Quote:
Originally Posted by Snake Doctor
I guess the big problem is the word "bonus".
Bonus has become interchangeable with salary, benefits, or really any type of compensation on Wall Street.....I'm not saying that's a good thing, I'm just pointing out that's the way it's been for awhile now.
I don't imagine there would be this outrage if the public found out what AIG spent on employee health benefits last year, or what it's monthly nut is for employee salaries, or IT, or whatever.
The word "bonus" just seems to hit a nerve with people.
|
You are right. The word "bonus" in regards to executive pay and taxation issues compared to the word "bonus" for normal people are two different things. Back in 93 Clinton tried to curb executive pay by only allowing executive compensation over a million dollars to be written off by the company if it was distributed as a "bonus".
So working within the confines of the law, clever companies started paying "bonuses" for things such as "making work a fun place", or "achieving personal commitments", or "banging more than 3 secretaries a year".
The word "bonus" has no relevance to how a company or division performs, only to how a corporation can deduct executive compensation under the current tax law.