By GottaLaff
This is snarkalicious. "Give, baby, give":
"There's a lesser known victim: Oil company executives... They could lose their second or third homes!"
By GottaLaff
American International Group is preparing to pay millions of dollars more in bonuses to several dozen top corporate executives after an earlier round of payments four months ago set off a national furor.The troubled insurance giant has been pressing the federal government to bless the payments in hopes of shielding itself from renewed public outrage.
The request puts the administration's new compensation czar on the spot by seeking his opinion about bonuses that were promised long before he took his post.
AIG doesn't actually need the permission of Kenneth R. Feinberg, who President Obama appointed last month to oversee the compensation of top executives at seven firms that have received large federal bailouts. But officials at AIG, whose federal rescue package stands at $180 billion, have been reluctant to move forward without political cover from the government. [...]
The payments coming due next week include $2.4 million in bonuses for about 40 high-ranking executives at AIG, according to administration documents from earlier this year. Though the actual sum may have changed since then, the payments are much smaller than those that caused the upheaval in March.
Still, officials at AIG and within the government see them as a land mine.
Gee, ya think?
By GottaLaff
My original post about this here. This is the latest:
U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner denied on Sunday the Obama administration was crafting bailout initiatives to allow companies to evade limits on executive pay and other restrictions imposed by Congress."No, that's not true," Geithner said when asked about a report in Saturday's Washington Post that the White House was trying to allow some exceptions.
"Now, our obligation is to apply the laws that Congress just passed on executive compensation and we're going to do that," he told the CBS program "Face the Nation."
"We're also going to make sure that these programs are as effective as possible in making credit more available to businesses and families across the country."
The Post said President Barack Obama's administration believes it can sidestep the rules because it has in many cases decided not to provide federal aid directly to the financial institutions, instead setting up special entities that act as middlemen to channel the funds. [...]
Geithner also said the U.S. government would not hesitate to oust management of big banks that require "exceptional assistance," as it did last week with General Motors.
He noted the government had shaken up management at financial institutions Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and AIG, "and we'll do that in the future if that is necessary."
Obama senior adviser David Axelrod told "Fox News Sunday" the president does not want to discourage companies from participating in the Treasury programs, but has a tough set of standards on executive pay.
"On some of these programs, we're asking financial companies to come in and help solve this problem by providing more lending, by buying up toxic assets and so on," he said. "We don't want to create disincentives and undermine the program.
"So we have to look very closely at this, making sure that we're not rewarding people for irresponsibility, that people -- that firms that get extraordinary help -- aren't getting, aren't giving out huge bonuses."
"Absolutely, because we want the American taxpayers' assistance going to generate greater lending -- not providing excess compensation," he told CBS.
"It is very important to us that every dollar of assistance we provide goes to expand lending."
By GottaLaff
I may need a talking down. Anyone?
There is much more, and my head is already spinning from other things. The rest of this report just added to that.The Obama administration is engineering its new bailout initiatives in a way that it believes will allow firms benefiting from the programs to avoid restrictions imposed by Congress, including limits on lavish executive pay, according to government officials.
Administration officials have concluded that this approach is vital for persuading firms to participate in programs funded by the $700 billion financial rescue package.
The administration believes it can sidestep the rules because, in many cases, it has decided not to provide federal aid directly to financial companies, the sources said. Instead, the government has set up special entities that act as middlemen, channeling the bailout funds to the firms and, via this two-step process, stripping away the requirement that the restrictions be imposed, according to officials.
Although some experts are questioning the legality of this strategy, the officials said it gives them latitude to determine whether firms should be subject to the congressional restrictions, which would require recipients to turn over ownership stakes to the government, as well as curb executive pay.
The administration has decided that the conditions should not apply in at least three of the five initiatives funded by the rescue package.
This strategy has so far attracted little scrutiny on Capitol Hill, and even some senior congressional aides dealing with the financial crisis said they were unaware of the administration's efforts. Just two weeks ago, Congress erupted in outrage over bonuses being paid at American International Group, with some lawmakers faulting the administration for failing to do more to safeguard taxpayers' interests.
Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y.), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said the congressional conditions should apply to any firm benefiting from bailout funds. He said he planned to review the administration's decisions and might seek to undo them. "We have to make certain that if they are using government money in any sort of way, there should be restrictions," he said.
A Treasury spokesman defended the approach. "These programs are designed to both comply with the law and ensure taxpayers' funds are used most effectively to bring about economic recovery," spokesman Andrew Williams said.
Last night I was cruising around during Rachel's commercials and came across Hannity talking with two FBN talking heads- one deeply up Sean's butt, the other one rather dumbfounded by Sean's ignorance. While SH kept trying to accuse Obama of teh socialism in capping salaries for bailout benefitees, the not-up-Sean's-butt FBN'r kept reiterating the fact that, "If they accept our tax payer dollars, we have a say in how they are spent". I was surprised how unprepared SH seemed to be to respond to dissent. Doesn't look like teh socialism meme is sticking.
A new Quinnipiac poll finds that American voters say by 81% to 16% margin that the government should limit executive compensation at companies receiving federal help, and say 47% to 44% that boards of directors and top managers at these companies should be forced to resign.
Support for income limits is strong among Democrats, Republicans and independent voters and in all income groups, but the call for forced resignations drops as income rises.
By GottaLaff
The financial industry is fighting back against restrictions on executive compensation that Congress included in the massive fiscal stimulus bill last week.
In letters from trade associations and recent interviews, representatives for the financial industry are arguing that the restrictions need to be clarified and are preventing firms from filing accurate financial statements.
Because, you see, they're so transparent and honest and stuff, that accuracy has become their top, toppier, toppiest priority.
In a letter on Thursday to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and Securities and Exchange Commission Chairwoman Mary Shapiro, the Financial Services Roundtable said the executive compensation rules "created serious implementation concerns." Their letter follows one from the American Bankers Association on Wednesday that said the uncertainty is already having a "profound effect" on the industry.
What about the profound effect they've had on the rest of us? That's an even higher priority, right? Right?
"We certainly understand the concerns expressed by the administration and the Congress about large bonuses that have been paid on Wall Street, but this new law is very complex in its reach and its effect on institutions of all sizes, including small community banks," wrote Edward Yingling, president of the ABA. "Our industry is badly in need of immediate clarification."
One specific issue raised by the Financial Services Roundtable is that the law does not make clear who is a "highly-compensated" employee. That ambiguity could drive away some employees who receive large bonuses, but are not necessarily in management. The roundtable also is questioning whether the firms that participate in a new program being set up by the Federal Reserve and the Treasury would also be subject to the law. That program to support consumer credit markets is a key part of Obama's plan for the rest of the $700 billion rescue money.
Okay, fair enough, they want Secretary Geithner to clarify. I have a question: Did America get all the clarification it needs from Wall Street yet?
By GottaLaff
I previously posted about Congress strengthening executive pay limits. Today on the Sunday talk shows, the White House expressed concerns:
The White House is concerned that the stringent limits “could prompt financial institutions to repay the government too quickly.” Financial firm lobbyists are also worried that they will lose personnel, “driving talented employees to companies that aren’t subject to the regulation or to overseas banks.”Well Barney Frank isn't all that concerned. In fact, he's very much in favor of the caps, and good for him (see video). Many of us are relieved that Congress isn't too eager to budge on this one.
Commenting on the issue of “executive compensation,” The New Yorker’s Hendrik Hertzberg recently wrote, “I have to say, I get a little dizzy with disgust whenever I hear that word used to describe some C.E.O.’s pay envelope. … What, exactly, are these people being ‘compensated’ for? Are they victims of crime? Or is it the long hours, the loneliness, the inability to spend time with their children—so much more terrible than the plight of a middle-aged immigrant mother working double shifts as an office cleaner?”!
Technically, it's a Bernie Sanders style executive pay cap, but it's still funny.
The Greens are urging the Federal Government to follow the United States in limiting the salaries paid to the top executives of companies that are bailed out by the Government.
(snip)
Greens leader Bob Brown says he has tried four times to get similar legislation through Parliament, but has been blocked by the major parties.
"I'll be putting pressure on the Government again to act in the wake of Obama to cut back on some of the obscene packages that we have seen in recent years," he said.
"Particularly from those corporations like the banks which are receiving assistance from the tax-payers through the Government in measures that we are seeing going through this Parliament at the moment."
By GottaLaff
At the risk of repeating myself... Change:
The Obama administration is expected to impose a cap of $500,000 for top executives at companies that receive large amounts of bailout money, according to people familiar with the plan.President Obama and Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner will announce the executive compensation plan on Wednesday at 11 a.m.
Executives would also be prohibited from receiving any bonuses above their base pay, except for normal stock dividends.
The new rules would be far tougher than any restrictions imposed during the Bush administration, and they could force executives in the months ahead to accept deep reductions in their current pay. The proposed cap comes amid rising public fury about huge pay packages for executives at financial companies being propped up by federal tax dollars. [...]
Crucial details remained unclear on Tuesday night, including whether the restrictions would apply to all companies that receive money under the so-called Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, or whether they would apply only to the “exceptional” companies that were being rescued from collapse.
.jpg)
