Good article on the hubris of CEO's and how it has effected the financial crisis
mammasan
Posts: 5,656
http://www.reuters.com/article/reutersEdge/idUSN1341059120080914?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=10003
To add to the article recently ousted WaMu CEO Kerry Killinger had the opportunity to sell WaMu to Chase a few months ago, and possibly save the struggling company, but didn't because he didn't want to loose his job. Well now he has lost his job and WaMu one of the nations largest deposit based banks is in serious trouble.
To add to the article recently ousted WaMu CEO Kerry Killinger had the opportunity to sell WaMu to Chase a few months ago, and possibly save the struggling company, but didn't because he didn't want to loose his job. Well now he has lost his job and WaMu one of the nations largest deposit based banks is in serious trouble.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
I agree. What also burns me is that WaMu's new CEO received a $22 million dollar salary plus a $17 million signing bonus without even spending a day in the office. What has he done to deserve a $17 million dollar, guarenteed, signing bonus. I can understand if the bonus is tied into the success of the company but it's not. So if this new guy simply continues to drive WaMu into the ground he still gets his $17 million dollar bonus plus what ever portion of his salary is guarenteed.
I agree completely.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Executive Excess 2008 highlights five distinct U.S. tax subsidies for executive pay. These are actually market distorting, in that they let top executives and investment fund managers take home more than they would if they played by the same tax rules as regular people. Altogether, Executive Excess 2008 reports, the five tax loopholes heap $20 billion in subsidies on the corporate and hedge fund honchos.
* The hedge fund manager loophole, involving what is called "carried interest," enables investment fund managers to treat most of their salaries as capital gains, and to pay taxes at the capital gains rate, rather than the ordinary income tax rate. Annual cost to taxpayers: $2.6 billion.
* The pensions for the rich loophole. While regular people can place a maximum of $15,500 in 401(k) plans -- deferring taxes until they withdraw the money -- CEOs can place unlimited amounts in deferred pay plans. Annual cost to taxpayers: $80 million.
* The offshoring loophole. Although companies cannot deduct the expense of executive compensation in deferred accounts, this is no problem for businesses registered in offshore tax havens. Set up an offshore subsidiary, and you can deduct the deferred income from revenue. Annual cost to taxpayers: $2 billion.
* The greed loophole. Money spent on wages and salaries are deducted from corporate revenues, and is not taxable. For top executives, however, U.S. tax rules impose a limit: corporations cannot deduct salaries and compensation that is more than "reasonable." An effort to define reasonable as $1 million has been entirely circumvented -- and corporations can, in effect, deduct whatever they pay CEOs. Annual cost to taxpayers: $5.2 billion.
(the most obnoxious)
* The double-standard loophole. Stock options -- the right to buy stock at a preset value, at a later date -- are now a huge component of executive pay. For their internal accounting, corporations value stock options using the value of the stock on the date of the option grant. For tax purposes, however, they can deduct the generally much higher value of the stock on the date the options are exercised. In other words, they can deduct more than they list as their expense. Annual cost to taxpayers: $10 billion.
I completely agree. The $400 million payout to the Exxon CEO is ludicrous and disgusting.
I agree that a law like that would be dangerous, but what are we supposed to do. This is a huge problem because CEO are not held fully accountable. Yes they loose their jobs but they get multi-million dollar packages.
While in this environment of high gas prices, and the energy crisis we are getting into, huge payouts like this bother me, but... At least in your example, the Exxon CEO is running a company that is doing extremely well.
Where I have a huge problem, is like Catch22 pointed out, is when companies go completely under, employees lose jobs, pensions, etc., and the CEO still gets millions of dollars.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
But if that is the "going rate" for a talented CEO what else can the company do? I imagine that with a company that is already a train wreck like that you want to hire someone who is extremely competent to get things back on track. And if you are someone suited for that job, you could probably take lots of other offers from companies that aren't on the verge of going completely out of business that are probably just as lucrative, they have to make you a really good offer to get you (plus if they are about to go under any second now I would want to make sure I got my money upfront). So unless they want to hire someone straight out of business school who doesn’t know what he is doing at all, and pay him next to nothing, how exactly are they going to get someone new? I mean I imagine the pool of talented CEO's is rather small.