South Korean executives reveal compensation under revised rulings
Hyundai chairman has disclosed his salary for the first time as per revised regulations requiring certain companies to disclose compensation information for executives
April 01, 2014 at 05:39 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
South Korea is upping its required levels of transparency from executives. The Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act — revised in November 2013 — now makes it compulsory for about 2,000 companies to provide compensation information. Some of the richest executives are the heads of automakers and technology companies as South Korea is one of the largest hubs for technological advancements.
Bloomberg Businessweek reports that — as a result of the tightened rules around executive compensation information — Hyundai Motor Chairman Chung Mong Koo has revealed his compensation for the first time. He received 14 billion won (equivalent to USD$13 million) in total from the three Hyundai entities. Bloomberg quotes Heo Pil Seok, CEO at Midas International Asset Management Ltd., which manages close to $9 billion including Hyundai shares:
“With the disclosure of the executives' compensation, the pressure to deliver better profits will increase…Still, only directors are required to disclose their pay, therefore, the government and companies should take steps to expand the scope and provide more in-depth information on compensation.”
Despite the newly revised compensation disclosure regulations, some executives choose to renounce the director title, allowing them to keep their compensation private. Samsung's Chairman Lee Kun Hee and his son Vice Chairman Lee Jae Yong are two such men. Samsung's three co-CEOs did disclose their compensations together totaling $18.1 billion.
The issue of executive pay is heating up in the U.S. where the debate around company performance versus levels of executive pay is raging. InsideCounsel's Erin Harrison writes that the rift between corporate directors and institutional investors over the executive pay model is still very much a wide one.
Harrison writes: “Given the strong level of shareholder support for say-on-pay votes the last three years, directors firmly believe they are doing a good job of addressing executive pay issues and that revisions to the executive pay model are working well overall, according to Andrew Goldstein, central division leader for executive compensation at Towers Watson. Investors, however, see things quite differently.”
The shareholder outrage that has erupted in the U.S. over Coca-Cola's executive pay has taken the spotlight in this arena. A dispute between shareholders and the company is based around the company's proposed equity plan for executives that one shareholder claims is vastly unfair to investors. The debate over executive compensation will likely always be an ongoing one on a global level.
Further reading:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLatham, Kirkland Alums Land the Top GC Posts—Here's What It Means for Business Generation
10 minute readEx-Twitter Exec Sues for $20M, Says Musk Fired Her as 'Petty Retribution'
Policy Wonks' Obsession: What Will Tuesday's Election Mean for FTC Firebrand Khan?
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
- 3Guarantees Are Back, Whether Law Firms Want to Talk About Them or Not
- 4Trump Files $10B Suit Against CBS in Amarillo Federal Court
- 5Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250