Cases of backdating employee stock options have drawn public and media attention.According to a study by Erik Lie, a finance professor at the University of Iowa, more than 2,000 companies used options backdating in some form to reward their senior executives between 19.
Over the years, lawmakers have tweaked the tax code to limit disfavored forms of executive compensation, while regulators have increased the amount of disclosure companies must make. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) has introduced the Income Equity Act of 2011 (H. 382), which would amend the Internal Revenue Code to prohibit deductions for excessive compensation for any full-time employee; compensation is defined as “excessive” if it exceeds either 0,000 or 25 times the compensation of the lowest-paid employee, whichever is larger.
This adjustment to the filing window came in with the Sarbanes-Oxley legislation.
The topic of executive compensation has long been of interest to academics, the popular press, and politicians.
The objective of this study is to examine the impact of a prior limitation on deductibility of compensation, Internal Revenue Code Section 162(m).
In contrast to much of the debate today on the need of the federal government to raise tax revenue, the primary goal of Section 162(m), which limited tax deductions for executive compensation, was not to raise revenue but to reduce excessive, non-performance-based compensation—in other words, to do something about excessive compensation that 1992 presidential candidate William Jefferson Clinton campaigned against.