2. 考研
  3. One reason why shareholder activism has been increasing is that regulators have encouraged it, especially on pay. For a decade B

One reason why shareholder activism has been increasing is that regulators have encouraged it, especially on pay. For a decade B

admin2018-03-01  49
问题     One reason why shareholder activism has been increasing is that regulators have encouraged it, especially on pay. For a decade Britain has required firms to give shareholders a non-binding annual vote on executive pay. The colossal Dodd-Frank act of 2010 gave shareholders in American companies a "say on pay", too.
    Now comes two new moves. On March 3rd the Swiss voted to oblige firms to hold a binding annual vote on director’s pay: in the small print, the referendum also banned golden handshakes and severance packages for board members, and bonuses that encourage the buying or selling of firms. Then on March 5th EU finance ministers (with only Britain objecting) agreed to cap bankers’ bonuses to 100% of their basic salary, or 200% if shareholders vote for it.
    If the Swiss had merely given shareholders an annual vote on pay, it would have been a good thing; but the accompanying bans are not. There are times when a golden handshake to a talented manager can be in shareholders’ interests: far better to let the owners vote on it than restrict the firm from trying it.
    The EU’s proposal has less still to recommend it. The rationale for it is that banking bonuses have encouraged risk taking, because they reward bankers hugely for bets that come off and punish them only slightly for those that don’t. But banks have come a long way since the crisis, by deferring bonuses and making them partly payable in their own debt and equity. Blunt laws could undermine such progress. And bonus caps will either hold pay down, thus sending clever people elsewhere, or push up salaries, thus making pay less responsive to performance. Enpowering shareholders is a good idea; requiring them to channel populist fury is not.
It would be good for Swiss to ______.
选项 A、ban shareholders’ annual vote on pay
B、give managers a right to vote on their pay
C、give talented managers golden handshake
D、give shareholders a vote on pay without the bans
答案D
解析 原文对应第三段第一句：If the Swiss had merely given shareholders an annual vote on pay，it would have been a good thing；but the accompanying bans are not．可见答案是“give share-holders an annual vote on pay”，即D项的前部分；而“accompanying bans are not”相当于选项D后半部分的“without the bans”。故确定选项D为答案。
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.kaotiyun.com/show/rABZ777K
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)