Newspaper logo  
Print view: Gold for Executives, Contempt for Taxpayers

Gold for Executives, Contempt for Taxpayers

by Gerald E. Scorse
Twenty years on, after three presidencies and six Administrations, Section 162(m) stands as a classic example of good intentions leading to bad endings.

Jamie Dimon, the current chairman, president and chief executive officer of JPMorgan Chase, took high heat over his 74% mega-raise, but he’s not at fault. The blame goes to a 1993 boondoggle for bigwigs—a boondoggle that’s cost taxpayers by the billions ever since. Congress should call a halt, and the country’s mood could push it to do just that.

Ironically, the law that launched the boondoggle started out aiming to do the opposite. Lavish corporate pay packages had turned off many Americans as the 1990s began. To fight the trend, the ’92 Clinton-Gore campaign proposed a $1 million cap on the tax deductibility of salaries paid to a firm’s top echelon. Companies have an absolute right to set executive pay. Congress likewise has the right to limit the amount that qualifies as a corporate tax write-off. Once elected, Clinton moved to enact the reform.

The final result—Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code—ended up delivering gold to the corporate elite and a slap in the face to America’s taxpayers. The statute did impose a $1 million deductibility cap on publicly-held corporations, but it also created a huge loophole. It wrote into law what quickly became the most gilded words in the gilded world of executive compensation: "performance-based pay."

As long as the pay meets IRS benchmarks for “performance-based,” its deductibility is unlimited. Boards of directors routinely find ways to hand out mega-million packages of stock grants, stock options, profit-sharing, stock appreciation rights, every imaginable kind of executive sweetener. Twenty years on, after three presidencies and six Administrations, Section 162(m) stands as a classic example of good intentions leading to bad endings.

A 2012 study by the Economic Policy Institute estimates that Section 162(m) is costing the Treasury about $5 billion a year. A fair number of companies ignore the salary cap and pay more in taxes, but that revenue gets swamped by the shortfall from deductible corporate pay. The Treasury’s wounds from 162(m) have festered forever. With inequality soaring, a few in Congress are finally going after a law that works overtime to drive it higher.

In August 2013, Senators Jack Reed (D-RI) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) introduced the Stop Subsidizing Multimillion Dollar Corporate Bonuses Act. Blunt title, blunt purpose: “This legislation would close a major loophole in current corporate tax law by putting an end to unlimited tax write-offs on performance-based executive pay.” The bill calls for a blanket $1 million deductibility cap. As Senator Blumenthal noted, corporations are free to “pay their executives whatever they wish, just not at the expense of American taxpayers...” (The same thinking, under the heading “Stop Subsidies for Excessive Compensation,” appears in the tax reform plan unveiled late last month by the GOP members of the House Ways and Means Committee. That plan takes aim as well at the huge salaries paid out by non-profits.)

Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-TX) introduced a House version of the Reed-Blumenthal bill earlier this year. “Most Americans,” the Congressman said, “would probably be surprised to learn that multimillion dollar executive bonuses are currently tax write-offs.”

Most Americans might be surprised, but legislators in both parties know only too well. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) formerly chaired the Senate Finance Committee. As the 2006 chair, he admitted that Section 162(m) “really hasn’t worked at all. Companies have found it easy to get around...It has more holes than Swiss cheese. And it seems to have encouraged the options industry.” Options play a big part in performance pay; in 2009, Senators Carl Levin (D-MI) and John McCain (R-AZ) co-sponsored a bill which would have extended the current $1 million cap to options awards.

Section 162(m) has failed as tax policy, but it does two things to perfection: it runs up federal red ink, and it shows contempt for taxpayers. Better late than never, Congress should act to stop the bleeding and end the long, long insult.

© 2014 Gerald E. Scorse. Scorse's articles on taxes have appeared in publications across the country.

Copyright © 2014 The Baltimore News Network. All rights reserved.

Republication or redistribution of Baltimore Chronicle content is expressly prohibited without their prior written consent.

Baltimore News Network, Inc., sponsor of this web site, is a nonprofit organization and does not make political endorsements. The opinions expressed in stories posted on this web site are the authors' own.

This story was published on March 22, 2014.

Local News & Opinion

Ref. : Civic Events

Ref. : Arts & Education Events

Ref. : Public Service Notices

Books, Films, Arts & Education

10.06 Teachers vs. Prisons

Open Letters:

Ref. : Letters to the editor

Health Care & Environment

10.08 Cars, aviation, steel ... the stranded assets risk spreads far beyond fossil fuel firms

10.08 How a Manmade Tidal Lagoon Could Change the Future of Clean Energy

10.08 L.A.'s New 'Energy Atlas' Maps Who Sucks the Most Off the Grid

10.07 California governor signs bill legalizing physician-assisted suicide

10.07 The Clean-Energy Moonshot

10.06 The 4 Kinds of People Who Don’t Vaccinate Their Kids

10.06 Seven practical steps to protect our cities from the effects of climate change

10.06 Chile to Create One of World’s Largest Marine Parks

10.06 Citigroup Becomes Third Major Bank to Cut Financing to Coal Industry

News Media Matters

Daily: FAIR Blog
The Daily Howler

US Politics, Policy & 'Culture'

10.08 Planned Parenthood's Cecile Richards: 'In this election, Roe v Wade is on the ballot'

10.08 'The goal is to be the winner': Donald Trump's campaign is for real

10.08 The Future of U.S. Voting May Be U.K. Technology

10.07 The Counted: 'Forced to fire'

10.07 Gun demanding: the psychology of why people want firearms

10.07 Bill Ackman's latest wager: Bloomberg for president

10.07 The Populist Prophet

10.06 Stephen Colbert to Donald Trump: ‘There Is Zero Chance’ You’ll Be President [7:58 video]

10.06 Watch John Oliver Explain Broken U.S. Mental Health System [11:54 video]

Justice Matters

10.08 Donald Trump takes campaign against windfarms to UK supreme court

10.08 Can California Prevent Wage Discrimination Against Women?

High Crimes?

10.06 U.S. General Says Afghans Requested Airstrike That Hit Kunduz Hospital

Economics, Crony Capitalism

10.08 Hillary Clinton Abandons Obama on Trade

10.07 The Corporate-Friendly World of the T.P.P.

10.07 The Good (and Bad) News About Poverty and Global Trade

10.06 Obama faces TPP deal balancing act as Congress considers approval


10.08 In the Montréal Area, 82 Municipalities Begin to Think and Act As One

10.08 All You Need Is Love [An old, true story with a timeless, powerful lesson]

10.08 Ready or Not, the Third Intifada May Be Here [Dear Netanyahu, read the story, above and ponder]

10.07 Nato’s bombs fall like confetti, not containing conflict but spreading it

10.07 Afghan hospital bombing: MSF demands investigation under Geneva conventions

10.07 Activists: Russia, Syria launch coordinated military attack on Assad opponents [2:13 video]

10.07 Boko Haram Has Killed 600 Nigerian Teachers, Displaced 19,000: Teachers Union [Why does the most barbaric behavior in the world have an Islamic basis?]

10.06 Will Istanbul’s new underwater highway just add traffic to a gridlocked city?

10.06 Israel demolishes homes of Palestinian attackers as clashes escalate

We are a non-profit Internet-only newspaper publication founded in 1973. Your donation is essential to our survival.

You can also mail a check to:
Baltimore News Network, Inc.
P.O. Box 42581
Baltimore, MD 21284-2581
This site Web

Public Service Ads: