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 Stories, Events

Ref. : Civic Events

Ref. : Arts & Education Events

Ref. : Public Service Notices

Books, Films, Arts & Education

Ref. : Letters to the editor

Health Care & Environment

03.24 Time running out to save the Earth's plants and animals

03.23 'Dead zone' in Gulf of Mexico will take decades to recover from farm pollution

03.23 EU in 'state of denial' over destructive impact of farming on wildlife

03.23 The ban on assisted death ignores the reality of illnesses like dementia

03.23 Lignite mining: Greece’s dirty secret - in pictures

03.22 Interview: Paul Ehrlich: 'Collapse of civilisation is a near certainty within decades'

03.21 THE BATTLE FOR PARADISE [renewable energy is obviously essential for rebuilding]

03.21 London air pollution activists 'prepared to go to prison' to force action

03.21 London air pollution activists 'prepared to go to prison' to force action

03.21 Subsidy-free renewable energy projects set to soar in UK, analysts say

03.21 'Catastrophe' as France's bird population collapses due to pesticides

03.21 A judge asks basic questions about climate change. We answer them

News Media Matters

03.22 Bernie Sanders: Russia and Stormy Daniels distract us from real problem of inequality

Daily: FAIR Blog
The Daily Howler

US Politics, Policy & 'Culture'

03.24 The Gun Control Debate: What Debate? [let's disarm playing Rambo]

03.24 The Radical Proposal That Moderate Democrats Should Be Running On

03.24 March for our Lives protests planned for 800 places across the world

03.23 Our manifesto to fix America's gun laws

03.22 Mick Mulvaney manipulated data to justify “tip-stealing” rule: report

03.22 Crooked Together: Two Equally Corrupt Parties Bent In Different Directions [the Sanders-Warren progressives are the standout exceptions]

03.22 'We Need Medicare for All,' Says Warren, But Until That's Achieved Her New Bill Aims to Curb Pain of For-Profit System [4:10 video]

Justice Matters

03.23 In court, Big Oil rejected climate denial

High Crimes?

03.23 Amnesty International slams Western arms sales to Saudi Arabia and allies in Yemen war

Economics, Crony Capitalism

03.20 Russian Roulette review: as Joe Biden said, 'If this is true, it's treason'

International & Futurism

03.24 Yes, John Bolton Really Is That Dangerous [why bring fire to the table when tensions are cooling down?]

03.24 Number of Starving People Surged to 124 Million Last Year Because "People Won't Stop Shooting at Each Other," Says UN Expert

03.24 Canada: more arrests as protest against oil pipeline expansion heats up

03.23 Trump Picks 'Unhinged Advocate for World War III' John Bolton as New National Security Adviser

03.23 At last, good news on Brexit: Britain is heading for Norway


03.22 The evil genius of Cambridge Analytica was to exploit those we trust most [the sociopathic modus operandi of The Trump Organization and Cambridge Analytica are suspiciously identical]

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: