PDA

View Full Version : San Francisco Voters To Decide ‘Overpaid CEO Tax’



Teh One Who Knocks
11-02-2020, 12:36 PM
By Jeffrey Cawood - The Daily Wire


https://i.imgur.com/H3eaUkxl.jpg

On Tuesday, the people of San Francisco will decide whether the city should tax companies for paying their CEOs too much money.

Progressive lawmaker Matt Haney introduced the “Overpaid Executive Tax” to the SF Board of Supervisors in June to better protect the city’s health care system from the COVID-19 threat. His colleagues unanimously agreed to put his idea before voters on the November ballot, listed as Proposition L. The measure requires a simple majority for passage.

“Billionaires added hundreds of hundreds of billions to their wealth during a pandemic,” Haney tweeted in August, calling the current tax system “backwards, brutal, and immoral.”
1293947086258331649
“I authored Prop L, the Overpaid Executive Tax, to put a surcharge on these companies who pay their top executives millions in salaries while underpaying their workers,” he continued. “This will allow us to hire hundreds of health care workers, nurses, doctors and emergency responders.”

Haney said most small businesses would be exempt.

To qualify for the proposed tax, businesses must generate at least $1.17 million in gross receipts annually. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, the measure would tax those earnings under the following criteria:


Companies subject to the tax would have to pay 0.1% of their gross receipts earned in San Francisco to the city if their highest-paid employee makes 100 times the median salary of the company’s San Francisco-based workforce. The figure goes up to 0.2% for executives making 200 times the company’s median salary for local workers, and upward to 1% of gross receipts when top brass makes 1,000 times the median.
1288349054317953025
Haney insists the extra revenue is needed to cover the city’s annual budget deficit, which he said is projected to be more than $2 billion over the next two fiscal years. If approved, officials estimate the new policy could raise between $60 million and $140 million additional annual revenue for the city’s general fund.

When promoting Prop L, Haney has emphasized the “massive wealth” in the city and country, saying “it should be shared.”

Even though his proposed CEO tax would affect a narrow base of payers, opponents say its approval could still drive companies and jobs out of town.
1303044433366007808
Haney recently told CalMatters, “We need companies who aren’t fueling our crisis of economic inequality.”

The outlet went on to report:


San Francisco lawmakers aren’t the first to turn to business to make up for budget deficits or tackle the income gap. Washington State is weighing legislation proposing a surcharge on publicly-traded corporations with a CEO-to-worker pay ratio of 150 to 1 or above. At the federal level, the Tax Excessive CEO Pay Act, introduced last year by Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont, with Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Michigan, and Barbara Lee, D-Oakland, would apply gradual tax increases upward of 5 percent on companies with disproportionately paid CEOs.

Portland in 2018 became the first city to tax publicly-traded companies based on their chief executive’s pay, but San Francisco’s measure goes farther by taxing private and public companies alike. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, endorsed the measure, as has the city’s Democratic Party and the San Francisco Labor Council, among others.

According to the CalMatters report, “not one penny has been spent so far on campaigns” opposing the proposed CEO tax in San Francisco, citing information provided by the Ethics Committee. An official with the city’s Chamber of Commerce told the outlet that business groups “had to prioritize” their political battles this election cycle because there are multiple tax proposals on the local ballot.

DemonGeminiX
11-02-2020, 05:41 PM
San Francisco's gonna be a ghost town.

PorkChopSandwiches
11-02-2020, 06:09 PM
San Francisco's gonna be a ghost town.

People are already leaving there in droves, and all of CA. These politicians are fucking crazy.

PorkChopSandwiches
11-02-2020, 06:09 PM
The homeless and drug addicted will stay though

DemonGeminiX
11-02-2020, 07:42 PM
The homeless and drug addicted will stay though

No they won't. When all of the tax payers are gone, there'll be no money to give to them. They'll have to leave to survive.

PorkChopSandwiches
11-02-2020, 07:49 PM
I guess thats true, currently they give them free hotel rooms and supply drugs

Godfather
11-03-2020, 06:47 AM
Companies subject to the tax would have to pay 0.1% of their gross receipts earned in San Francisco to the city if their highest-paid employee makes 100 times the median salary of the company’s San Francisco-based workforce. The figure goes up to 0.2% for executives making 200 times the company’s median salary for local workers, and upward to 1% of gross receipts when top brass makes 1,000 times the median.

Wait, so median income in San Fran is $74k. That means the CEO would have to make $7,400,000 to hit a 0.1% tax? Average CEO compensation is a fraction of that so we're talking about a handfuls of companies. I work for a company with a half billion in revenue and our CEO makes nowhere near that despite being a 'top 50' CEO in the industry domestically.

To qualify for the full 1% tax, at a bare minimum your CEO would have to make $27,000,000, which is 1000x the salary of a workforce with a minimum wage median making $27,000. :lol:

Maybe this would encourage CEO's not to take 1000x what their average worker makes? I don't think that's necessarily unreasonable. I'd love to work my way up to CEO of my company one day, but I personally wouldn't sleep at night making the same salary as 100+ of my employees combined. That's gross. And people wonder why the younger generations are increasingly looking towards socialist policies :lol: These kids don't want or trust the government to 'control the means of production' (see other thread posted this week)... but some interventions to save the middle class, I could get behind (despite democratic, socialist policies being a 4-letter word to my parents). CEO salaries are up something like 900% the past 40 years, which outstrips stock index growth by a considerable margin, and average wages by an insane margin. My dad bought a house in his 20's working retail banking with no education, while friends I know in the same company my pops worked for today have to rent a dump with roommates to survive, whilst their CEO makes 8-figures There's got to be a balance, well before turning into Venezuela, that's attainable and still supports a free market.

I'll say it another way too... The CEO of McDonalds was making 1939x the average worker's income, while about 50% of fast food staff take government welfare, costing billions in tax dollars. Could a McDonalds, that makes $21+ billion gross revenue and $11 billion in gross profits (paying only $1.99B in taxes, far less ratios than any of us), perhaps be paying 1% ($200m) in additional taxes for that burden on those of us in the middle class? Or do we just blame the poor and underemployed because it's all their fault?

I've read that hundreds of companies are leaving California for states like Texas which opposes the points I'm making, but I dono, will the same pressures that lead to these 'anti-business' taxes not follow these companies eventually to their new home state? Shit like their tax-dodging corporations and executives making bank while their staff's incomes don't even keep up with inflation?

/rant

lost in melb.
11-03-2020, 10:40 AM
I think it's grossly unfair that young people are singled out as lazy or whatever. They just want some hope for a normal life that doesn't feel like being a rat in a maze. I think the rest of the Western world is looking to see how the US sorts out this problem, since they usually slightly ahead of the 8 Ball.

It's hard to see what's actually going on though because the strings that are being pulled are hidden. Our finances are caught up in zeros in one's in banks. I don't blame some people going down FBDs path into surreal explanations of global conspiracy either. Some explanation is better than none

FBD
11-03-2020, 12:15 PM
/rant

to put this one simply, a large middle class is bad for banksters, and banksters would rather there simply be no middle class whatsoever.

high paid oligarchs who will do as their told, on the other hand, are very good for banksters - look at the tail wag the dog these days for absolute scads of evidence. people like this are what helps hold the edifice up.

FBD
11-03-2020, 12:15 PM
It's hard to see what's actually going on though because the strings that are being pulled are hidden. Our finances are caught up in zeros in one's in banks. I don't blame some people going down FBDs path into surreal explanations of global conspiracy either. Some explanation is better than none

:meatspin: when ya just follow data

lost in melb.
11-09-2020, 06:20 AM
:meatspin: when ya just follow data

:beatdown: