Quote Originally Posted by ForeverAutumn
That's what I was wondering? In the AIG situation, aren't these bonuses being paid to the department that ran the company into the ground in the first place? Fire the lot of them and hire some competent people.
The unit still manages over 1 trillion in assets. The story as told by the CEO is that they were concerned that if ALL these people left or were fired, they'd lose critical instututional knowledge and short-term ability to manage these funds leading to collapse of the division and possible additional loss of 1.4 trillion. It is funny that we see risk management applied to salaries like this; it was weak or absent on the things they were doing with other people's money.
Quote Originally Posted by ForeverAutumn
How can the US gov't raise the tax on these bonuses? Don't y'all have a legal system for income tax? Can the gov't just arbitrarily change how these bonuses are taxed? Because that doen't seem like it should be legal to me.
The proposal is to put the stiff tax on all bonuses over $10,000 from companies which are more than 79% owned by the government through bailout funds. AIG is the only company that meets that criteria (so far )