put into print how much he or she (in Bermuda, that is definitely a he) is remunerated annually, as this newspaper has discovered in the past with Bermuda-based insurance entities ACE and Exel.

But any company seeking to go public on a recognised stock exchange, as both ACE and Exel have done in recent years, must disclose executive compensation in full to give potential investors a full financial picture before parting with their money.

Now a method of remuneration which 90 percent of US top executives and many in Bermuda benefit from -- the stock option arrangement -- is under attack from the Financial Accounting and Standards Board.

Stock options, which are promises to issue a fixed number of shares at a set price, are considered by shareholder activists to result in overly generous pay packages, coming, as they do, on top of generous salaries and other forms of bonuses and compensation.

The FASB wants to change the fact that US stock options, which are good for a fixed period, often 10 years, have long been made with little effect on companies' bottom lines.

In a move that could revolutionise the way executives are paid, the powerful FASB has proposed that firms be required to take a charge against their earnings for stock options given to executives and other employees as part of compensation packages. The decision came despite protests from many businesses.

The rule change would lower the earnings of companies that grant stock options -- and could leave some with losses. The rule, which the FASB hopes will be ready for a vote by its board before the end of the year, would be phased in over three years.

Not surprisingly, companies have opposed the change.

Just how lucrative stock options can be for executives was illustrated late last year, when Walt Disney Co. chairman Michael Eisner and president Frank Wells exercised stock options netted them a combined $257.2 million.

Disney had granted Eisner the option to buy shares at 5.4 million at $3.60 apiece, 3.4 million of which he subsequently for about $40 each.

Options are now the only major form of compensation in the US that do not have to be listed as expenses in reports to stockholders. Companies can issue as many options as they want without harming earnings.

"The current accounting standards would make you think they have no value when they are granted. That is demonstrably not true,'' said an FASB spokesman.

The board found that the current practice in accounting for stock options "produces inconsistent results, depending on the type of option granted, which impairs the credibility of financial statements,'' said the spokesman.

The rule change, if adopted, would lower earnings for major corporations by no more than 2 percent to 3 percent, companies have reported. But executives worry that the accounting change would make directors less generous with their compensation.

Supporters of the rule change have argued that corporations are now benefiting from a double standard because they are taking a tax deduction on executives' option profits. They also say the requirement would make earnings reports more accurate.

"FASB's proposal, if it becomes final, would place a reasonable check on executive pay packages which contain options -- a check which up until now has been missing,'' said Michigan-based Senator Carl Levin, who has held hearings on changing accounting rules to limit corporate tax deductibility for executive stock options.

*** Once again, due to space restrictions, the mutual funds list could not be run at the end of last week. They are included today on Page 11.