The total number of CEOs this is likely to affect is zero. > According to reports, Wells Fargo, the bank headquartered in San Francisco, increased its CEO’s sa

The total number of CEOs this is likely to affect is zero. > According to reports, Wells Fargo, the bank headquartered in San Francisco, increased its CEO’s salary to $23 million in 2019. It would have to pay its median worker in the city at least $38,000 to avoid the highest tax rate and $230,000 to avoid the lowest tax rate. Well the minimum wage in San Francisco is $33,425.60 annually, so the median wage is almost certain to be above that since I doubt more than half their employees are entry-level bank tellers making minimum wage. Additionally since Wells Fargo is headquartered in San Francisco, I'm sure the number of highly-compensated key employees present locally is even higher. > additional tax would only apply to companies with gross annual revenues of at least $1.7 million and executives who make at least $2.7 million annually Again, minimum wage for a full-time employee is $33,425.60 annually, so this really could only apply to executives making more than $3,342,560 unless we're talking about part-time jobs. The net effect of this is going to be nil all but the largest corporations that have a large minimum-wage workforce based in the city and perhaps a handful of small corporations that employ a large number of part-time employees. So whereas I'm sure they passed this intending to make it sound like they're sticking-up for the little guy, the net effect is going to be the loss of a number of minimum-wage jobs. A couple big-box stores might either pay-up or move outside the city limits. And a lucky handful of employees might receive a modest raise. But probably not, since any small corporation could just as easily compensate their executives via dividends which are not covered by this legislation. In short: This is the legislative equivalent of a puff piece. Designed to sound good on paper without actually effecting any meaningful change.