Congress may weigh in on the controversy over soaring executive pay by
changing a tax rule that experts say has encouraged companies to use stock
options in compensation packages.
A bill is unlikely to come up in the short amount of time remaining in the
current session of Congress. One might emerge next year as part of a larger tax
reform bill or perhaps as part of a measure to close tax loopholes.
But Congress is already turning its attention to executive compensation. Two
Senate hearings on September 6—one in the Finance Committee and one in the
Banking Committee—explored the issue.
The Finance session featured Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Mark
Everson and Linda Thomsen, director of enforcement at the Securities and
Exchange Commission. SEC Chairman Christopher Cox testified before the Banking
Committee.
Thomsen indicated that the SEC is investigating more than 100 companies for
fraudulent reporting of stock option grants.
The Finance Committee focused on a tax provision that limits corporations to
a $1 million tax deduction for executive salaries. An exception was made for
performance-based pay, which companies can deduct beyond $1 million. Critics say
that the rule has contributed to an increase in the use of stock options.
Recent controversy has focused on the practice of backdating options, which
occurs when a strike price is retroactively set to a date that would produce a
gain for the option holder.
Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, said
that the tax code is "broken" when it comes to executive compensation.
"Companies have found it easy to get around the law," Grassley said. "It has
more holes than Swiss cheese. And it seems to have encouraged the options
industry."
Modifying the deduction for performance-based pay or tightening up
eligibility are options Congress may consider, Grassley said.
Grassley intends to prepare the ground for such legislation by obtaining
board minutes from meetings in which companies approved backdating. He also will
seek information from attorneys, accountants and compensation consultants who
contributed to the decision.
Grassley gave no quarter in attacking pay schemes that lead to bloated
executive salaries. "It is behavior that, to put it bluntly, is disgusting and
repulsive," he said.
Everson recommended that Congress allow the IRS to share more tax return
information with the SEC regarding companies that are suspected of reporting
violations. In sometimes passionate testimony, Everson demonstrated his
frustration with backdating scandals.
"In the area of corporate governance, the temptation to do the wrong thing is
increased when he stakes are as staggeringly high as they are," he said. "I do
find it disappointing that the boards of these companies haven’t done a better
job of preventing us from getting to (this) point."
Charles Elson, a University of Delaware professor, suggested that board
members hold stock in the companies they oversee so that they are more closely
linked to their management. He also called for more disclosure regarding
compensation consultants and greater shareholder say in board elections.
"There is an overcompensation problem in corporate America," he said. "It has
undermined shareholder confidence in the system."
In testimony at a House hearing earlier this year, Thomas Lehner, director of
corporate governance at the Business Roundtable, said that the increase in CEO
compensation has been consistent with shareholder return.
—Mark Schoeff Jr.