The typical pay of bosses at the majority of the UK's largest publicly listed companies rose 11% last year to £3.65m, according to research done on behalf of the BBC.

Manifest, the adviser to shareholders, calculated the research based on data from the 60% of FTSE 100 companies who have published their annual reports.

The news comes amid shareholder revolts over high executive pay.

On Tuesday, insurance firm Aviva said boss Andrew Moss will be leaving.

Pay at firms in the UK in general rose by just 1.1%, according to the Manifest calculations.

While pay rose at big corporations for chief executives and executive chairmen, shares of FTSE 100 firms shed 6.6% of their value last year.

FFS sick hearing that fucking line.

Exec pay has been increasing like that for years and shareholders approved it then. Of course their pay is ridiculous but you could argue their job is a hell of a lot harder now than it was during the boom years when share holders were happy to sign off on silly sums.

You're a Daily Mail reader right Boobs?

Your point being?

I was asking a question. Care to answer it?

The scourge of our wealth divide

The annual Sunday Times Rich List yields four very important conclusions for the governance of Britain (Report, Weekend, 28 April). It shows that the richest 1,000 persons, just 0.003% of the adult population, increased their wealth over the last three years by £155bn. That is enough for themselves alone to pay off the entire current UK budget deficit and still leave them with £30bn to spare.

Second, this mega-rich elite, containing many of the bankers and hedge fund and private equity operators who caused the financial crash in the first place, have not been made subject to any tax payback whatever commensurate to their gains. Some 77% of the budget deficit is being recouped by public expenditure cuts and benefit cuts, and only 23% is being repaid by tax increases. More than half of the tax increases is accounted for by the VAT rise which hits the poorest hardest. None of the tax increases is specifically aimed at the super-rich.

Third, despite the biggest slump for nearly a century, these 1,000 richest are now sitting on wealth greater even than at the height of the boom just before the crash. Their wealth now amounts to £414bn, equivalent to more than a third of Britain's entire GDP. They include 77 billionaires and 23 others, each possessing more than £750m.

The increase in wealth of this richest 1,000 has been £315bn over the last 15 years. If they were charged capital gains tax on this at the current 28% rate, it would yield £88bn, enough to pay off 70% of the entire deficit. It seems however that Osborne takes the notorious view of the New York heiress, Leonora Helmsley: "Only the little people pay taxes."
Michael Meacher MP
Labour, Oldham West and Royton

I was asking a question. Care to answer it?

The annual Sunday Times Rich List yields four very important conclusions for the governance of Britain (Report, Weekend, 28 April). It shows that the richest 1,000 persons, just 0.003% of the adult population, increased their wealth over the last three years by £155bn. That is enough for themselves alone to pay off the entire current UK budget deficit and still leave them with £30bn to spare.

The axe is out of his depth on rugby (his best subject), the idea of politics and the uk media well that's never ganna be good.

Re the report: brokem intl industry, the bankers at least have taken restraint. Well done stephen hestor.

Comrades:

Michael "9/11 was an inside job" Meacher determined to leave no shred of doubt about his fuckwittery.

Leaving aside some of the bogus assumptions underpinning the desire to tax this wealth, and the fact that the muppet doesn't undertsand the difference between GDP which is a measure of value added in the economy and "wealth" which is a capital stock, there's a reason you tax income flows not wealth. That £315bn isn't sitting around in cash under the bed. It's either in bank accounts (in which case it's been lent out) or far more likely it's been invested in assets like stocks and real estate. Something like £90bn of investment assets would be suddenly dumped in the market in order to pay the tax demand. And who is going to be left to buy the fuckin stuff anyway?

Cunt.

Seems a great idea to me if we are all in this together that is, tbf a bit a pain for a few thousand is worth it.

FFS sick hearing that fucking line.

Exec pay has been increasing like that for years and shareholders approved it then. Of course their pay is ridiculous but you could argue their job is a hell of a lot harder now than it was during the boom years when share holders were happy to sign off on silly sums.

Amazing the correlation between being a lefty and being economically illiterate. It's almost as if...

Companies (and countries) that have more equitable payscales are generally more successful.

This "their job is a hell of a lot harder" stuff is bollocks.

Amazing the correlation between being a lefty and being economically illiterate. It's almost as if...

It's also fuckin stupid because it misses the point that their comp packakges are mainly because they are hitting performance targets and the value of their stock awards ( a big chunk of their comp) are increasing as the markets improve from the previous few years of carnage. This is a feature not a bug.

Of course it's down from 2000 when we were about a 1-2 years really into the boom time and before the big dip/market panic when practically everything was overvalued.

I'm assuming then from zzzzzzzzzzzzz's argument that there were pay cuts and stocks handed back for the downs?

He said performance targets, that's not share price, that's things like income/profit/market share, so they could very well have met these targets despite a lower share price as the whole market went down, not just one of two big businesses.

So we're not all in this together, now there's a surprise

The rich have been crying like babies about the top earners 50p tax rate and how it is holding back the economy, if anyone still believes this shit they are fucking loons.

So not only are the rich earning more than ever, they are also paying less tax, all thanks to their chums in Downing street.

Do you accept how economically illiterate meacher is, are u supporting his argument?

Between 1947 and 1979, productivity in the US rose by 119%, while the income of the bottom fifth of the population rose by 122%. But between 1979 and 2009, productivity rose by 80% , while the income of the bottom fifth fell by 4%. In roughly the same period, the income of the top 1% rose by 270%.*

So share price goes up, executives get pay rise, share price goes down, executives get pay rise.

Labour mp's post silver like economic statements and lefties repost. Stupid is as stupid does!

Eh?