>>Stuff like that is unconscionable. <<
I agree.
The SEC's position is that they set rules for disclosure, and if a company discloses "gross up" or any other offensive policy and the shareholders (including mutual funds) are too lazy or dumb to read and vote against it, and to vote it down, that's the shareholders' problem. (Or shareholder democracy <ng>).
I think it is the SEC's problem to correct or require better identification. Or for Congress to address it.
But you distort with
>>knows the system well enough to set up deals for himself like those you list for NYSE CEOs. <<
When a CEO gets $18 million with "gross up" so it costs the company $30 million, and a NY Fed Governor gets maybe $160,000 a year or a Treasury Secretary maybe $190,000 a year (and he didn't get the job yet), that's not "like" the CEO deals I wrote about.
Knowing "the system well enough to set up deals for himself" and not doing it, however, is a skill a Treasury Secretary should have.
If a business that lost money in 2008 can now go back up to 5 years to get previously paid taxes refunded, it seems only fair that individuals similarly situated get something similar.
We're in an economic downturn, and various features of the next plan and the one after that will attempt to stimulate spending and investment.
But if some people gamed the system to earn $1 billion, $10 billion, $30 billion, $80 billion, and more, that's where we should have an excess profits tax. |
