors, excluding Mr. Smith, are independent under the applicable NYSE and SEC rules. In making these determinations, the Board considered the types and amounts of the commercial dealings between the Company and the companies and organizations with which the directors are affiliated. Each of these transactions was significantly below the thresholds set forth in the categories of

11

Table of Contents

immaterial relationships described in our Director Independence Standards which are attached as Appendix A to this Proxy Statement. See “Review, Approval or Ratification of Transactions with Related Persons—Transactions with Related Persons” on page 16.

Communicating with Directors

Shareholders and other interested parties who wish to communicate with our directors, a committee of the Board of Directors, the Presiding Director, the non-management directors as a group, or the Board generally should address their correspondence accordingly and send by mail to Equifax Inc., c/o Corporate Secretary, P.O. Box 4081, Atlanta, Georgia 30302. All concerns related to audit or accounting matters will be referred to the Audit Committee.

Director Qualifications and Nomination Process

The Governance Committee of our Board is the standing committee responsible for selecting the slate of director nominees for election by our shareholders. The Committee recommends those nominees to the full Board for approval. In the past, our Governance Committee has utilized the services of a third party search firm to assist in the identification and evaluation of potential director nominees. The Committee may engage such firms to provide such services in the future, as it deems appropriate.

Our Governance Committee determines the selection criteria and qualifications for director nominees. As set forth in our Governance Guidelines, a candidate must have demonstrated accomplishment in his or her chosen field, character and personal integrity, the capacity and desire to represent the balanced, best interests of the Company and the shareholders as a whole and not primarily a special interest group, and the ability to devote sufficient time to carry out the duties of an Equifax director. The Committee and the Board consider whether the candidate is independent under the standards described above under “Director Independence.” In addition, the Committee and the Board consider all information relevant in their judgment to the decision of whether to nominate a particular candidate, taking into account the then-current composition of the Board and an assessment of the Board’s collective requirements. These factors may include a candidate’s educational and professional experience; reputation, industry knowledge and business experience and relevance to the Company and the Board (including the candidate’s understanding of markets, technologies, financial matters and international operations); whether the candidate will complement or contribute to the mix of talents, skills and other characteristics that are needed to maintain Board effectiveness; and the candidate’s ability to fulfill his or her responsibilities as a director and as a member of one or more of our standing Board committees.

Although the Committee does not have a formal diversity policy for Board membership, it considers whether a director nominee contributes or will contribute to the Board in a way that can enhance the perspective and experience of the Board as a whole through diversity in gender, ethnicity, geography and professional experience. When current Board members are considered for nomination for re-election, the Committee also takes into consideration their prior Board contributions, performance and meeting attendance records. The effectiveness of the Board’s skills, expertise and background, including its diversity, is also considered as part of each Board annual self-assessment.

The Board believes that nomination of a candidate should not be based solely on these factors noted above. The Governance Committee and the Board do not assign specific weights to particular criteria, and no particular criterion is a prerequisite for Board membership. We believe that the backgrounds and qualifications of our directors, considered as a group, should provide a complete mix of experience, knowledge, and abilities that will allow the Board to fulfill its responsibilities. Our current Board is geographically diverse with half of the members based outside the Company’s headquarters in Georgia; there is a balance of different ages; gender diversity includes one female director; and directors have diverse industry backgrounds which include banking, investment banking, venture capital, consumer products manufacturing, accounting and consulting, information and technology, telecommunications and legal. The backgrounds and qualifications of our current directors and nominees are further described under “Proposal 1—Election of Directors” beginning on page 18.

12

Table of Contents

The Governance Committee will consider for possible nomination qualified Board candidates that are submitted by our shareholders. Shareholders wishing to make such a submission may do so by sending the following information to the Governance Committee by November 21, 2012, c/o Corporate Secretary, P.O. Box 4081, Atlanta, Georgia 30302: (1) a nomination notice in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 1.12 of the Bylaws; (2) a request that the Governance Committee consider the shareholder’s candidate for inclusion in the Board’s slate of nominees for the applicable meeting; and (3) along with the shareholder’s candidate, undertaking to provide all other information the Committee or the Board may request in connection with their evaluation of the candidate. See “Shareholder Proposals and Director Nominations for 2013 Annual Meeting” on page 64. A copy of our Bylaws is available on our website at www.equifax.com/about_equifax/corporate_governance/en_us or by writing to the Corporate Secretary.

Any shareholder’s nominee must satisfy the minimum qualifications for any director described above in the judgment of the Governance Committee and the Board. In evaluating shareholder nominees, the Committee and the Board may consider all relevant information, including the factors described above, and additionally may consider the size and duration of the nominating shareholder’s holdings in the Company; whether the nominee is independent of the nominating shareholder and able to represent the interests of the Company and its shareholders as a whole; and the interests and/or intentions of the nominating shareholder.

No candidate for director nomination was submitted to the Governance Committee by any shareholder in connection with the Annual Meeting.

Executive Sessions

The non-management directors meet in executive session without management at every regularly scheduled in-person Board meeting. The Presiding Director presides at these executive sessions.

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

Mr. Humann, Ms. Marshall and Mr. Templeton were the members of the Compensation Committee during 2011. None of these directors is or has been an executive officer of the Company, or had any relationship requiring disclosure by the Company under the SEC’s rules requiring disclosure of certain relationships and related party transactions. None of the Company’s executive officers served as a director or a member of a compensation committee (or other committee serving an equivalent function) of any other entity, the executive officers of which served as a director of the Company or member of the Compensation Committee during 2011.

Director Compensation

The table below sets forth the compensation received by our non-management directors during 2011:

Director Compensation Table

13

Table of Contents

Director Fees.    For 2011, director cash compensation was unchanged from 2010 and consisted of an annual cash retainer of $60,000, and an annual cash retainer of $15,000 for the Audit Committee chair, $10,000 for the Compensation Committee chair, and $7,500 each for the chairs of the Governance and Technology Committees.

By paying directors an annual retainer and eliminating separate meeting fees, the Company compensates each non-employee director for his or her role and judgment as an advisor to the Company, rather than for his or her attendance or effort at individual meetings. Directors with added responsibility are recognized with higher cash compensation as noted above. The Governance Committee believes that this additional compensation is appropriate.

Equity Awards.    Prior to 2010, each non-employee director received an annual long-term incentive grant of 3,000 restricted stock units under our shareholder-approved 2008 Omnibus Incentive Plan following the annual meeting of shareholders to further align their interests with those of our shareholders. New directors were also entitled to receive an initial grant of 4,000 restricted stock units, to attract and retain highly qualified directors through equity ownership. Beginning in 2010, the formula for initial and annual equity grants of restricted stock units was changed from a fixed number of shares to a fixed value in shares computed as of the grant date ($175,000 for initial one-time grants to new directors, and $125,000 for annual grants). The annual grants and initial grants vest one year and three years, respectively, after the grant date with accelerated vesting in the event of the director’s death, disability, retirement or a change in control of the Company. No dividend equivalents are paid on outstanding unvested restricted stock units.

Director Deferred Compensation Plan.    Each non-employee director may defer up to 100% of his or her retainer fees. The director is credited with a number of share units having an equivalent value at the end of each quarter based on his or her advance deferral election. Share units are equivalent to shares of the Company’s common stock, except that share units have no voting rights and do not receive dividend credit. In general, amounts deferred are not paid until the director retires from the Board. However, directors may also establish sub-accounts from which amounts are to be paid on specific pre-retirement timetables established by the director. At the end of the applicable deferral period, the director receives a share of common stock for each share unit awarded. Such shares are received either in a lump sum or over a period not to exceed 15 years for retirement distributions, or up to five years for a scheduled withdrawal, as elected in advance by each director.

Director and Executive Stock Deferral Plan.    Each director may defer taxes otherwise due upon the vesting of restricted stock units. Due to changes in federal tax laws, no deferral elections for stock options are currently permitted under the plan. The director is credited with a number of share units as of the vesting date based on his or her advance deferral election. In general, amounts deferred under the plan are not paid until the director retires from the Board. However, directors may also establish sub-accounts from which amounts are to be paid on specific pre-retirement timetables established by the director. Amounts deferred are paid in shares of our common stock, at the director’s option, either in a lump sum or in annual installments over a period of up to 15 years for retirement distributions, or up to five years for a scheduled withdrawal. We make no contributions to this plan, but we pay all costs and expenses incurred in its administration.

Director Stock Ownership Guidelines.    Our Bylaws require all directors to own our stock while serving as a director. Our stock ownership guidelines, which were amended by the Compensation Committee in November 2010 to reflect market data, require that each non-employee director own shares of our stock having a value of at least five times the annual cash retainer, no later than the fifth anniversary of the annual meeting of shareholders at which the director was first elected to the Board. Previously, the guideline was four times the annual cash retainer within four years.

Indemnification.    Under our Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws, the directors and officers are entitled to indemnification from the Company to the fullest extent permitted by Georgia law. We have entered into indemnification

14

Table of Contents

agreements with each of our directors and executive officers. Those agreements do not increase the extent or scope of the indemnification provided, but do establish processes and procedures for indemnification claims.

Other.    Non-employee directors are reimbursed for customary and usual expenses incurred in attending Board, committee and shareholder meetings. Directors are also reimbursed for customary and usual expenses associated with other business activities related to their Board service, including participation in director education programs and memberships in director organizations. We pay premiums on directors’ and officers’ liability insurance policies that we maintain that cover our directors. Directors are indemnified by us against certain liabilities relating to service as a director. We do not provide retirement benefits to non-employee directors.

Changes in Director Compensation for 2012.    In November 2011, upon the recommendation of the Governance Committee after a review of director stock ownership guidelines, market trends and data from the same peer group of companies used for executive compensation purposes, the Board approved the following changes in compensation for non-employee directors effective January 1, 2012:

Executive Officers

The executive officers of the Company and their ages and titles are set forth below. Business experience for at least the past five years and other information is provided in accordance with SEC rules.

Richard F. Smith (52) has been Chairman and CEO since December 15, 2005. He was named Chairman-Elect and CEO and a director in September 2005. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Smith served in various senior executive positions with General Electric Co., including as Chief Operating Officer, GE Insurance Solutions, from 2004 to September 2005 and President and CEO of GE Property and Casualty Reinsurance from 2003 to 2004.

Lee Adrean (60) has been Corporate Vice President and CFO since October 2006. Prior to joining the Company, he served as Executive Vice President and CFO of NDCHealth Corporation from 2004 to 2006. Prior thereto, he served as Executive Vice President and CFO of EarthLink, Inc. from 2000 until 2004.

Kent E. Mast (68) has served as Corporate Vice President and Chief Legal Officer since he joined the Company in 2000. His responsibilities include legal services, global sourcing, security and compliance, government and legislative relations, corporate governance and privacy functions.

Coretha M. Rushing (55) has been Corporate Vice President and Chief Human Resources Officer since 2006. Prior to joining Equifax, she served as an executive coach and HR Consultant with Atlanta-based Cameron Wesley LLC. Prior thereto, she was Senior Vice President of Human Resources at The Coca-Cola Company, where she was employed from 1996 until 2004.

Paul J. Springman (66) has served as Corporate Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer since February 2004. Prior thereto, he was head of the Analytics unit from August 2002 until February 2004.

David C. Webb (56) became Chief Information Officer in January 2010. Prior to joining the Company, he served as Chief Operations Officer for SVB Financial Corp. since 2008, and from 2004 to 2008 he was CIO. Mr. Webb was Vice President, Investment Banking Division at Goldman Sachs & Co., a global investment banking, securities and investment management firm, from 1999 to 2004. He was CIO at Bank One from 1997 to 1999.

15

Table of Contents

J. Dann Adams (54) has been President, TALX since April 2010. Previously, he was President, U.S. Consumer Information Solutions since 2007, and Group Executive, North America Information Services from November 2003 until December 2006.

Paulino R. Barros, Jr. (55) has been President, International since April 2010. Prior to joining the Company, he was founder of PB&C—Global Investments LLC, an international business consulting firm, and served as its President from October 2008. Mr. Barros was President and Managing Director of Hatteras Corporation, a provider of strategic intellectual property consulting and transaction services, from January 2009 until April 2010. He was President of Global Operations for AT&T from January 2007 to October 2008, Chief Product Officer for BellSouth Corporation from January 2005 to December 2006, President of BellSouth Latin America from November 2003 to December 2004, and Corporate Vice President and General Manager—Latin America Group for Motorola from October 1998 to November 2000.

Alejandro Gonzalez (42) has been President, North America Commercial Solutions since January 2010. He was Senior Vice President of Strategic Marketing from December 2005 to December 2009, and Customer Experience Leader for GE Insurance Solutions from January 2005 to December 2005.

Joseph M. Loughran, III (44) has been President, North America Personal Solutions since January 2010. He was Senior Vice President—Corporate Development from April 2006 to December 2009. Prior to joining Equifax, he held various executive roles at BellSouth Corporation from May 2001 to April 2006, including Managing Director-Corporate Strategy and Planning from May 2005 to April 2006, and various roles with McKinsey & Company, King & Spalding LLP, and Lazard Frères & Co.

Rodolfo M. Ploder (51) has been President, U.S. Consumer Information Solutions since April 2010. He was President, International since January 2007 and Group Executive, Latin America from February 2004 to January 2007.

Nuala M. King (58) has been Senior Vice President and Controller since May 2006. She was Vice President and Corporate Controller from March 2004 to April 2006. Prior to joining the Company, Ms. King served as Corporate Controller for UPS Capital from March 2001 until March 2004.

REVIEW, APPROVAL OR RATIFICATION OF TRANSACTIONS WITH RELATED PERSONS

The Board has adopted a written policy for approval of transactions between the Company and its directors, director nominees, executive officers, greater than five percent beneficial owners and their respective immediate family members, where the amount of the transaction is expected to exceed $120,000 in a single calendar year. The policy provides that the Audit Committee reviews transactions subject to the policy and decides whether or not to approve or ratify those transactions. In doing so, the Audit Committee determines whether the transaction is in the best interests of the Company. In making that determination, the Audit Committee takes into account the following, among other factors it deems appropriate:

The Governance Committee also determines the impact or potential impact on a director’s independence in the event the related party is a director, an immediate family member of a director, or an entity in which a director is a partner, shareholder or executive officer.

The Board has determined that all Board members, except Mr. Smith, are independent under the applicable NYSE and SEC rules and our Director Independence Standards. In making these determinations, the

16

Table of Contents

Board considered the types and amounts of commercial dealings between the Company and the companies and organizations with which the directors are affiliated. In each case, Audit Committee approval or ratification was obtained in accordance with our related party transaction approval policy and practices.

Transactions with Related Persons

Robert D. Daleo, a director of the Company, is also Vice Chairman of Thomson Reuters (“TR”), which provides certain financial market data and web-based software to the Company. In 2011, the Company paid $163,512 to TR for these services. In making the determination that this relationship is not material and does not prevent Mr. Daleo from being an independent director of the Company, the Board took into account the fact that the fees paid to TR are comparable to those paid to other firms for similar services and that the amount of fees paid to TR is not significant to both the Company and TR.

Walter W. Driver, Jr., a director of the Company, is also Chairman Southeast of Goldman Sachs & Co. (“Goldman”). In 2011, the Company paid $2,030,860 to Goldman for investment banking services related to the Company’s merger of its Brazilian operations with and into Boa Vista Serviços S.A. In making the determination that this relationship is not material and does not prevent Mr. Driver from being an independent director of the Company, the Board took into account the fact that the fees paid to Goldman are comparable to those paid to other firms for similar services and that the amount of fees paid to Goldman is not significant to both the Company and Goldman.

FMR LLC (“FMR”) beneficially owned approximately 5.96% of the outstanding shares of Equifax common stock based on a Schedule 13G filed on February 14, 2012 with the SEC. An affiliate of FMR, Fidelity Investments Institutional Services Company, Inc. (“Fidelity”) acts as the third party administrator for the Company’s 401(k) Plan. While the Company does not pay any fees directly to Fidelity for administering the 40(k) Plan, entities affiliated with FMR benefit from fees incurred by the plan participants on balances invested in mutual funds through the plan.

PROPOSALS TO BE VOTED ON

This Proxy Statement contains three proposals requiring shareholder action. Proposal 1 requests the election of nine directors to the Board as noted below. Proposal 2 requests the ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for 2012. Proposal 3 is an advisory resolution to approve the Company’s executive compensation. Each of the proposals is discussed in more detail on the pages that follow.

17

Table of Contents

PROPOSAL 1

ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

All members of our Board are elected to serve until the next annual meeting of shareholders and until their successors have been elected and qualified. All of the nominees for election listed below have consented to being named in this Proxy Statement and to serve if elected. Presented below is biographical information for each of the nominees.

Our directors have a variety of backgrounds, which reflects the Board’s continuing objective to achieve a diversity of perspective, experience, knowledge, ethnicity and gender. As more fully discussed below, director nominees are considered on the basis of a range of criteria, including their business knowledge and background, reputation, and global business perspective. They must also have demonstrated experience and ability that is relevant to the Board’s oversight role with respect to Company business and affairs. Each director’s biography includes the particular experience and qualifications that led the Board to conclude that the director should serve on the Board.

18

Table of Contents

19

Table of Contents

20

Table of Contents

21

Table of Contents

22

Table of Contents

23

Table of Contents

PROPOSAL 2

RATIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT OF

INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Audit Committee has appointed Ernst & Young LLP (“E&Y”) as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm and as auditors of the Company’s consolidated financial statements for 2012. E&Y has served as our independent auditor since 2002.

At the Annual Meeting, the shareholders are being asked to ratify the appointment of E&Y as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for 2012. In the event of a negative vote on such ratification, the Audit Committee will reconsider its selection. Even if this appointment is ratified, the Audit Committee, in its discretion, may direct the appointment of a different independent registered public accounting firm at any time during the year if the Audit Committee determines that such a change would be in the best interest of the Company and its shareholders. Representatives of E&Y are expected to be present at the Annual Meeting and to respond to any questions.

Fees Paid to Auditor

The following table sets forth the fees billed by E&Y to the Company for services rendered for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010:

Audit and Non-Audit Fees

Policy on Audit Committee Pre-Approval of Audit and Non-Audit Services Performed by the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Company maintains an auditor independence policy that mandates that the Audit Committee approve the audit and non-audit services in advance. The Audit Committee has authorized its Chair to pre-approve certain permissible audit and non-audit services that arise between Audit Committee meetings, provided the Audit Committee is informed of the decision to pre-approve the services at its next scheduled meeting. In its pre-approval of non-audit services and fees, the Audit Committee considers, among other factors, the possible effect of the performance of such services on the auditor’s independence. The Audit Committee has determined that performance of services other than audit services is compatible with maintaining E&Y’s independence.

To avoid potential conflicts of interest in maintaining auditor independence, the law prohibits a publicly traded company from obtaining certain non-audit services from its independent registered public accounting firm. In 2010 and 2011, we did not obtain any of these prohibited services from E&Y. The Company uses other accounting firms for these types of non-audit services.

24

Table of Contents

PROPOSAL 3

ADVISORY RESOLUTION TO APPROVE EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

The Company is asking its shareholders to cast an advisory vote to approve the 2011 compensation of our named executive officers as disclosed in this Proxy Statement. This “say-on-pay” proposal gives our shareholders the opportunity to express their views on the design and effectiveness of our executive compensation program.

Our executive compensation program is designed to attract, motivate and retain our named executive officers, who are critical to our success. Please read the “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” beginning on page 28 (the “CD&A”) and the tables and narrative that follow for additional details about our executive compensation program, including information about the 2011 compensation of our named executive officers.

At the 2011 annual meeting, we asked our shareholders to indicate if we should hold an advisory vote on the compensation of our named executive officers every one, two or three years, with our Board recommending an annual advisory vote as a good corporate governance practice. Since approximately 87% of the votes cast were in favor of an annual advisory vote, we will continue to hold annual advisory votes on executive compensation until at least the next required shareholder advisory vote on frequency in 2017 in accordance with SEC rules.

Outcome of 2011 Shareholder Say-on-Pay Vote and Compensation Actions Taken

At last year’s annual meeting of shareholders, approximately 83% of the shares voted were cast in support of the Company’s executive compensation and related disclosures for 2010 in connection with the shareholder advisory vote on executive compensation. The Compensation Committee viewed the results of this vote as broad shareholder support for our pay for performance executive compensation philosophy. As a result, following its annual review of our executive compensation philosophy, the Compensation Committee decided to retain our general approach to executive compensation, with an emphasis on short-term and long-term incentive compensation that rewards our senior executives when they deliver value for our shareholders.

In addition, beginning in early 2011, the Compensation Committee met several times to consider ways to strengthen our pay for performance culture at Equifax and to more closely align equity incentives to creation of long-term value for our shareholders. The Committee reviewed advice from its independent compensation consultant as well as additional feedback from our ongoing shareholder engagement program. The Committee determined that, beginning in 2012, named executive officers and certain other senior officers will receive at least one-half of their annual long-term incentive opportunity in three-year “Performance Shares,” instead of stock option awards, and the remainder of the award will continue to consist of restricted stock units which cliff vest in three years. The Performance Shares will pay out, if at all, in shares of our common stock depending on our total shareholder return performance (stock price change and assuming reinvestment of dividends) over a three-year period relative to that of the S&P 500 index (as constituted on the grant date, subject to certain adjustments). See page 46, “Actions Taken with Respect to 2012 Compensation” for additional information regarding the new Performance Share incentive program.

2011 Business and Shareholder Return Highlights

For 2011, Equifax reported strong business results from continuing operations despite a persistent challenging economic environment. Operating revenue increased 5% to $2.0 billion and operating income rose 10% to $471 million, compared to the prior year. Our total shareholder return in 2011 was 10% compared to 2% for the S&P 500 index, -4% for the S&P Commercial & Professional Services index and -10% for the S&P 500 Banking index.

25

Table of Contents

2011 Compensation Program Highlights

Highlights of our 2011 compensation program included the following:

Our Compensation Committee regularly reviews our executive compensation program with its independent compensation consultant to ensure proper alignment of the program with our shareholders’ interests and current market practices; to establish appropriate performance targets based on our strategic and operating plans; and to ensure that these programs do not create inappropriate or excessive risk that is likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company. We closely monitor the compensation programs and pay levels of executives from companies of similar size and complexity, so that we may ensure that our compensation programs are within the norm of market practices. This enables us to retain our executive officers in a highly competitive market for executive talent.

26

Table of Contents

Advisory Vote and Board Recommendation

We request shareholder approval of the 2011 compensation of our named executive officers as disclosed in this Proxy Statement pursuant to SEC compensation disclosure rules (which includes the “Compensation Discussion and Analysis,” the compensation tables, and the narrative disclosures that accompany the compensation tables within the Executive Compensation section of this Proxy Statement). This vote is not intended to address any specific element of compensation, but rather the overall compensation of our named executive officers and the compensation philosophy, policies and practices described in this Proxy Statement.

Accordingly, we ask that you vote “FOR” the following resolution at the Annual Meeting:

“RESOLVED, that the shareholders of Equifax Inc. approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation of the named executive officers, as disclosed in the Company’s Proxy Statement for the 2012 Annual Meeting of Shareholders pursuant to the compensation disclosure rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission, including the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, the 2011 Summary Compensation Table and the other related tables and disclosure within the Executive Compensation section of this Proxy Statement.”

As an advisory vote, the outcome of the vote on this Proposal is not binding upon us. However, our Compensation Committee, which is responsible for designing and administering our executive compensation programs, values the opinions expressed by our shareholders in their vote on this Proposal and will carefully evaluate the outcome of this vote when making future compensation decisions for our named executive officers.

27

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT

The Compensation, Human Resources & Management Succession Committee (the “Compensation Committee”) has reviewed and discussed with management the Compensation Discussion and Analysis contained in this Proxy Statement. Based upon this review and discussion, the Compensation Committee recommended to the Board of Directors that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this Proxy Statement and incorporated by reference in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011.

Members of the Compensation, Human Resources & Management Succession Committee

L. Phillip Humann, Chair    Siri S. Marshall    Mark B. Templeton

COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

This section explains the Company’s executive compensation program as it relates to the following “named executive officers” (the “NEOs”) whose compensation information is presented in the tables following this discussion in accordance with SEC rules:

Executive Summary

Objectives. The Compensation Committee considers the following objectives in setting executive compensation:

To support our businesses with strong execution, we strive to create a dynamic and energized work environment that attracts and retains great people who contribute directly to creating organizational priorities, innovation, customer focus and growth for the Company. As summarized below, our 2011 executive compensation program rewarded our NEOs for the successful execution of our business objectives, and we continued to listen to the opinions expressed by our shareholders regarding the design of this program.

28

Table of Contents

2011 Company Financial Performance. Our operating and financial performance was strong in 2011, as shown in the table below:

* Excludes the impact of certain items that affected comparability between the years, including acquisition-related amortization expense, a loss on the deconsolidation of our Brazilian business and an income tax benefit. See the reconciliation of non-GAAP financial measures to the corresponding GAAP financial measures included in Appendix B to this Proxy Statement.

2011 Total Shareholder Return. In 2011, we outperformed each of the S&P 500, S&P 500 Commercial & Professional Services, and S&P 500 Banking stock indices on a total shareholder return basis (share price change and assuming reinvestment of dividends):

We returned approximately $220.4 million to our shareholders in 2011 through the payment of $78.1 million in dividends and $142.3 million in stock repurchases. Beginning in the fourth quarter of 2010, we reevaluated how we return value to our shareholders and increased our quarterly dividend by 300% from $0.04 to $0.16 per share, to deliver a more meaningful cash return to our shareholders, targeted by the Board at a range of 25% to 35% of our net income. In February 2012, the Board approved an additional 12.5% quarterly dividend increase, to $0.18 per share.

2011 Executive Compensation. Our 2011 compensation program for the NEOs resulted in the following actions and values:

29

Table of Contents

Other compensation actions taken for 2011 included the following:

30

Table of Contents

2011 Executive Compensation Compared to 2010. Our executive compensation program for 2011 consisted of base salary, an annual cash incentive, long-term equity incentives, and other benefits. As illustrated in the chart below, for 2011 the percentage of target total direct compensation for the NEOs approved by the Compensation Committee as performance-based pay (the combination of target annual incentive bonus and target long-term equity incentive award) represented 82% of total direct compensation for the CEO and 67% on average for the other NEOs:

Target 2011 Direct Compensation Mix

Actual 2011 Compensation Mix. As illustrated in the chart below, for 2011, the performance-based pay (the combination of bonus and long-term equity incentive awards at grant date fair value) approved by the Compensation Committee for the NEOs that was paid based on the Company’s actual performance represented 83% of total direct compensation for the CEO and 71% on average for the other NEOs:

Actual 2011 Direct Compensation Mix

31

Table of Contents

Comparison of Realized Pay, 2010-2011. The table below supplements the Summary Compensation Table that appears on page 47. This table shows the compensation actually realized in 2011 and 2010 by each NEO. This supplemental table also illustrates the impact that our above-target financial performance in 2011 had on realized compensation by facilitating a comparison of the 2011 realized compensation amounts with the 2010 amounts.

The primary difference between this supplemental table and the standard Summary Compensation Table is the method used to value stock options and stock awards. SEC rules require that the grant date fair value of all stock options and stock awards be reported in the Summary Compensation Table for the year in which they were granted. As a result, a significant portion of the total compensation amounts reported in the Summary Compensation Table relate to stock options and stock awards that have not vested and for which the value is therefore uncertain (and which may end up having no value at all). In contrast, the supplemental table below includes only stock options and stock awards that vested during the applicable year and shows the value of those awards as of the applicable vesting date. It should be noted that there is no assurance that the NEOs will actually realize the value attributed to these awards even in this supplemental table, since the ultimate value of the stock options will depend on when the options are exercised and the underlying shares are liquidated and the ultimate value of the stock awards will depend on when the restricted shares are liquidated.

Realized Pay Table

32

Table of Contents

Comparison of 2011 Target and Realized Equity Compensation. The table below compares, for each NEO, the hypothetical aggregate value of all stock options and stock awards that vested during 2011, had all of the awards vested at target; and the actual aggregate value of all stock options and stock awards that vested in 2011 as shown above in the Realized Pay Table. This information provides additional context to 2011 NEO compensation by showing the impact that our financial performance in 2011 had on the value of realized equity compensation.

Target vs. Realized Equity Table

Other Compensation Practices That Also Benefit Shareholders. We believe our executive pay is reasonable and provides appropriate incentives to our executives to achieve our financial and strategic goals without encouraging them to take excessive risks in their business decisions. We regularly evaluate the major risks to our business, including how risks taken by management could impact the value of executive compensation. To this end, we note the following aspects of our compensation program that mitigate risks:

Each Compensation Committee member is independent as defined in the corporate governance listing standards of the NYSE and our Director Independence Standards. The Compensation Committee engages and is advised by an independent compensation consultant on all NEO pay decisions who keeps the Committee apprised of evolving compensation best practices.

33

Table of Contents

2011 Shareholder Say-on-Pay Vote and Compensation Actions Taken

At last year’s annual meeting of shareholders, approximately 83% of the shares voted were cast in support of the Company’s executive compensation and related disclosures for 2010 in connection with the shareholder advisory vote on executive compensation (the “Say-on-Pay vote”). The Compensation Committee viewed the results of this Say-on-Pay vote as broad shareholder support for our executive compensation program and made no changes to our program specifically as a result of this vote.

In 2011, the Company continued to engage with its largest shareholders and received their feedback on executive compensation practices. In early 2011, the Compensation Committee, weighing this feedback, advice from its compensation consultant and the positions of several proxy voting advisory firms, undertook a thorough review of the structure of our long-term incentive program to analyze how to more closely align these incentives with the creation of long-term value for our shareholders. The Committee decided to directly link a substantial portion of our future long-term incentives to our long-term total shareholder return (“TSR”) performance compared to a representative broad index of companies.

Beginning with the annual equity award to NEOs in February 2012, at least one-half of the grant date value of long-term incentives will be in performance-based restricted shares (the “Performance Shares”) to be earned after a three-year performance period, and the remainder will continue to consist of time-vested restricted stock units which cliff vest after three years. This compares to our prior practice of awarding the target long-term incentives in an equal mix of time-vested restricted stock units and stock options. For further information on the Performance Shares, see “Actions Taken with Respect to 2012 Compensation” on page 46.

34

Table of Contents

Principal Components of the Executive Compensation Program

For 2011, the Compensation Committee authorized an executive compensation program to accomplish the objectives described above, as summarized in the following table:

35

Table of Contents

How We Determine the Total Amount of Compensation

Benchmarking Process. We consider market pay practices when setting executive compensation. The Compensation Committee uses benchmarking to guide decision-making with respect to executive pay levels.

The Compensation Committee negotiated Mr. Smith’s initial CEO compensation and benefit package in 2005 in the competitive manner required to induce him to leave GE Insurance Solutions, where he was Chief Operating Officer and had significant retention incentives in place after 22 years of experience. Since that time, the Committee has adjusted his pay opportunities based almost entirely on movement in the competitive market for CEO pay. His actual total compensation for 2011 (excluding the annual change in pension value, which fluctuates due to changes in the discount rate and other actuarial assumptions) has remained near 2008 levels, with declines in some intervening years, corresponding to annual changes equal to the constant sample general industry market movement for CEOs from the Aon Hewitt Total Compensation Measurement database. Based on that data, and notwithstanding his strong performance over this period, Mr. Smith has not received a base salary increase since 2008. In 2011, consistent with the above-described market movement, his target annual incentive opportunity was increased by 5% to 105% of base salary, and his long-term incentive value (as calculated by the Committee) increased by 14.2% from levels that had declined in 2010 due to negative market movement.

The table below shows the strong correlation between CEO total compensation (excluding the annual change in pension value) and the indexed cumulative total shareholder return (“TSR”) of our stock over the period 2006-2011:

* Excluding annual change in pension value and using grant date fair value for all equity awards.

The annual change in pension value for Mr. Smith for the years 2006-2011 was approximately $155.7 thousand, $844.3 thousand, $1.19 million, $1.41 million, $1.66 million and $2.32 million, respectively. See also “Pension Benefits at 2011 Fiscal Year-End” on page 53.

For our other NEOs, in 2011 we conducted a detailed market review of executive pay to evaluate each element of pay and benefit competitiveness, review pay practices and compare performance against market data as described below. This analysis was discussed and reviewed by the Compensation Committee with its compensation consultant. Two primary types of market data were used to compile this analysis:

36

Table of Contents

This 2011 compensation peer group was unchanged from the group used in 2010 except for the deletion of Perot Systems Corporation (acquired by Dell Corporation in 2009). This group includes companies against which we compete directly or indirectly for capital, executive talent and, in some cases, business. Because there were no publicly-held, stand-alone direct U.S. competitors across all of our businesses, we focus on companies that compete with us in a significant aspect of our business, have similar customers, or are in the business of data and analytics-based business solutions delivered through technology, and which are similarly complex. Industries represented by these companies included information and delivery systems, publishing, specialized finance, information technology consulting services, data processing and outsourced services, and application software. We reviewed and updated our comparator peer group for executive compensation to reflect changes in the industries in which we operate and the goals of our long-term growth strategy. The companies included in the peer group differ from those listed in the indices used to prepare our stock price performance graphs which can be found in our 2011 Annual Report and Form 10-K because we believe that the companies listed in the peer group more closely represent the labor markets in which we compete for executive talent.

Use of “Tally Sheets” and Wealth Accumulation Analysis. In 2011, Meridian prepared for review by the Compensation Committee “tally sheets” relating to compensation of the NEOs. The tally sheets quantified the total compensation package, the impact of stock price change on the value of existing long-term incentives, fluctuations in the amount of wealth created from prior equity grants, and amounts payable upon hypothetical employment change events. The summaries allowed the Committee to assess the cumulative impact of its past compensation decisions. As a result of viewing the tally sheets, the Committee did not deem any changes to be necessary to the structure of the total compensation package or specific NEO compensation.

Other Factors Considered in Setting Pay Opportunities for NEOs other than the CEO. The CEO and the Compensation Committee consider a number of factors in addition to the market data in determining individual pay amounts (e.g., base salaries, the individual portion of short-term incentive, and yearly equity grants). Such factors include an individual’s general level of performance, demonstrated success in meeting or exceeding business objectives and creating shareholder value, job market conditions, criticality to our business, succession planning considerations, salary budget guidelines, and the individual’s pay in the context of others at the Company). The application of discretion based on such factors may result in pay opportunities that are different from market as determined above. The Committee has not adopted a policy with regard to the relationship of compensation between or among the CEO and the other NEOs or other employees and exercises its discretion in determining actual and relative compensation levels. Overall compensation opportunities reflect our executives’ positions, responsibilities and tenure and are generally similar for executives who have comparable levels of responsibility (although actual payouts may differ depending on relative performance). Our CEO has ultimate responsibility for the strategic direction of the Company, and therefore is the most highly paid. CEO compensation also reflects the importance of his leadership to the successful design and execution of our business strategy.

2011 Annual Cash Incentive Opportunities. The target annual cash incentive opportunities for 2011, expressed as a percentage of base salary, were unchanged from 2010 for the NEOs (other than the CEO) as described above under “Benchmarking Process.”

2011 Long-Term Incentive Opportunities. As in prior years, 2011 long-term incentive opportunities for the NEOs (other than the CEO) were set in a range of plus or minus 25% around the average of the peer group median. The CEO took individual performance and other factors into account in recommending for Compensation Committee approval the award sizes for the other NEOs, as discussed more fully below.

37

Table of Contents

Analysis of 2011 Compensation

Base Salary. We provide our NEOs with a base salary to compensate them for services rendered during the year. Consistent with the Company’s philosophy of tying pay to performance, our executives receive a relatively small percentage of their overall targeted direct compensation in the form of base pay, ranging from 18% for the CEO to an average of 33% for the other NEOs in 2011. The executives are paid an amount in the form of base pay sufficient to attract competent executive talent and retain a stable management team.

The Compensation Committee assessed whether each NEO’s base pay was sufficient to retain competent executive talent and maintain a stable management team, considering factors such as the benchmarking data described above, an internal review of the executive’s position and current compensation, both individually and relative to other executive officers, experience, scope, breadth and complexity of responsibilities, retention considerations, and the individual performance as discussed below.

In February 2011, the Compensation Committee approved merit salary increases for most senior executives based on the Committee’s review of market data, adjustments for position, retention considerations, and individual performance assessments conducted by the CEO. The merit salary increases ranged from 3.2% to 4.3% for the NEOs except for Mr. Smith. Notwithstanding Mr. Smith’s strong performance, the Committee determined that movement in the market data for CEOs did not support a base salary increase for the CEO in 2011.

Annual Cash Incentive Opportunity. Our annual cash incentive plan, or AIP, is part of our shareholder-approved 2008 Omnibus Incentive Plan. The AIP is designed to reward high performance and achievement of corporate and individual goals by key employees, including our NEOs; to encourage actions that will result in the growth of shareholder value; and to ensure a competitive compensation program given the marketplace prevalence of short-term incentive compensation. The NEOs are eligible for cash incentive awards based on the Company’s attainment of specific performance measures established by the Compensation Committee at the beginning of the plan year. The 2011 AIP was structured as described below for our NEOs:

38

Table of Contents

The 2011 corporate financial performance objectives for the NEOs, all of whom had Company-wide responsibilities, were based on the Company’s operating revenue (used to measure top line business growth) and Adjusted EPS (used to measure the profitability of that growth). In March 2011, the Compensation Committee established corporate financial goals required to earn a cash incentive award for 2011, as follows:

The foregoing objectives were subject to adjustment by the Compensation Committee for the effect of material acquisitions and divestitures and certain other extraordinary items. The Committee exercised its discretion to adjust the foregoing goals to eliminate the impact of the Company’s divestiture of Brazilian operations. The threshold, target and maximum operating revenue goals noted above were reduced by $49.7 million to $1,813,300,000, by $54.7 million to $1,921,300,000, and by $57.9 million to $1,974,100,000, respectively, and the corresponding threshold, target and maximum Adjusted EPS goals were increased to $2.334, $2.46 and $2.566, respectively, from $2.31, $2.45 and $2.56, respectively.

Individual personal objectives are specific to each executive officer position and may relate to:

Personal objectives are set at the start of the fiscal year. At the end of the fiscal year, the CEO uses his judgment to evaluate the performance of the other named executive officers against their personal objectives approved by him, taking into account performance for the just-completed fiscal year versus predefined commitments for the fiscal year; unforeseen financial, operational and strategic issues of the Company; and any other information deemed relevant by the CEO. The Compensation Committee reviews and approves this performance evaluation and evaluates the performance of the CEO in a similar manner, with input from the full Board. Individual performance rating categories and award opportunities for the NEOs were as follows:

The 2011 individual performance ratings for the NEOs ranged from “exceeds expectations” to “distinguished,” as reflected below in the 2011 AIP calculations under the “Weighted Individual Incentive Achieved” column. In each case, the NEOs met or exceeded their applicable objectives.

All of the NEOs had objectives related to people, including leadership behaviors, performance management, feedback and coaching, employee recognition, talent management and communication of key business objectives. All of the named executive officers had objectives related to improving operational

39

Table of Contents

efficiencies through LEAN and Workout programs to reduce costs, disaster recovery planning, customer satisfaction, enterprise risk management and talent management and succession planning. Each NEO also had Company-wide objectives related to long-term strategic objectives.

Mr. Smith achieved a distinguished rating on his individual objectives for 2011. He successfully executed on the Company’s strategy of broadening and deepening product offerings to improve financial performance in all five business units in a highly challenging global business environment, generating $2.0 billion in revenue with an operating margin of 24% and diluted EPS of $1.87 from continuing operations ($2.52 Adjusted EPS). He led the Company’s efforts to continue strategically building and rebalancing its capabilities with high value acquisitions, including Workload, IntelliReal, eThority, and DataVision Resources. Mr. Smith refined and executed the Company’s long-term Growth Playbook strategy by expanding our role in client business decisions and processes through product innovation and delivering unique value to the customer; employing advanced analytics and technology to help drive client growth, security, efficiency and profitability; investing in emerging opportunities; geographic, diversifying data sources and products; maximizing the use of analytics and decisioning technology to differentiate the Company’s product offerings; implementing measures to control expense growth in line with revenue growth; driving operational efficiencies through LEAN, Workout and other continuous business process improvements; accelerating the pace of new product innovation and product transfers across the Company; driving a performance-driven culture to deliver sustained long-term business growth; retaining and developing a strong leadership team; and demonstrating exemplary leadership and values.

Mr. Adrean achieved a distinguished rating on his individual objectives for 2011. As leader of the Company’s Finance function, these objectives included implementing measures to control expense growth in line with revenue growth; improving financial analytical capabilities and operational metrics to help focus management on key revenue, customer and product profitability drivers and opportunities in the business; developing the 2012 corporate budget consistent with long-term growth objectives; implementing strategies to optimize the corporate tax position; supporting corporate growth initiatives; developing global finance organization capabilities and enhancing financial system controls; supporting the Company’s acquisition efforts with financial diligence and valuation analyses; effectively managing the Company’s capital structure, ratings, access to capital and allocation of capital among internal growth investments, acquisitions, and return to shareholders; enhancing the communication of the Company’s strategy and growth prospects to the investment community; and enhancing and overseeing global enterprise risk management processes with effective monitoring across all major risk areas.

Ms. Rushing achieved a distinguished rating on her individual objectives for 2011. Her objectives as head of Human Resources included deploying a global employee career framework initiative to improve the Company’s staffing flexibility, add bench strength and map career development paths; improving employee engagement and support; supporting acquisitions and the integration of acquisitions; redesigning benefit plans to better align with the Company’s meritocracy culture and the competitive market for talent; and refining and overseeing rigorous global talent management, performance management and succession planning programs.

Mr. Mast achieved a rating of exceeds expectations on his individual objectives as Chief Legal Officer. The objectives included managing global regulatory and legislative matters; supervising legal staff and support for all geographies; successfully directing of the Company’s global sourcing, security and compliance operations; directing the Company’s continued success in the quality of our litigation management and outcomes; continuing to meet the demands of increasingly complex litigation, regulatory and political environments; and providing effective support for mergers, acquisitions and other enterprise transactions.

Mr. Springman achieved a rating of exceeds expectations on his individual objectives as Chief Marketing Officer. His objectives included achieving record new product innovation revenue for business units; launching new revenue programs in new markets and verticals; building a new consumer database which includes telecommunications, utility, cable and satellite payment information and launched initial products; launching high value solutions and building a strong pipeline of products utilizing Decision360^™ data; and expanding data resources and improved quality across all markets.

40

Table of Contents

Summary of 2011 AIP Results

The table below summarizes the performance measures, weights, targets and actual results we used to determine the 2011 AIP awards to our NEOs. Performance goal achievement for 2011 was certified by the CFO and approved by the Compensation Committee in early February 2012:

Summary of 2011 Annual Cash Incentive Awards

Long-Term Equity Compensation. Long-term equity compensation is designed to give key employees, including the NEOs, a longer-term stake in the Company, provide incentives for future performance, act as a long-term retention tool and align employee and shareholder interests over the longer term. In 2011, the Company used stock options and time-vested restricted stock units to accomplish these goals. Stock options closely align employee incentives with shareholder interests. Since a financial gain from stock options is possible only after the price of the common stock has increased, stock options motivate executives and other employees toward behavior and activities that benefit all shareholders. The value of restricted stock units varies directly with the market price of the common stock, but since some value is likely to be earned, they are used primarily for retention purposes.

The Committee considers individual performance relative to the prior year and the prior year’s awards in granting stock options and restricted stock units.

Non-qualified stock options permit an NEO to purchase shares of our common stock at a per-share exercise price equal to the closing price of our common stock as reported on the NYSE on the grant date. Options granted to NEOs in 2011 have ten-year terms and vest one-third on each of the first three anniversaries of the grant date.

Restricted stock units represent a promise to issue unrestricted shares of our common stock once applicable vesting requirements are satisfied. The restricted stock units issued to NEOs “cliff vest” on the third anniversary of the grant date. The restricted stock units do not accrue dividend equivalent units.

The Compensation Committee awards long-term equity incentives to reward past performance but also to retain executive officers and to provide incentive for exceptional future performance. The value of equity grants increases with the level of position, and for the CEO and other NEOs is the largest element of the total compensation package. In determining the value of stock option and restricted stock unit awards to executive officers, the Committee (in the case of the CEO’s grant) and the CEO (in the case of recommendations for grants to other NEOs), consider numerous factors, including the benchmarking data described below, individual performance, and the Company’s annual budget for equity awards.

The Compensation Committee determines long-term incentive grant values by establishing a dollar value within the appropriate range for each NEO other than the CEO and then converts this dollar value to a number of restricted stock units (with each share being valued at 89% of our six-month average stock price) and non-qualified stock options (using a Black-Scholes formula equaling 30% of the six-month average stock price in 2011). By using this approach, the number of stock options and restricted stock units varies from year to year

41

Table of Contents

based upon, among other things, stock price, even if the award value at grant stays consistent from year to year. The approximate 50/50 split of target grant value between stock options and restricted stock units in 2011 balanced the relative certainty and retention value offered by restricted stock units with the higher risk and performance leverage of stock options.

The Committee approved equity awards to the NEOs in April 2011, informed by the benchmarking data described above. The table below details the target grant value used by the Compensation Committee to determine the number of options and restricted stock units to be granted. Actual grant date values, computed in accordance with applicable accounting standards, are disclosed in the “Grants of Plan-Based Awards in Fiscal Year 2011” table on page 49. As noted above under “Realized Pay Table” and “Target vs. Realized Equity Table,” the actual value of equity awards that may be realized by the NEOs will depend on their continued service and the Company’s future stock price performance.

April 2011 Target Value for Equity Grants