The Truth About Post-Bailout Pay Restrictions: They Are A Lie

Bertel Schmitt
by Bertel Schmitt
the truth about post bailout pay restrictions they are a lie

What’s 10 million these days – give the man a raise!

Up until the mid-1800s, debtor’s prison did await those who could not pay their debts. To this day, more than a third of U.S. states allow debtors to be jailed for non-payment. If you run a company called GM, Ally, or AIG, not only do you keep your freedom, you will be bailed out by the government, and given a $10 million salary. Waitaminute, you say, aren’t executive salaries of bailed-out companies limited to a still very generous $500,000? This is exactly the question the special inspector general for the Troubled Assets Relief Program asked. The answer, provided in a report to Treasury Tim Geithner, and the public, is scathing: The Treasury Department ignored its own rules and approved “excessive pay packages” for the leaders of bailed-out companies.

The report lambasts the government which “continues to award excessive pay packages.” It also flogs executives who “continue to lack an appreciation for their extraordinary situations and fail to view themselves through the lenses of companies substantially owned by the U.S. Government.” Special mention for an inordinate amount of chutzpah received “GM CEO Dan Akerson [who] even asked Treasury Secretary Geithner to relieve GM from OSM’s pay restrictions, which was denied.” Akerson took home $9 million in cash and stock in 2012, apparently, he thought that was not enough.

This is your money on drugs

A total of 69 executives of bailed-out companies are under supposed salary restrictions. 23 were found earning more than the $500,000 limit. Another 25 made exactly $500,000. 65 of 69 made more than $450,000. Says the report:

“In stark contrast, the 2011 median household income of U.S. taxpayers who fund these companies was approximately $50,000.”

The report did not specifically reveal by name how much the executives of bailed-out companies make. It also did very little to hide the names.

According to GM’s website, a Daniel F. Akerson serves as GM Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, a Stephen J. Girsky is GM Vice Chairman, Daniel Ammann is GM Senior Vice President & Chief Financial Officer.

The Washington Post calls the report “stinging allegations of lax oversight and supervision.” The Detroit Free Press on the other hand complains that “Akerson’s pay package, which included $1.7 million in cash salary and stock valued at $7.3 million, did not increase from 2011 to 2012,” and that Alan Mulally and Sergio Marchionne make much more.

Join the conversation
2 of 40 comments
  • BrianL BrianL on Jan 29, 2013

    Not to debate if the bailout was a smart idea or not (I don't think it was, but understand the fear of not doing anything), limiting financial compensation was probably the dumbest aspect of TARP. Since this is a car site, lets take GM as the example. What do the CEO's of Ford, Toyota, Honda, and Nissan make? How does 500k per year sound? By the way, it was 500k salary plus long term stock incentives. I don't see many people just itching to take the job when they can go other places make orders of magnitude more. When reading the SIGTARP report, it talks of risk to the tax payer with TARP money. SIGTARP fails to account for is a total loss for unqualified talent taking the wheel because that is who the companies are forced to employee given the restrictions.

  • Jjster6 Jjster6 on Jan 30, 2013

    So, first it was management that was incompetent to decide what the CEO (who was part of management) got paid. Then it was the Executive Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors who was incompetent. So we got the TARP Special Master and now they are incompetent. SIGTARP has all the answers. Where does this madness stop. Can't we all just admit we are extremely jealous that some are paid so much more than us. This is America. The market pays what the market demands.

  • VX1NG I think it should but I am open and curious to hear the arguments from those who oppose income based fines.
  • EBFlex No
  • VX1NG My understanding is that by removing analog AM capabilities it will force the AM industry to transition to either analog FM or digital radio broadcasts. Both of which use radio bandwidth much more efficiently than analog AM. The downside with switching to digital radio broadcasts is, just like we saw with the analog to digital OTA TV transition; you either receive the signal or you don’t. Whereas analog FM does not have that same downside. The downside with switching to analog FM or digital FM is the coverage area is significantly smaller than AM.Phasing out analog AM would free up a large chunk of radio bandwidth and could allow for newer technologies to utilize the bandwidth.
  • Bill 80% of people do not know how to or check the condition/ status of air pressure in thier tires let alone the condition of thier tires. Periodic safety inspections ensures vehicle are safe to be on the roads. I sure would like to be confident the vehicles around me are safe because they passed a objective inspection. The cause for suspicion in the US is most safety inspection programs are subjective and do not use technology to make the determination if the vehicle is safe or not. Countries that that use technology for annual vehicle inspections have a fairly high failure rate. I live in California a state without safety inspections and the freeways are litter ed with tire fragments and parts of cars. Every time it rains the roads are congested from accidents. Instagram is full of videos of vehicles with the wheels coming of while driving on the freeway. Just hope you won't be on of the casualties that could have been prevented if the vehicle owner had spend $7-$20 for a periodic safety inspection.
  • Kcflyer The Prado is the GX. So they already did, a long time ago