By MARK MAREMONT and JOANN S. LUBLIN

President
Barack Obama's crackdown on Wall Street pay contains loopholes, and may
have limited impact in restraining compensation, according to some
executive-pay consultants and management attorneys.

Some compensation professionals already are pointing out potential
holes in the rules, including tactics such as changing executives'
titles or rearranging pay packages. Just as past attempts by the
government to restrict executive pay largely backfired, these people
warn, the new curbs also may have unintended consequences.

The
plan, announced Wednesday, includes a $500,000 cap on annual
compensation for senior executives of companies that receive future
"exceptional" government aid. Additional compensation would have to be
paid in restricted stock or similar long-term incentive arrangements,
which the executives could cash in only after the government is repaid,
with interest.

Other recipients of future federal bailout money would have to place
tougher limits on severance packages and disclose luxurious perks, such
as the use of company jets. Annual compensation above $500,000 at these
companies would be subject to a nonbinding shareholder vote.

"The mix of transparency and accountability is powerful and strikes
the right balance to allow banks to continue operating effectively
while operating under common-sense guidelines that rein in excessive
compensation," a Treasury Department official said Thursday.

Many applauded the moves as a useful step to curb Wall Street
compensation practices that may have led to excessive risk-taking. But
some critics identified weaknesses, suggesting the restrictions be
retroactively applied to companies that already have received federal
bailout cash. They noted that the most stringent restrictions likely
would affect only a few firms; others could avoid some of the curbs by
putting extra pay to a shareholder vote.

Some said the plan doesn't limit total compensation, because it allows companies to boost awards of restricted stock.

more...http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123387352310154241.html?mod=rss_Politics_And_Policy