[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.

                          ____________________