**Although difficult to put into practice, no CEO should be able to profit while others suffer** Despite the difficulties behind capping CEO pay, on principle, it is the ethical thing to do. [Inequality has worsened since the pandemic began], and little has been done to curb individuals from profiting while others suffer. - Much like taxation, this pay could be capped at a marginal rate to prevent smaller business owners from missing out - It is not only how *much* CEOs are paid that is the problem, but *how* - [exorbitant executive compensation is a massive problem](https://www.epi.org/publication/ceo-compensation-2018/) - Some may say that this would disincentivise hard work as CEOs would not strive towards profit maximisation, but this could also inspire a move away from conglomerates that use exploitation of workers and the environment to succeed - CEOs, although often innovative entrepreneurs, would be nowhere without their workforces - when a CEO is a billionaire, it is unreasonable to say that they have made every penny from hard work

**Some argue that capping CEO pay may actually end up hurting workers.** - Alex Edmans [argues in _Harvard Business Review_](https://hbr.org/2017/02/why-we-need-to-stop-obsessing-over-ceo-pay-ratios) that attempting to mitigate the pay ratio between CEOs and workers can have unintended consequences that may end up hurting workers: CEOs "wishing to improve the ratio may outsource low-paid jobs, hire more part-time than full-time workers, or invest in automation rather than labor." They may also "raise workers’ salaries but slash other benefits," which are also quite important, since "research shows that, after salary reaches a (relatively low) level, workers value nonpecuniary factors more highly, such as on-the-job training, flexible working conditions, and opportunities for advancement. Indeed, a high pay ratio can indicate promotion opportunities, which motivates rather than demotivates workers." - However, I agree with the excellent point above that capping CEO pay could also more importantly lead to a move away from the exploitation of workers and the environment. If there is a way to both protect workers and the environment _and_ keep the incentives from within the company strong, then that's the best of both worlds. So long as that remains a dream, however, it seems we have to choose between the two.