The article followed  Standard & Poor's announcement that it will change its assessment of corporate performance to take into account the cost of stock option awards in an "effort to return transparency and consistency to corporate reporting."

Livingston acknowledged in the article that the debate on stock option accounting has been reopened due to the Enron debacle, but argued "changing how they are accounted for will add confusion, not clarity."

"It is perfectly logical  that incentive stock options generate capital gains income to the employee and no tax deduction to the company, and that non-qualified stock options generate ordinary income to the employee and an ordinary deduction to the company; this taxation scheme is a good parallel construction that promotes employee ownership," wrote Livingston.

According to Livingston, the focus should be placed on corporate governance, since that appears to be the root of the problem. He proposed preventing "mega-grants" to CEOs, removing "incentives to profit from short-term stock price changes," and to implement performance-based options.

Additionally, Livingston blasted Warren Buffett, a vocal proponent of the expensing of stock options approach, for his eagerness to eliminate stock option incentives.

"Simply put, part of his formula for driving the value of his own position is to be stingy about sharing equity with the workers, or not to be overly reliant on the intellectual capital in a highly specialized workforce," he wrote of Buffett.

Have an opinion on this topic? To add your voice to Letters to the Editor, write editor@smartpros.com. All letters become the property of SmartPros and may be edited for space, clarity, relevance and fairness upon publication.