Tuesday, July 12, 2022

CRIMINAL CAPITALI$M

Kingfisher tycoon Vijay Mallya sentenced to jail in India

IMAGE SOURCE,GETTY IMAGES

India's top court has sentenced tycoon Vijay Mallya to four months in jail for disobeying an earlier court judgement linked to the collapse of his airline.

India has previously made efforts to extradite the former billionaire, who is believed to still be in London.

He made his fortune selling beer under the Kingfisher brand before branching out into aviation and Formula 1 racing.

Kingfisher Airlines was India's second largest domestic carrier before it collapsed a decade ago.

On Monday, India's Supreme Court found Mr Mallya guilty of contempt, as it said he failed to disclose his assets after defaulting on a loan.

He was found guilty of the same offence in 2017 for allegedly transferring $40m to his children, even as loans to Kingfisher Airlines remained unpaid, the court said at that time.

Known as the "king of good times", in a reference to his lavish lifestyle, Mr Mallya has fought extradition from the UK to India, where he faces charges including fraud.

Mr Mallya who left India in 2016 after defaulting on debts of more than $1bn (£842m), has denied fleeing the country.

Late in 2018, a court in London ruled that he could be extradited from the UK to India to face charges there.

In 2020, Mr Mallya lost his final appeal against his extradition at the High Court in London. However, he is still believed to be living in London.

Mr Mallya faces a number of charges related to alleged financial irregularities at Kingfisher Airlines.

The carrier was wound down in 2012 amid reports that pilots and cabin crew had worked unpaid for 15 months.



The Indian Farmer Protests: A Rare Concession

12.JUL.2022 1:13 AM 

Gloomy faces, weary from the steady onslaught of the draconian heat and unforgiving weather, peered into the camera. A myriad of emotions flashed through the faces of the interviewees sitting before the plethora of newscasters, ranging from anxiety to restlessness, placidity to anger. They all came to rest upon one: determination.

“We are fighting for our land, we are fighting for our rights. We’ve been protesting for two months here, but we’re ready to be here for two years until these laws are repealed.” When local farmer Devilal Dahiya spoke to several news correspondents in India’s Haryana state, he publicly chastised the national policies which sought to remove the legal umbrellas protecting his fellow farmers. Despite encouragement from his family to heed these policies, Dahiya refused, emboldened by the massive support from his fellow farmers across India. In a movement championed by swaths of citizens, sprawling protests took over New Delhi and several cosmopolitan cities in India, a testament to the sheer number of agricultural producers in India. On India's annual Republic Day,  falling on January 26, 2021, tens of thousands of farmers converged on Delhi, riding their tractors and pushing for reparations against the policies endangering them.

Promulgated by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the reigning political party of India, the controversial agricultural laws removed the threshold for minimum prices for outside entities to buy crops, which hitherto protected farmers from an uncontrolled market. The bills originated as an attempt to liberalize Indian markets, encouraging private economic growth and the deregulation of private markets. The laws provided farmers the flexibility to sell crops to private entities, rather than the traditional middlemen regulating regional markets. The resulting laws loomed ominously over anxious villagers and farmers, who feared that this move “forward” would pull farmers three steps back through removing minimum prices that protected their products from being undervalued. The BJP envisioned the laws to be an essential next step in the modernization of India’s farming practices, an effort to stimulate the private sector through promoting negotiation.

Through removing traditional buffers in farmer markets, the BJP’s agriculture policies hoped to assist farmers in directly trading with private entities. Although supported by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, these laissez-faire policies were met with intense anger and backlash. Dating back to the 1960s, maintained prices helped alleviate food shortages and improve crop sales. Farmers feared that the BJP would end a protective mechanism that guaranteed prices for several crucial cash crops such as rice, paddy, cotton, grains, and onions, all items typically sold in mandis. In regions such as Punjab and Haryana, mandis are smaller, local farmer markets, and any threats to these crops could spell calamity for the families who grew them.

The BJP, on their part, attempted to diffuse tension through verbally guaranteeing the maintenance of prices, however farmers argued for an officiated law. Many feared an agreement without writing would leave room for the free-market economy to prey on their farms. With aggression rising and impassioned leaders speaking on both sides, protests spewed out across the country. Although beginning with peaceful rallies, protesters quickly moved towards symbolic acts and coordinated movements. The beginning of 2021 saw masses of protesters storm the heart of New Delhi in Red Fort, filling to the brim with farmers, primarily from Punjab and Haryana, demanding better conditions. As a result of these invigorated groups, police and officials convened to disperse the crowd, resulting in dozens injured and one dead.

Across the span of 2021, hundreds of farmers died as a result of drought, and the everpresent COVID-19 virus. Estimates put the total at over 500, with farmer leaders demanding monetary compensation for the families of the deceased in the form of 500,000 Indian rupees (US$6,750).

In the form of several smear campaigns, social media propaganda, and organized in-person canvassers, the BJP attempted to disavow the protests as the actions of another Indian minority. With the majority of the protesting movement being held afloat by Sikh farmers, Modi moved to exploit ethnic tensions. He stoked fear in Indian denizens with warnings of a potential Sikh religious movement, and referred to protesters as "Khalistanis” (a previous, unaffiliated Sikh group vying for an independent homeland from the Indian nation). Modi attempted to sway the nations towards anti-farmer sentiment through supplanting any support with fear of a potential uprising. In response to his denigration of the many agricultural producers ineffably important to India, anger and vitriol followed, along with heavy criticism from humanitarian activists and leaders.

Despite the rising tides of support, the protesters’ future seemed incredibly bleak. India was not renowned for bending to societal pressure or heeding democratic movements. Farmers such as Devilal Dahiya, despite being surrounded by hundreds of impassioned protesters, felt as much. In a reiteration of his declaration, he vowed to spend as much time as needed, whether it be a month or two years, to reestablish the vital safety net Indian farmers so desperately need.

As it turns out, two years were unnecessary.

In a far-less anticipated move, Modi publicly vowed to remove the laws which inspired hundreds of thousands to protest against him in November, 2021, a year later. Speaking in a nationally televised address, Modi addressed the pushback, emphasizing that “the purpose of the new laws was to strengthen the country’s farmers, especially small farmers. We have failed to convince some farmers despite all our efforts.” While protests continued until December 2021, roadblocks were decreased and heavily amassed groups lessened in intensity. Many noted his actions come ahead of elections in key states such as Uttar Pradesh and Punjab, which are major agricultural producers. His party, the BJP, has voiced concerns over dropping support there..

The move has represented a rare concession for the 71-year-old leader, who has stood firm in the face of fierce criticism of his government's many controversial actions. From a ban on high-denomination banknotes to citizenship laws preventing Muslims immigrating into the country, even in the face of escalating violent protests, Modi has rarely bowed to public pressure. But farmers are a particularly influential constituency in India—both because of their sheer size and because they are often romanticized as the heart and soul of the nation. They are particularly important to Modi's base and represent a significant portion of the population in some of the states his party has strong support in.

While the road towards an eventual full repeal of the heavily criticized agricultural laws remains open, the widespread implications of Modi’s actions and even more shocking reversal of course are substantial. It remains to be seen what is made of such an event, as the significant and overwhelming pressure is now enough to alarm Modi. A particular point of contention was Modi introducing the laws through an executive order, traditionally used for national emergencies. The rebuke of Modi’s foundational support ultimately proved intense enough to dissuade the often-unwavering political powerhouse. The BJP has also been criticized for its refusal to prolong the debate on the legislation, with allegations that it has too often used its majority to pass laws without sufficient consultation.

The BJP’s next steps to swing the pendulum in their favor remain to be seen. As the elections approach, the recent farmer protests are anticipated to be a heavily deciding factor between the BJP and major opposition parties. Opposition leaders have welcomed the repeals, yet have frequently lamented upon the loss of unnecessary life in the process, claiming the BJP capsized to pressure due to the upcoming elections. What is known, however, is the strength of amassed support in the face of approaching threat. For the BJP, it has been nothing short of astonishing to witness a group of people, impassioned about their families, mobilizing themselves in such a way and achieving what was only before considered impossible. Their actions open a number of possibilities in a government that formerly repudiated a number of policies supported by public groups. Despite various televised remarks and agitprop from vast parts of the country, the farmers had prevailed, leaving room for other national groups to ponder: what else is possible?

Monday, July 11, 2022

Anoushka Shankar Launches New Film To Highlight Indigenous Resistance To Coal Mining In India

Award-winning musician Anoushka Shankar has narrated a new campaigning film highlighting Indigenous opposition to coal mining in the Hasdeo Forest, India.

Shankar, a seven-time Grammy nominee and multi-award winner, is lending her voice to the growing Adivasi (Indigenous) campaign in India to prevent further coal mining in the unique Hasdeo Forest, Chhattisgarh, home to 20,000 Adivasi people.

At least two enormous open-pit coal mines are already established in the Forest, but there are plans for three new mining projects there.

The Adivasi communities in Hasdeo have resisted the mines for 10 years, during which time their leaders have faced threats and false charges and their demands have been ignored, despite the community marching 300km to the state capital, and having sat in continuous protest in the Forest for over 100 days.

Recently Rahul Gandhi, a senior figure in the opposition Congress Party, said that the Adivasi protests are “justified; that he “has a problem” with mining the Forest; and that he “does not defend” it.

The three proposed new mines were recently put on “indefinite hold” in a major victory for the Adivasi campaign. However, they have not been cancelled, and the rights of Indigenous peoples, enshrined in Indian law, to withhold their consent for mining have still not been recognized by the authorities.

Anoushka Shankar said today: “The people of Hasdeo Forest are an inspiration to us all to stand firm and to defend that which is most precious. Their land is everything to them – it is their Mother, their god and their life, and they are utterly determined to protect it.

“The Adivasi women of Hasdeo are placing their bodies in front of the trees they love. I’m honoured to use my voice to help amplify their bravery in standing against the destruction of their forest and the desecration of their sacred sites. The government’s plan to sacrifice these people and their Forest for coal must be permanently stopped.”

Jo Woodman of Survival International said today: “The strength and determination of the Adivasi resistance movement in Hasdeo Forest has not wavered for a decade, and they remain united and committed to saving their Forest, getting their rights recognized and stopping any further coal mining. Until these mines are totally cancelled, and the community’s rights are fully recognized, their peaceful and just fight for Hasdeo continues – and history will be on their side.”

© Scoop Media

On the street and online: social media becomes key to protest in Kenya

As elections near amid soaring debt and a cost-of-living crisis, grassroots activists are turning to social media to propel change


Members of the Kenya Fight Inequality Alliance learn how to spread their message online during a meeting in Nairobi.
 Photograph: Courtesy of Kenya Fight Inequality Alliance


Global development is supported by
Tue 12 Jul 2022 

When 1,700 Kenyans took to the streets of Nairobi, Kisumu and Mombasa last week, they had one main demand of the government: to bring down the skyrocketing cost of living. Commemorating Saba Saba Day (“seven seven” in Swahili, when protesters on 7 July 1990 called for democracy under President Daniel arap Moi), the demonstrators brandished placards that read #nofoodnoelections and #lowerfoodprices.

Crucially, they also took to social media with their demands. “There is an escalation in how online space is being used,” says Sungu Oyoo, a community organiser with grassroots political movement, Kongamano la Mapinduzi (which roughly translates as conference of the revolution).

“We are realising that we may not always get coverage in traditional media or may face media blackouts,” he says. “So many activists are using social media like an independent media outlet – where they can push the conversations and reach more people.”

Oyoo says online activism is even more powerful in the hands of disenfranchised communities. “On social media, we are all starting from the same point.”

Online social justice movements are gathering momentum in Kenya’s informal settlements. In Mukuru, one of Africa’s biggest slums, residents meet for bimonthly meetings, known as barazas, which have become a vital space for political debate among young people as the country’s elections on 9 August approach. In this election, they are using social media to press presidential candidates on two big-ticket issues affecting their daily lives: the rising cost of living and the country’s soaring debt.

Young people from low-income areas such as Mukuru have long been sidelined from national policy debates that disproportionately affect their communities. “Kenyan media is run by the highest class of society. The economic interests of those people and the ones of the street are divergent, and the patterns of coverage reflect that,” says Oyoo.
Young Kenyan activists meeting to debate issues such as debt cancellation. 
Photograph: Courtesy of Kenya Fight Inequality Alliance

Collaborating with activist organisations such as the Kenya Fight Inequality Alliance, people from poorer areas are now coordinating “Twitterstorms” to air concerns. “They feel they get the attention of their representatives better that way,” says Winny Chepkemoi, national coordinator of Kenya Fight Inequality Alliance.

The alliance supports activists organised in community-led social justice centres across the country as they launch online campaigns. In May, they successfully pushed MPs to reject an increase in the tax on staples such as maize flour, which had been planned even as 69% of Kenyans reported struggling to feed their families. The justice centres organised a peaceful protest at parliament and ran a #NjaaRevolution (hunger revolution) campaign on Twitter, which trended for days.
The government is raising debt but it’s not being used to improve our lives. Our grandchildren will be paying for thisKimani Nyoike, Kenya Fight Inequality Alliance

Many of the young people turning to online campaigns say it is their way of taking power back and getting issues on the agenda. “We can’t all go out and demonstrate,” says Felix Kiamboi, a Mukuru resident, “but we can marshal [people] and send a message to those in power.”

Young people from poor areas often bear the brunt of police violence during street protests, so the online movements have created a safe space for activism. According to Solomon Josephat, a 22-year-old Mukuru resident, street protests are often divided along class lines. Inequality is rife in Kenya, and the issues that propel the middle classes on to the streets contrast with those that mobilise lower-income communities.

Josephat says building a more united front on social and economic issues would make police brutality less likely. “If the middle class showed up more for protests, it would be harder for the police to get violent because they wouldn’t know who they were shooting at,” he says.
Kenya Fight Inequality Alliance wants young people to make their voice heard on debt cancellation with the hashtag #CancelDebtKE. 
Photograph: Courtesy of Kenya Fight Inequality Alliance

Class divides allow poor policy decisions to go unchallenged, say Mukuru residents. “As Kenyans, we are to blame because as long as we can afford to get by, we have a ‘we-shall-cope’ attitude – until we’re affected directly,” says Frederick Okwafubwa, 22, who lives in the settlement.

The cost of a 2kg bag of maize meal has nearly doubled since last year, placing the country’s staple food, ugali (boiled maize flour), out of reach for many. Some have had to make drastic changes to get by. Joyce Mwikali, an unemployed 33-year old Mukuru resident, has cut back to one meal a day. “If things are like this now, how will they be for my daughter?” she asks.
Advertisement


Collins Mageto, who works on branding for companies, says his wife had to return to her parents’ home with their child because her family was better off. “We were struggling. Things went up, and the money I used to leave for their daily needs was no longer enough,” says the 24-year-old.

Reflecting on previous election choices, Nicholas Mutinda, a 30-year old businessman, says: “Our first mistake was electing a president who doesn’t know the price of bread,” referring to President Uhuru Kenyatta, who is the son of the country’s independence leader and founding father, Jomo Kenyatta. Mutinda says he wants to elect a leader who knows how people feel.

Experts say the country’s high debt is contributing to the cost of living crisis through highly taxed goods. In a new campaign launched last month, the Mukuru Youth Initiative used the hashtag #CancelDebtKe to push presidential candidates to make detailed commitments on how they would tackle Kenya’s rising debt.

Activists from Kenya’s Social Justice Centres Working Group demonstrate with empty pots and cooking oil containers – to represent the high cost of living – during a protest on Saba Saba Day last week. 
Photograph: Daniel Irungu/EPA

“The government is raising debt but it’s not being used to improve the lives of Kenyans,” says Kimani Nyoike, a member of the Fight Inequality Alliance. “Our grandchildren will be paying for this.”

Kenya’s soaring public debt stands at more than 8tn Kenyan shillings (about £56bn), and earlier this month, parliament increased its debt ceiling to KES10tn.

From this month, for the first time in Kenya, the government’s debt repayments have overtaken current spending. This will place a significant strain on Kenya’s growth, says Ken Gichinga, chief economist at Mentoria Economics.


Pressure points: threat of unrest looms as Kenya’s elections approach

With mounting public pressure to address the debt burden, the veteran opposition leader Raila Odinga has promised to restructure debt and negotiate debt relief. George Wajackoyah, an underdog in the race, has suggested clearing Kenya’s debt by legalising cannabis and selling it abroad. William Ruto, the deputy president and a leading contender, has also vowed to bring an end to excessive borrowing, but was vague on details.

“The election period may not be enough to get these issues fully addressed, but pushing our leaders lets them know Kenyans are watching them,” says Nyoike.

Primatologist Jane Goodall gets Barbie doll in her likeness 


By Reuters
Primatologist Jane Goodall gets Barbie doll in her likeness
Primatologist Jane Goodall gets Barbie doll in her likeness   -   Copyright  Thomson Reuters 2022

By Marie-Louise Gumuchian

LONDON – British primatologist Jane Goodall has got a Barbie in her likeness, fulfilling a longtime wish of having her own doll to inspire young girls.

Mattel Inc unveiled the new Barbie, which the toymaker says is made from recycled plastic, as part of its Inspiring Women Series, nodding to Goodall’s groundbreaking studies of chimpanzees and conservation efforts.

Dressed in a khaki shirt and shorts and holding a notebook, Goodall’s doll has a pair of binoculars around her neck and David Greybeard by her side, a replica of the first chimpanzee to trust the primatologist as she conducted her research at Gombe National Park, in what is now Tanzania in east Africa.

“I wanted a doll to be me even before this idea came up. I’ve seen…little girls playing with Barbie dolls and certainly at the beginning, they were all very girly girly and I thought little girls need…some choice,” Goodall told Reuters.

“Mattel has changed its range of dolls and there’s all kinds of astronauts and doctors and things like that. So many children learn about me at school. They’ll be thrilled to have the Barbie doll.”

Goodall, 88, began her research in east Africa in 1960, observing that chimpanzees make tools, hunt and eat meat and show compassion among other traits.

“When I got to Gombe, it was beautiful, my dream had come true,” she said. “But for four months the chimps ran away from me…so although the forest was wonderful, I couldn’t enjoy it until this David Greybeard lost his fear and helped the others to lose their fear too.”

Mattel said it would also partner with the Jane Goodall Institute and her youth service movement Roots & Shoots to help teach children about their environmental impact.

“I see us at the mouth of a very long, very dark tunnel with a little shining star at the end and it’s no good sitting at the mouth of the tunnel and saying ‘Oh, I hope that star comes to us.’ Hope is about action,” Goodall said.

“We… work around all these obstacles between us and the star, which is climate change, loss of biodiversity, poverty, unsustainable lifestyles, pollution, you name it. And as we go along the tunnel, we reach out to others because there are people working on each one of these problems but so often they’re working in silos.”






A handout picture shows a Jane Goodall Barbie doll and David Greybeard Chimpanzee along with the accessory products, in Los Angeles, U.S., April 2022. Jane Goodall Institute/Handout via REUTERS



A handout picture shows primatologist Jane Goodall holding the new Eco-leadership team Barbie dolls, in Los Angeles, U.S., April 2022. Jane Goodall Institute/Handout via REUTERS

 dollar tank military

Class And Racist Security In A Liberal Democratic Order – OpEd

By 

There is an African proverb with the theme that when you see a lion, a bear, a fox, a hyena, and a deer running together at the same time, the forest is on fire and an exceptional situation has been created. An exceptional situation basically occurs when the law is suspended and the ruler’s decision replaces the law. Then, previous legal clauses and regimes and legal and international conventions become an appendage that can only occasionally be used behind the podium to declare that “The forest is on fire and any fire is condemned”. The same situation is going on in the United Nations as without any practical action, the organization only declares its concern about the war in Ukraine.

However, in the Ukraine war, the exceptional situation in the international order will not only affect the Americans or the Ukrainians. These exceptional circumstances are the product of the current situation due to the arrangement of world powers and the tension between them. Nearly 800 US military bases in more than 70 countries have turned the world into something like a US barracks, or rather a hostage of American order. Britain, France, and Russia also have a total of 30 military bases around the world. In addition, China established its first overseas military base in Djibouti in 2017 and is now not much far away from establishing the second one in the Solomon Islands near Australia- However, USA and Australia announced in the AUKUS Pact that this establishment is a red line for them.

 It is estimated that the United States alone spends about $ 200 billion to maintain these bases; a price that is obviously paid from the pockets of American taxpayers. It is a pity that these bases have not been much successful in maintaining global efficacy and deterrence. The strategic question is “What is the purpose of creating this number of bases?” If the new liberal order is based on the continuation of peace, what is the justification for this militarization of the world? The only thing that the other power actors can do in the current situation, especially after the nightmare of the emergence of the enduring paradigm of Trumpism in the United States, is to side with the commander of this invading military order and endless wars.

Another important question is whether countries like Iran, Venezuela, and Cuba which are encircled by US bases, or even China and Russia, as military powers, are allowed to set red lines to maintain their security against the United States or not? The fundamental question is “Why the right to draw red lines is not considered for other countries that do not have close ties to the United States?” History will not forget that John F. Kennedy, then President of the United States, was ready to even wage a nuclear war to push back the Soviets from their borders. 

What does security mean in a situation that the United States defines as a zero-sum game for others? In the current conceptualization of security, it is nothing but the security of the United States and its allies, who define themselves as the rulers of the world order and the guarantor of security. In other words, the security of independent countries or even the actor’s attempt to gain strategic independence from the global hegemony of this order is defined as the insecurity of the international order or American security, which has emerged as an international commander. In the current conceptualization, security is nothing but the security of the United States and its allies, who define themselves as the rulers of the world order and the guarantor of security. 

America considers itself rightful to determine its interests by defining new wars, new rivals, or endless wars so that no country or international organization will ever dare to speak about dismantling these bases.  International organizations and conventions must act according to what is acceptable in Bush and Trump’s governing paradigm of US foreign and security policy. This means that any country could face a threat or war as soon as it violates the unilateral interests of the United States. In this exceptional situation, the international regimes and conventions that constitute the international order have practically become something that is subject to the decision of the ruling hegemon. Another necessity for maintaining this exceptional status for the White House, as the imperial power of the new order, is to maintain and continue the strategy of endless wars. For decades, war has been the most essential part of the Washington order. In other words, the ” war of all against all” under the supervision of the White House has gained legitimacy for years. In the strategy of endless wars, not only should the wars in Syria, Yemen, and Afghanistan not end, but also the provocation of China in Taiwan should be maintained and Russia should be constantly encouraged to pursue geo-strategic expansionism.

It is said that when a government is in danger of falling, the only thing that can save it might be war. From a larger perspective, if we consider that the United States of America is the ruler of the liberal world order and actors like Europe, as former allies seek strategic independence and countries like China fight for authoritarian rule, what can help the US to maintain its dominance once again? In addition to suspending the law and stabilizing the exceptional situation, the war also preserves the ruling order.

In America’s grand strategy, war is the code name that has kept the state of exception stable for American interests. In the war of all against all strategy, Afghanistan was offered to terrorist Islamist jihadists, and now it’s time to provoke Russia into war in Ukraine and possibly mobilize allies who are afraid of Russia in case of future China aggression. Ukraine and Russia will also have to fight until the threat draws closer to Europe until the continent becomes more dependent on the USA. Iran, too, must be isolated with the strategy of keeping the option of war on the table of US presidents. 

Let’s return to the image of a large garrison with 800 military bases around the world. What will 800 military bases do if they have not been able to prevent the war? Isn’t it time for the demand for being released from the prison guard who has turned the world into a great garrison? Isn’t it time that the world is no longer a laboratory of occupation, military operations, and military campaigns? Isn’t it time for US taxpayers to ask why $ 200 billion of their hard-earned money should be spent on inefficient US military barracks around the world? Perhaps now is the time for strategic independence and the preservation of the lost prestige of the Charter of Nations, regimes, and international conventions to become a global and international demand to prevent another country from falling victim to this so-called order.



Timothy Hopper is an international relations graduate of American University.

 Income Tax Calculator Accounting Financial

Tax Cuts And Jobs Act Did Little To Affect Executive Pay, Counter To What Congress Intended

By 

Through the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, Congress attempted to curb CEO pay by repealing a long-standing exemption that allowed companies to deduct large amounts of qualified performance-based pay. New research finds the change has had little effect, with CEO pay either staying the same or growing after the law made it more costly to award executives with high levels of compensation.

The intention of the legislation was to move top-executive compensation away from stock-based compensation and performance pay that can lead to a myopic emphasis on short-term results and toward cash-based fixed compensation.

Professors at Indiana University, the University of Texas and the Chicago Booth School of Business examined CEO pay packages before and after the tax policy change and found no evidence that companies affected by the law changed total compensation, compensation mix or pay-performance sensitivity.

“It’s very politically amenable right now to say they’re going to tax these corporations and these executives and it’s going to reduce income inequality, but our research — and that of others — suggests that taxes are just not a big enough stick to change the structure or the magnitude of executive compensation,” said Bridget Stomberg, associate professor of accounting and a Weimer Faculty Fellow at the IU Kelley School of Business. “We found no statistical effects, which is counter to what Congress intended. We looked very hard and see no evidence of a reduction in CEO pay.”

The article, “Examining the Effects of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act on Executive Compensation,” has been published online by the journal Contemporary Accounting Research. The other authors are Lisa De Simone, an associate professor of accounting at the University of Texas’ McCombs School of Business; and Charles McClure, an assistant professor of accounting at Booth. Stomberg and De Simone are co-hosts of the podcast “Taxes for the Masses.”

Since 1994, publicly traded companies were generally subject to a $1 million-a-year cap on the amount of top-executive compensation that they could deduct from corporate taxable income. But there was an exemption, allowing them to deduct more if the pay was linked to the company’s performance. In 2017, Congress reduced the corporate tax rate to 21 percent from 35 percent and eliminated the exemption, limiting the deductibility of certain highly compensated employees to only $1 million.

In the paper, Stomberg and her colleagues used a battery of over 40 tests to examine changes in executive compensation from fiscal years 2017 to 2018, when the tax rules took effect. They used a control sample of companies operating under fiscal years, which were affected later than companies operating under calendar years. They then looked at compensation in 2019 and 2020.

“Even three full years after the law took effect, we didn’t see any evidence of a reduction in CEO pay,” she said.

The results broadly suggest that taxes are not a first-order determinant of executive pay and that tax regulation could be relatively ineffective at curbing executive compensation in response to growing income inequality. This finding has policy implications as some in Congress propose a federal corporate tax surcharge linked to the CEO pay ratio. The cities of Portland, Oregon, and San Francisco have implemented business taxes tied to CEO pay ratios, which also has been proposed by at least eight states.

“If Congress’ fundamental assumption about the relative importance of taxes in the design of executive compensation is overstated, its ability to shift current compensation practices through changes in tax policy is also likely overstated,” the authors said. “Our results and those from prior studies suggest increases in firms’ cost of executive compensation do little to reduce its amount.

“As a consequence, policymakers should reconsider whether changes to the taxation of executive compensation are a viable path towards addressing the perceived issues of excessive executive pay and inequality. Although our results speak only to the effects of the TCJA, we believe our results can inform the broader debate on the efficacy of tax regulation to influence executive compensation.”

Britain to toughen accuracy safeguards of company statements
By Huw Jones  

People walk across Millennium Bridge with the City of London financial district seen behind, amid the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, in London

LONDON (Reuters) - Starting in January 2024, company directors will have to give investors stronger reassurance that annual reports are free of fraud after collapses at retailer BHS and builder Carillion, Britain's accounting watchdog said on Tuesday.

The British government said in May it will legislate to introduce a more powerful audit and company governance regulator, and change how auditors are hired.

But with no timetable for legislation, the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) set out on Tuesday changes it will propose which do not need a new law, such as amending Britain's "comply or explain" Corporate Governance Code, and introducing standards which are voluntary until legislation is brought in to make them mandatory.

"These long-awaited reforms are a once-in-a-generation opportunity to ensure corporate Britain upholds the highest standards of governance and protects those stakeholders who rely on high-quality reporting," FRC's chief executive Jon Thompson said in a statement.

After a public consultation early next year, the FRC said it will change the code from January 2024 so that companies have effective internal controls to ensure the accuracy of annual reports and other reports.

The change comes after Britain decided not to introduce into law a version of the stringent U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley rules which force company directors to personally attest to the accuracy of their financial statements or risk imprisonment for breaches.

The FRC will also write guidance for directors on reporting fraud, distributable profits, and resilience, meaning the company's ability to stay in business.

The FRC will also change the code to reflect a board's wider responsibilities for sustainability, and environment, social and governance reporting (ESG) as new disclosure requirements are rolled out.

There would be a provision for companies to take into account the need for "diversity" when tendering for a new auditor to dilute the dominance of EY, KPMG, PwC and Deloitte.

The code will be updated to strengthen reporting on when arrangements are triggered to reclaim a bonus, the FRC said.

There will be a pilot on how companies could report on remuneration, a topic increasingly under the investor spotlight.
Pacific nuclear victims paying the price for actions decades ago


Runit Island, Marshall Islands 14 August 2018
.Carolyn Cole / Los Angeles Times

By Sanjeshni Kumar
12 July 2022 
Pacific nuclear victims seek an apology for actions decades ago. “…..we are still angry that we are not recognised as nuclear victims.”

Lest we forget, it has been 24 years since the last nuclear test in Mururoa, French Polynesia and 76 years since the first at the Bikini Atoll in the Marshall Islands. It’s easy to forget that they ever happened unless if you are living with its consequences and paying the price dearly daily.

For Marshall Islands Student Association representative, Danity Laukon, she really did not know the history of the nuclear tests on her country until a few years ago.

They did not teach this history in school and so generations after the 97 nuclear tests didn’t know their own history, a deliberate erasure of a period in history.

But there are daily reminders, such as the lady she met at the airport in Majuro, suffering from thyroid cancer and who cannot be compensated because she was from an atoll that was not one of the four – Bikini, Enewetak, Ronelap and Ulro- identified for compensation.

It was an ‘omission’ to acknowledge that the radioactive fallout downwind as well as the current’s spread the radioactive material.

“Go tell my story, our story, that we are still angry, we are still angry that we are not recognised as nuclear victims,” the lady pleaded with Danity.

Lena Nomand of French Polynesia’s Association 193 says there are inconsistencies in the compensation of nuclear victims and adds that it was important that France also apologizes for her actions decades ago.

“We do need France to ask for forgiveness. “It is not the riches – for us asking for forgiveness is important before the reparation. Two months after President Macron came to French Polynesia, he asked for forgiveness from the people in Algeria. So… just to say that it is possible,” Nomand said.



Tahiti, above, was exposed to 500 times the accepted maximum radiation level from nuclear tests in the 20th century, reports Le Parisien.

Nomand and Laukon were in Vienna last month to attend the first meeting of state parties since the Treaty on the Prohibition of nuclear weapons came into effect in January last year.

Kiribati’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Teburoro Tito urged the international community to listen to the voices of youth and of those whose families have suffered from nuclear testing.

“The international community cannot forget how the former colonial powers treated innocent Pacific Islanders in their pursuit of weapons of mass destruction,” he said. “Nuclear weapons undermine the core tenets of international humanitarian law, and it is unacceptable that a small group of states are spending billions in modernising and maintaining their nuclear arsenals. These weapons are on hair-trigger alert and are ready to annihilate the world. We cannot allow these immoral weapons to continue to threaten humanity.”

The meeting ended with a Declaration by state parties and a 50-point Action Plan., which includes actions on universalization; victim assistance, environmental remediation and international cooperation and assistance; scientific and technical advice in support of implementation; supporting the wider nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation regime; inclusion; and implementation of the treaty’s gender provisions.

“From the adoption earlier today of our rules of procedure to the creation of an intersessional structure and Scientific Advisory Group, to agreement on a comprehensive action plan, you can count on New Zealand as a steadfast supporter and active participant in our Treaty’s future,” New Zealand Minister of Disarmament and Arms Control, Phil Twyford.

“Let us focus now on our immediate tasks and have confidence that the message we will send from our first meeting is one of commitment to – and resolute belief in – the necessary and urgent elimination of nuclear weapons. A message we will carry also to the Review Conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Nuclear weapons are never the answer. But our Treaty can be,” Twyford said.



Nuclear testing in the Pacific.

At the Vienna meeting, Pacific Islands Forum chairperson and Fijian Prime Minister, Frank Bainimarama called on world leaders to consider the long-term consequences of the displacement of communities from their traditional lands due to ever-encroaching nuclear waste.

“The terrible legacy of those tests wasn’t only the waste that was created, it was the weapons that were perfected. Thousands of missiles and trillions of dollars later, every person on earth is hostage to arsenals that threaten our existence. It’s time we do away with these trillion-dollar relics and get serious about securing our future,” he said.

Fiji also declared it would work closely with New Zealand to eliminate nuclear weapons, including joint advocacy efforts with partners.

Meanwhile, State parties also declared to “move forward with its (TPNW) implementation, with the aim of further stigmatising and de-legitimising nuclear weapons” and work in partnership with the United Nations, the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, other international and regional organisations, the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons and other non-governmental organisations, religious leaders, parliamentarians, academics, indigenous peoples, victims of the use of nuclear weapons (hibakusha), as well as those affected by nuclear testing and youth groups.

They also pledged to “work with affected communities to provide age and gender-sensitive assistance without discrimination to survivors of use or testing of nuclear weapons, and to remediate environmental contamination.”