AIG bonus mess, blame Sen. Dodd

R

RockX

Banned
Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) on Monday night floated the idea of taxing American International Group (AIG) bonus recipients so the government could recoup some or all of the $450 million the company is paying to employees in its financial products unit. Within hours, the idea spread to both houses of Congress, with lawmakers proposing an AIG bonus tax.

While the Senate was constructing the $787 billion stimulus last month, Dodd added an executive-compensation restriction to the bill. The provision, now called “the Dodd Amendment” by the Obama Administration provides an “exception for contractually obligated bonuses agreed on before Feb. 11, 2009” -- which exempts the very AIG bonuses Dodd and others are now seeking to tax.

Dodd’s original amendment did not include that exemption, and the Connecticut Senator denied inserting the provision. (LIAR)

“I can't point a finger at someone who was responsible for putting those dates in,” Dodd told FOX. “I can tell you this much, when my language left the senate, it did not include it. When it came back, it did.”

“Because of negotiations with the Treasury Department and the bill Conferees, several modifications were made,” Dodd Spokesperson Kate Szostak in a response to FOX Business.

The provision excluding those bonus payments made it into the final version of the bill, and is law.

Separately, Sen. Dodd was AIG’s largest single recipient of campaign donations during the 2008 election cycle with $103,100, according to opensecrets.org. Also, one of AIG Financial Products’ largest offices is based in Connecticut.

Fucking liar slipped it in as payback for AIG's years of donations to him, then acts surprised when caught.
 
webbway said:
Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) on Monday night floated the idea of taxing American International Group (AIG) bonus recipients so the government could recoup some or all of the $450 million the company is paying to employees in its financial products unit. Within hours, the idea spread to both houses of Congress, with lawmakers proposing an AIG bonus tax.

While the Senate was constructing the $787 billion stimulus last month, Dodd added an executive-compensation restriction to the bill. The provision, now called “the Dodd Amendment” by the Obama Administration provides an “exception for contractually obligated bonuses agreed on before Feb. 11, 2009” -- which exempts the very AIG bonuses Dodd and others are now seeking to tax.

Dodd’s original amendment did not include that exemption, and the Connecticut Senator denied inserting the provision. (LIAR)

“I can't point a finger at someone who was responsible for putting those dates in,” Dodd told FOX. “I can tell you this much, when my language left the senate, it did not include it. When it came back, it did.”

“Because of negotiations with the Treasury Department and the bill Conferees, several modifications were made,” Dodd Spokesperson Kate Szostak in a response to FOX Business.

The provision excluding those bonus payments made it into the final version of the bill, and is law.

Separately, Sen. Dodd was AIG’s largest single recipient of campaign donations during the 2008 election cycle with $103,100, according to opensecrets.org. Also, one of AIG Financial Products’ largest offices is based in Connecticut.

Fucking liar slipped it in as payback for AIG's years of donations to him, then acts surprised when caught.
Click to expand...


You should link to work that is not your own.
 
Makes no difference. those bonuses will be taxed to 0 on a specific line item add to the 2009 income tax form.
 
Dodd submitted a reason for his stand on it and they were that the legal entanglements would hamper the restrictions on bonuses.

But Hey I know the right wing doesnt care about the facts just sound bites so I know that wont stop you from pretending something else.
 
stop making bullshit excuses for Dodds attempted political payback and cronyism. He added an amendment to try to help his political contributors. He got caught and now he's hanging AIG out to dry. Typical politician.
 
Hey asshole are you aware of the legal entanglements that DO EXSIST with the government breaking the contracts of individual Americans to take the money they earned by working?

There are constitutional problems with stripping peoples rights you fucking idiot.
 
Another illustration of why Americans deserve the politicians we get.

Instead of finger-pointing, how about the truth that BOTH parties are responsible for this? There were plenty of opportunities for BOTH parties to demand this bonuses not happen during this process.
 
How good for the country do you think it is for the government to distroy the contract of a worker because they are punishing the company?

There are REAL legal problems here folks.

It sets some very bad precidents folks.
 
evince said:
How good for the country do you think it is for the government to distroy the contract of a worker because they are punishing the company?

There are REAL legal problems here folks.

It sets some very bad precidents folks.
Click to expand...

Indeed it does. The idea that the rules or stipulations of the loan (bailout) can be changed after the fact is scary.

The idea that politicians responding to public opinion can nullify legal contracts is even scarier.
 
evince said:
How good for the country do you think it is for the government to distroy the contract of a worker because they are punishing the company?

There are REAL legal problems here folks.

It sets some very bad precidents folks.
Click to expand...


You don't know what you are talking about.

1) Dodd's position is that his actual amendment prohibited the payment of bonuses but the amendment was watered down in the conference committee process. All indications thus far are that the Treasury Department pushed for the language that exists in the bill.

2) Worker contracts are blown up all the time in bankruptcy proceedings, which is where AIG would be without the bailout money. And we're not talking about middle income workers here, were talking about top earners, people making millions in bonus payments in addition to their substantial regular compensation. It's not a matter of punishing the worker (although that is part of it) but not rewarding people that brought the company to its knees and that nearly brought the world economy with it.
 
Dungheap said:
You don't know what you are talking about.

1) Dodd's position is that his actual amendment prohibited the payment of bonuses but the amendment was watered down in the conference committee process. All indications thus far are that the Treasury Department pushed for the language that exists in the bill.

2) Worker contracts are blown up all the time in bankruptcy proceedings, which is where AIG would be without the bailout money. And we're not talking about middle income workers here, were talking about top earners, people making millions in bonus payments in addition to their substantial regular compensation. It's not a matter of punishing the worker (although that is part of it) but not rewarding people that brought the company to its knees and that nearly brought the world economy with it.
Click to expand...


Did you read the material I provided?

there were several reasons
 
Dungheap said:
2) Worker contracts are blown up all the time in bankruptcy proceedings, which is where AIG would be without the bailout money. And we're not talking about middle income workers here, were talking about top earners, people making millions in bonus payments in addition to their substantial regular compensation. It's not a matter of punishing the worker (although that is part of it) but not rewarding people that brought the company to its knees and that nearly brought the world economy with it.
Click to expand...

Does the fact that they are top earners making millions have anything to do with it?

Yes, contracts are blown up all the time in bankrupcy court. But AIG is not in bankrupcy court. Whether they would have been or not is not relevant.

This still boils down to the federal government ignoring laws concerning contracts.

If there had not been a public outcry, this would not be happening. Yes, the american people are pissed. But they should be pissed at both AIG and at our fearless leaders for loaning money without stipulating some common sense rules about the company's operations. If they had done this as a stipulation of the loan, AIG could have gotten waivers or signed acceptances of the suspension of bonuses.
 
evince said:
Did you read the material I provided?

there were several reasons
Click to expand...


Those were the reasons advanced by that organization. Dodd told them to fuck themselves.

His original amendment prohibited bonus payments that would result in any employee earning more than the President. Treasury (specifically Geithner and Summers) didn't like it and it was watered down in committee.
 
Solitary said:
Does the fact that they are top earners making millions have anything to do with it?

Yes, contracts are blown up all the time in bankrupcy court. But AIG is not in bankrupcy court. Whether they would have been or not is not relevant.

This still boils down to the federal government ignoring laws concerning contracts.

If there had not been a public outcry, this would not be happening. Yes, the american people are pissed. But they should be pissed at both AIG and at our fearless leaders for loaning money without stipulating some common sense rules about the company's operations. If they had done this as a stipulation of the loan, AIG could have gotten waivers or signed acceptances of the suspension of bonuses.
Click to expand...


Well, when I hear people bring up the plight of these "workers" I get a little annoyed.

And spare me the rhetoric about the federal government ignoring the laws on contract. Let me see the contract and I'll tell you how to get out of them. This shit happens all the time. Promised bonuses are not paid (including, notably, at AIG).
 
The contracts were made before the money was promised. Some of these employees effected are in areas of the company that have no responsibility for the actions that caused this mess.


This is why the top choice right now is to TAX the bonuses at a high rate.

Who would want to work for a company who will strip the contracts of its workers for political reasons?

I am not just trying to defend AIG ,I'm trying to defend the precident it could set.
 
evince said:
The contracts were made before the money was promised. Some of these employees effected are in areas of the company that have no responsibility for the actions that caused this mess.


This is why the top choice right now is to TAX the bonuses at a high rate.

Who would want to work for a company who will strip the contracts of its workers for political reasons?

I am not just trying to defend AIG ,I'm trying to defend the precident it could set.
Click to expand...


I'm just pointing out to you that Dodd's fingerprints aren't on this one. His amendment to the bill would have prohibited bonus payments. This is the work of the eminently worthless Timothy Geithner and the slightly less worthless Larry Summers and the Administration is trying to pin it on Dodd. It's nonsense.
 
Dungheap said:
Well, when I hear people bring up the plight of these "workers" I get a little annoyed.

And spare me the rhetoric about the federal government ignoring the laws on contract. Let me see the contract and I'll tell you how to get out of them. This shit happens all the time. Promised bonuses are not paid (including, notably, at AIG).
Click to expand...

Ok, then get out of the contracts in legal ways. Yes, contracts are argued and gotten out of regularly.

But that is different than just making a blanket policy that contractually guaranteed bonuses will not be paid.
 
Dungheap said:
I'm just pointing out to you that Dodd's fingerprints aren't on this one. His amendment to the bill would have prohibited bonus payments. This is the work of the eminently worthless Timothy Geithner and the slightly less worthless Larry Summers and the Administration is trying to pin it on Dodd. It's nonsense.
Click to expand...



That could be. Maybe they will buy a clue or maybe they will be replaced.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top