[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 10, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S206-S208]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. REED (for himself and Mr. Blumenthal):
S. 82. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand
the denial of deduction for certain excessive employee remuneration,
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. REED. Mr. President, I am reintroducing the Stop Subsidizing
Multimillion Dollar Corporate Bonuses Act with Senator Blumenthal. This
legislation would end special tax exemptions for huge CEO bonuses by
closing a glaring loophole that allows publicly traded corporations to
deduct the cost of multimillion-dollar bonuses from their corporate tax
bills. If executives perform, companies may compensate them however
they wish, but U.S. taxpayers shouldn't have to subsidize these massive
bonuses.
Under current tax law, when a publicly traded corporation calculates
its taxable income, it is generally permitted to deduct the cost of
compensation from its revenues, with limits up to $1 million for some
of the firm's most senior executives. However, a loophole relating to
performance-based compensation has allowed many public corporations to
avoid such limits and freely deduct excessive executive compensation.
To illustrate how this loophole works, if a CEO receives $1 million in
cash compensation and $14 million in performance-based compensation in
a given year, the public corporation's taxable income would decline by
$15 million. With the current corporate tax rate at 35 percent, the
corporation in this case would receive a tax giveway of $5.25 million.
The Stop Subsidizing Multimillion Dollar Corporate Bonuses Act puts
an
[[Page S207]]
end to that giveaway and limits public corporations to a single $1
million per employee deduction as was originally intended. Using the
same example above, a profitable public corporation could deduct $1
million of the CEO's $15 million compensation package but could not
claim a deduction on the remaining $14 million. So instead of claiming
$5.25 million in Federal subsidies for the CEO's pay, this public
corporation will be contributing $4.9 million toward improving our
roads, our schools, and our military--costs that middle-class families
are already underwriting.
Indeed, over a 10-year window, the Joint Committee on Taxation, in
their most recent assessment, estimated that closing this loophole
would save U.S. taxpayers over $50 billion.
Specifically, our legislation first applies section 162(m) of the Tax
Code to all employees of publicly traded corporations so that all
compensation is subject to a deductibility cap of $1 million. Publicly
traded corporations would still be permitted to pay their executives as
much as they desire, but compensation above and beyond $1 million would
no longer be subsidized by other hard-working taxpayers through our Tax
Code.
Second, our bill removes the exemption for performance-based
compensation, which currently permits compensation deductions above and
beyond $1 million when executives have met performance benchmarks set
by the corporation's board of directors. As a result, publicly traded
corporations would still be able to incentivize their executives, but
all such incentives would be subject to a corporate deductibility cap
of $1 million.
Finally, our legislation makes a technical correction to ensure that
all publicly traded corporations that are required to provide quarterly
and annual reports to their investors under Securities and Exchange
Commission rules and regulations are subject to section 162(m).
Currently, this section of the Tax Code only covers some publicly
traded corporations who are required to provide these periodic reports
to their shareholders. Discouraging extravagant compensation packages
shouldn't turn on whether a publicly traded corporation falls into one
SEC reporting requirement or another, and our bill closes this
technical loophole.
Even our President-elect has acknowledged the problem of excessive
CEO pay. When asked about this issue on CBS's ``Face the Nation'' on
September 13, 2015, then-Presidential Candidate Trump said, ``Well, it
does bug me. It's very hard if you have a free enterprise system to do
anything about that. The boards of companies are supposed to do it. But
I know companies very well. And the CEO puts in all his friends. And so
you will take a company like, I could say Macy's or many other
companies, where they put in their friends as head of the company, and
they get whatever they want, because the friends love sitting on the
board. So that's a system that we have. And it's a shame and it's
disgraceful. And, sometimes, the boards rule. But I would say it's
probably less than 10 percent. And you see these guys making these
enormous amounts of money. It's a total and complete joke.''
Our legislation tackles this issue head on by ending the public
subsidy of excessive CEO compensation, derailing the lavish tax breaks
that exclusively benefit public corporations. This is simply a matter
of fairness, ensuring that corporations--and not hard-working taxpayers
who face their own challenges in this economy--are paying for the
multimillion-dollar bonuses they have decided to dole out to their
CEOs.
We need to prioritize tax breaks that grow our economy and strengthen
the middle class. This bill would eliminate some of the inequity in the
Tax Code. Again, companies are free to pay their executives as much as
they want, but the American taxpayer shouldn't help foot the bill for a
CEO's multimillion-dollar bonus.
I thank Public Citizen, Americans for Financial Reform, the AFL-CIO,
International Brotherhood of Teamsters, and MIT professor Simon Johnson
for their support. I also want to thank Senator Blumenthal for working
with me on this issue, and I urge our colleagues to join us in
cosponsoring this legislation.
______
By Mr. CORNYN (for himself and Mr. Cruz):
S. 90. A bill to survey the gradient boundary along the Red River in
the States of Oklahoma and Texas, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of
the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 90
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Red River Gradient Boundary
Survey Act''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Affected area.--
(A) In general.--The term ``affected area'' means land
along the approximately 116-mile stretch of the Red River,
from its confluence with the north fork of the Red River on
the West to the 98th meridian on the east.
(B) Exclusions.--The term ``affected area'' does not
include the portion of the Red River within the boundary
depicted on the survey prepared by the Bureau of Land
Management entitled ``Township 5 South, Range 14 West, of the
Indian Meridian, Oklahoma, Dependent Resurvey and Survey''
and dated February 28, 2006.
(2) Gradient boundary survey method.--The term ``gradient
boundary survey method'' means the measurement technique used
to locate the South Bank boundary line in accordance with the
methodology established in Oklahoma v. Texas, 261 U.S. 340
(1923) (recognizing that the boundary line along the Red
River is subject to change due to erosion and accretion).
(3) Landowner.--The term ``landowner'' means any
individual, group, association, corporation, federally
recognized Indian tribe or member of such an Indian tribe, or
other private or governmental legal entity that owns an
interest in land in the affected area.
(4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior, acting through the Director of the Bureau of
Land Management.
(5) South bank.--The term ``South Bank'' means the water-
washed and relatively permanent elevation or acclivity
(commonly known as a ``cut bank'') along the southerly or
right side of the Red River that--
(A) separates the bed of that river from the adjacent
upland, whether valley or hill; and
(B) usually serves, as specified in the fifth paragraph of
Oklahoma v. Texas, 261 U.S. 340 (1923)--
(i) to confine the waters within the bed; and
(ii) to preserve the course of the river.
(6) South bank boundary line.--The term ``South Bank
boundary line'' means the boundary, with respect to title and
ownership, between the States of Oklahoma and Texas
identified through the gradient boundary survey method that
does not impact or alter the permanent political boundary
line between the States along the Red River, as outlined
under article II, section B of the Red River Boundary Compact
enacted by the States and consented to by Congress pursuant
to Public Law 106-288 (114 Stat. 919).
SEC. 3. SURVEY OF SOUTH BANK BOUNDARY LINE.
(a) Survey Required.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall commission a survey to
identify the South Bank boundary line in the affected area.
(2) Requirements.--The survey shall--
(A) adhere to the gradient boundary survey method;
(B) span the length of the affected area;
(C) be conducted by surveyors that are--
(i) licensed and qualified to conduct official gradient
boundary surveys; and
(ii) selected jointly by and operating under the direction
of--
(I) the Texas General Land Office, in consultation with
each affected federally recognized Indian tribe; and
(II) the Oklahoma Commissioners of the Land Office, in
consultation with the attorney general of the State of
Oklahoma and each affected federally recognized Indian tribe;
and
(D) be completed not later than 2 years after the date of
enactment of this Act.
(b) Approval.--
(1) State approval.--
(A) In general.--Not later than 60 days after the date on
which the survey under subsection (a)(1) is completed, the
Secretary shall submit the survey for approval to--
(i) the Texas General Land Office, in consultation with
each affected federally recognized Indian tribe; and
(ii) the Oklahoma Commissioners of the Land Office, in
consultation with the attorney general of the State of
Oklahoma and each affected federally recognized Indian tribe.
(B) Timing of approval.--Not later than 60 days after the
date of receipt of the survey under subparagraph (A), the
Texas General Land Office, in consultation with each affected
federally recognized Indian tribe, and the Oklahoma
Commissioners of the Land Office, in consultation with the
attorney general of the State of Oklahoma and each affected
federally recognized Indian tribe, shall determine whether to
approve the survey.
[[Page S208]]
(C) Surveys of individual parcels.--
(i) In general.--Surveys of individual parcels in the
affected area shall be conducted in accordance with this
section.
(ii) Approval or disapproval.--A survey of an individual
parcel conducted under clause (i) shall be approved or
disapproved, on an individual basis, by the Texas General
Land Office, in consultation with each affected federally
recognized Indian tribe, and the Oklahoma Commissioners of
the Land Office, in consultation with the attorney general of
the State of Oklahoma and each affected federally recognized
Indian tribe, by not later than 60 days after the date of
receipt of the survey.
(2) No federal approval required.--The survey conducted
under subsection (a)(1), and any survey of an individual
parcel described in paragraph (1)(C), shall not be submitted
to the Secretary for approval.
(c) Notices.--
(1) Secretary.--Not later than 60 days after the date on
which a survey for an individual parcel is approved by the
Texas General Land Office and the Oklahoma Commissioners of
the Land Office, in consultation with the attorney general of
the State of Oklahoma, under subsection (b)(1)(C), the heads
of those offices shall submit to the Secretary--
(A) a notice of the approval of the survey; and
(B) a copy of--
(i) the survey; and
(ii) any field notes relating to the individual parcel.
(2) Adjacent landowners.--Not later than 30 days after the
date on which the Secretary receives a notice relating to an
individual parcel under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall
provide to each landowner of land adjacent to the individual
parcel--
(A) a notice of the approval of the survey; and
(B) a copy of--
(i) the survey; and
(ii) any field notes relating to the individual parcel.
SEC. 4. EFFECT OF ACT.
Nothing in this Act--
(1) modifies any interest of the State of Oklahoma or
Texas, or the sovereignty, property, or trust rights of any
federally recognized Indian tribe, relating to land located
north of the South Bank boundary line, as established by the
survey;
(2) modifies any land patented under the Act of December
22, 1928 (45 Stat. 1069, chapter 47; 43 U.S.C. 1068)
(commonly known as the ``Color of Title Act''), before the
date of enactment of this Act;
(3) modifies or supersedes the Red River Boundary Compact
enacted by the States of Oklahoma and Texas and consented to
by Congress pursuant to Public Law 106-288 (114 Stat. 919);
(4) creates or reinstates any Indian reservation or any
portion of such a reservation; or
(5) alters any valid right of the State of Oklahoma or the
Kiowa, Comanche, or Apache Indian tribes to the mineral
interest trust fund established under the Act of June 12,
1926 (44 Stat. 740, chapter 572).
SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to
carry out this Act $1,000,000.
____________________