Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Eugene

(61,899 posts)
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:56 PM Apr 2016

Regulators introduce new rules to curb Wall Street pay

Source: Washington Post

NEW YORK – U.S. regulators proposed new rules on Thursday to overhaul the way Wall Street executives are paid, addressing years of complaints that excessive bonuses and salaries helped lead to the 2008 financial crisis.

The proposals are aimed at ensuring executives don’t make risky bets to boost their pay and then walk away with a large bonus before the consequences become clear. Under the proposed rules, for example, the nation’s largest banks would have up to seven years to “claw back” an executives’ bonuses if it turns out their actions hurt the institution.

The regulations are one of the last uncompleted provisions of 2010’s financial reform package approved by Congress, known as Dodd Frank, and one of its most controversial. A team of regulators, including those from the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Reserve, initially proposed limits to pay and bonuses given to top executives at financial institutions in 2011.

But critics pounced on the proposal as weak, noting that it did not address the compensation of traders who can draw some of the biggest bonuses.

[font size=1]-snip-[/font]


Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/regulators-introduce-new-rules-to-curb-wall-street-pay/2016/04/21/4a8ae25c-07cf-11e6-b283-e79d81c63c1b_story.html



By Renae Merle April 21 at 11:09 AM
9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Regulators introduce new rules to curb Wall Street pay (Original Post) Eugene Apr 2016 OP
And they will find fifty different ways to weasel out of this... Human101948 Apr 2016 #1
Yup. SoapBox Apr 2016 #2
That's just it. Turbineguy Apr 2016 #3
I wouldn't hold my breath on that - packman Apr 2016 #4
reinstate 95% income tax with a ceiling of $250,000 - UpInArms Apr 2016 #5
And this is Wall Street's reaction: ReRe Apr 2016 #6
What a badly written article! elleng Apr 2016 #7
I wish they would have tied executive pay to an equation ... aggiesal Apr 2016 #8
The regs sound like risk mitigation. Igel Apr 2016 #9

Turbineguy

(37,332 posts)
3. That's just it.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:27 PM
Apr 2016

If they were making money, perhaps people wouldn't mind so much. They've become a net-zero or even a drag on the economy.

 

packman

(16,296 posts)
4. I wouldn't hold my breath on that -
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:30 PM
Apr 2016


Greasy, slimy, oozy things have a way of their own. Does anyone believe this or is it just a Dr. Feelgood thing?

UpInArms

(51,284 posts)
5. reinstate 95% income tax with a ceiling of $250,000 -
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:36 PM
Apr 2016

all income over $250,000 is taxed at 95%

the corporations then push that money outward to ALL employees and no one gets a free ride

elleng

(130,917 posts)
7. What a badly written article!
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 03:08 PM
Apr 2016

'Regulators?' WTF, anyone have any idea how many regulators there are in DC???

I may have missed it, but WHICH regulators/regulatory authority proposed this???



aggiesal

(8,915 posts)
8. I wish they would have tied executive pay to an equation ...
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 03:46 PM
Apr 2016

Like CEO's can't make more than 100x the average of non-executives pay plus
some percentage, like 2% based on profit made.
That way, if they want higher pay, they'd have to get the workers higher
pay to raise the average. Plus make more profit for the company, make more money.

Igel

(35,317 posts)
9. The regs sound like risk mitigation.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:58 PM
Apr 2016

They won't work, of course, because regulators aren't omniscient but think they are. (When the regulators run into regs they don't like at work or at home, they, too, probably work hard in their own interests to work around them.)

But it may take a while to work out the work-arounds.

They may also have nasty consequences. A lot of the excesses we see and get outraged over are the results of work-arounds to prior attempts to impose regulatory will on CEOs and traders. By forcing them to be clever, we showed them how to be clever in ways that not only got them their previous perks but new levels of perkitudinous splendor.


Most people will complain that the regs don't do what those particular people want them to do. "They're not strong enough" will mean "those regs don't accomplish our goal, but are intended to accomplish the regulators' goals." Mostly with glee at punishing those with large bonuses or with the hopes that if those people over there don't get large bonuses the money will go elsewhere.

The glee is petty and banal, the hopes in vain.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Regulators introduce new ...