BF2S Forums Dem Congressman introduces 50% tax on bonuses

Macbeth wrote:

Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) will introduce legislation that would impose a 50% tax on excessive bonuses at firms that received bailout funds.

The "Wall Street Bonus Tax Act" would apply only to bonuses over $50,000, and would use the tax revenue to support loans to small businesses.

Welch unveiled the proposal at a press conference in Burlington this morning.

"As most Americans struggle to endure a long and wrenching recession, the same Wall Street bankers who came to the American taxpayer with hat in hand are now preparing to pocket record-breaking bonuses,” said Welch. “Financial firms that received taxpayer assistance must remember that they owe their return to profitability to hardworking Americans.”

Reports this week indicated that a handful of the largest firms receiving TARP funds--Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, Chase, Goldman Sachs, and Bank of America--will pay out $90 billion in bonuses.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing- … on-bonuses
They paid back their debts to the government so am I the only who thinks the government can go fuck itself in this case and leave these people alone?

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

$50,000 is a pretty low limit. You can get a bigger bonus by enlisting in the Army. Which under this law would end up getting slashed in half.

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

$50,000 is a pretty low limit. You can get a bigger bonus by enlisting in the Army. Which under this law would end up getting slashed in half.

Army bonuses aren't paid in a lump sum.

I know, but would they still get counted as above the limit under this legislation?

Macbeth wrote:

Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) will introduce legislation that would impose a 50% tax on excessive bonuses at firms that received bailout funds.

The "Wall Street Bonus Tax Act" would apply only to bonuses over $50,000, and would use the tax revenue to support loans to small businesses.

Welch unveiled the proposal at a press conference in Burlington this morning.

"As most Americans struggle to endure a long and wrenching recession, the same Wall Street bankers who came to the American taxpayer with hat in hand are now preparing to pocket record-breaking bonuses,” said Welch. “Financial firms that received taxpayer assistance must remember that they owe their return to profitability to hardworking Americans.”

Reports this week indicated that a handful of the largest firms receiving TARP funds--Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, Chase, Goldman Sachs, and Bank of America--will pay out $90 billion in bonuses.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing- … on-bonuses
They paid back their debts to the government so am I the only who thinks the government can go fuck itself in this case and leave these people alone?

Last edited by Turquoise (2010-01-13 21:21:25)

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

$50,000 is a pretty low limit. You can get a bigger bonus by enlisting in the Army. Which under this law would end up getting slashed in half.

JohnG@lt wrote:

ruisleipa wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Man these senators come up with some silly shit in order to gain the votes of pissed off, jealous people.

something the republicans excel at! And those tea-party folks. No news there tbh.

I know you're an expert on America having seen a few Michael Moore movies but the Dems are historically about a thousand times more likely to introduce populist measures. This bill was introduced by a Dem.

Pug wrote:

Oh great.  Let's give them Tarp money and then penalize them.

How about just not giving them money in the first place?

Phrozenbot wrote:

Pug wrote:

Oh great.  Let's give them Tarp money and then penalize them.

How about just not giving them money in the first place?

That's how I feel.

Anyways, it seems companies that give the largest bonuses are the least fundamentally sound. No need to tax the bonuses, they say a lot. I only understand the issue with companies receiving government aid, but like you said, maybe we shouldn't bail them out.

Last edited by JohnG@lt (2010-01-14 08:04:46)

Phrozenbot wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Phrozenbot wrote:

That's how I feel.

Anyways, it seems companies that give the largest bonuses are the least fundamentally sound. No need to tax the bonuses, they say a lot. I only understand the issue with companies receiving government aid, but like you said, maybe we shouldn't bail them out.

Not true at all. They give out such large bonuses because it keeps their payroll costs down, and not static. If they have a bad year they aren't forced to pay the same payroll costs as they would in a good year.

Also, they have no overhead. They don't have to purchase capital goods in order to make money, all they need is brainpower, so they can give a much higher percentage of their revenue to their employees companies in other industries can. This whole bs is just jealousy.

Not saying they don't, but if you look at Bear Stearns and the Auto Makers, they were handing out enormous bonuses, despite being fundamentally weak. Some companies like to reward crappy leadership excessively. That's their choice how much they want to to pay them, whether it's through bonuses and what not.

Phrozenbot wrote:

And if that revenue is because of 1/30-60 leverage, you can easily make a lot of money just with a minor swing in your favor. It can also break you if things turn a bit sour, hence why I feel they are fundamentally weak. Bear Stearns handed out the biggest bonuses and were the first to fail.