You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
1/4% Tax on all stock trades pushed in NY Times today
- Thread starter seasideheights
- Start date
US pols like to argue for taxes federally for YEARS (like 10-15) to be applied to expats who try to move to South America and other places. IOW, if you renounce your citizen ship and move to Jamaica, and trade with a firm that has no PDT rule or trader tax, they USA gov will try to argue they can STILL collect on you AFTER you leave the country for a period of like 10-15 years. I read this someplace, and I would not be surprised if it was law or in the works. These bast@rds are hardcore...
Quote from PlusMinus:
No. That would be an absolutely absurd thing for any one industry (relatively small) to be pursuing,.
The $11 trillion dollar mutual fund industry is small? 1.5% in management fees is over $110 billion dollars. They stand to gain even more by the elimination of brokerages and online trading.
Quote from Anaconda:
How is the administration stupid? Have you seen how much money Obama got from Wall Street? Have you looked into who compiles his team and their background?
Seems like they are executing according to plan. Nothing stupid about it.
You are right. Their interests are diametrically opposed to the average American.
Quote from traderbigt:
Anyway, they will demand US CITIZEN's trades abroad will be subject to the tax, undoubtedly, so unless you trade with a nation outside the US and leave here, it is hopeless. You will not be able to use Interactive Brokers and trade abroad markets and evade this tax.
They canât unless US is in control of all foreign exchanges and brokerage firms, which is impossible. As long as there is one foreign firm/exchange not under the US jurisdiction, traders will get away from it. That is why Pelosi wants unilateral transaction tax across nations.
Quote from jj69:
Anaconda, let's say that your thesis turns out to be right. Do you see any way for retail traders to trade(actively for a living) once this passes? For instance viability of trading cfds in canada, or maybe some props get exemption, etc.
trade for a firm that has exchange status via finra cboe cbx etc. professionals will get exemptions whether you trade prop for gs or some other bd. the indivdual acctt i have now through lightspeed would be no good. now how they keep their mouths shut as to how all the exchange members get exemptions without starting world war III is anyones guess.
Quote from seasideheights:
The extreme anger in the 500+ replies to that thehill.com story is actually pretty encouraging. I expected a lot of folks to come out in support of the tax just because of the Anti-WallStreet tornado that's spinning around. It seems to be universal anti-tax folks over there and they've differentiated between the investment banks & regular Americans with brokerage accounts. It's good to see. Almost like a hornet's nest that's been hit with a baseball bat. A politician reading that flood of harsh reaction won't be so quick to proudly boast about the tax in a positive way.
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/69295-dems-push-wall-street-150b-stock-tax?page=1#comments
just last night this updated petition had less than 100 signed on by 9pm. There are over 1300 now in less than a day.
again found here. . .
http://www.rallycongress.com/greent...-jobs-do-not-enact-financial-transaction-tax/
Attachments
Jeffrey V offers his thoughts
http://www.rallycongress.com/greentradertax-traders-association1/2644/view_all/4/#comment-595035
If this bill is passed, it will have unintended consequences that are hard for the proponents of this tax to believe. To begin with, every ordinary citizen who owns mutual funds or other financial assets will have their wealth destroyeed further than has already happened. This wealth-destruction will end up costing jobs and destroying tax revenues.
Further, a transaction tax would fail to achieve its purpose because transactions would dry up (think Laffer curve). In the process, it would further destroy financial liquidity in our markets and available capital for businesses. (Think of what happened when liquidity dried up in the credit markets in late 2008. Think again before voting for a transaction tax) In addition, as soon as the bill looked likely to pass, there would be a horrid rush to get out of the markets because the tax would reduce the value of assets, and there would be a mad scramble to "get out of the theater" and preserve whatever personal wealth that has not already been destroyed. When this happens, the resulting bear market would further destroy wealth, hitting the consumer further, causing additional job loss and AT LEAST a double-dip recession - one that the Administration would be unable to do anything about because they will have already used their resources to support the current fledgling recovery, and because the government would lose at least 100X as much revenue than the tax would garner due to the reduction of income, both corporate and individual.
Furthermore, if DeFazio and his ilk succeed, there will be a massive centrist backlash against those who support such a tax. Think what happened to the Hoover Administration - in reverse.
Those who taught themselves to trade in our financial markets because they were unable to get jobs are prime examples of the American ingenuity that made our country great. These people include those who are making a good living, and others who are stay-at-home mothers with mouths to feed and retirees on fixed income trying to eke out a bit of additional income on very narrow margins (including core constituents of office-holders like DeFazio). Those who demonize "Wall Street" should consider that the vast majority of people who profit from stocks, bonds, and other financial instruments (including mutual fund and retirement investors) are ordinary citizens trying to find a way to prosper, not scoundrels who deserve to be demonized.
Furthermore, such a tax would strike a blow at the very economic system that has made our country great. Businesses are motivated to make profit, and are rewarded in our financial system by having their stock rise and having their debt graded higher and more easy to obtain. A transaction tax would diminish the value of their stocks and make capital more difficult to obtain. So this tax is qualitatively different than an income tax.
http://www.rallycongress.com/greentradertax-traders-association1/2644/view_all/4/#comment-595035
If this bill is passed, it will have unintended consequences that are hard for the proponents of this tax to believe. To begin with, every ordinary citizen who owns mutual funds or other financial assets will have their wealth destroyeed further than has already happened. This wealth-destruction will end up costing jobs and destroying tax revenues.
Further, a transaction tax would fail to achieve its purpose because transactions would dry up (think Laffer curve). In the process, it would further destroy financial liquidity in our markets and available capital for businesses. (Think of what happened when liquidity dried up in the credit markets in late 2008. Think again before voting for a transaction tax) In addition, as soon as the bill looked likely to pass, there would be a horrid rush to get out of the markets because the tax would reduce the value of assets, and there would be a mad scramble to "get out of the theater" and preserve whatever personal wealth that has not already been destroyed. When this happens, the resulting bear market would further destroy wealth, hitting the consumer further, causing additional job loss and AT LEAST a double-dip recession - one that the Administration would be unable to do anything about because they will have already used their resources to support the current fledgling recovery, and because the government would lose at least 100X as much revenue than the tax would garner due to the reduction of income, both corporate and individual.
Furthermore, if DeFazio and his ilk succeed, there will be a massive centrist backlash against those who support such a tax. Think what happened to the Hoover Administration - in reverse.
Those who taught themselves to trade in our financial markets because they were unable to get jobs are prime examples of the American ingenuity that made our country great. These people include those who are making a good living, and others who are stay-at-home mothers with mouths to feed and retirees on fixed income trying to eke out a bit of additional income on very narrow margins (including core constituents of office-holders like DeFazio). Those who demonize "Wall Street" should consider that the vast majority of people who profit from stocks, bonds, and other financial instruments (including mutual fund and retirement investors) are ordinary citizens trying to find a way to prosper, not scoundrels who deserve to be demonized.
Furthermore, such a tax would strike a blow at the very economic system that has made our country great. Businesses are motivated to make profit, and are rewarded in our financial system by having their stock rise and having their debt graded higher and more easy to obtain. A transaction tax would diminish the value of their stocks and make capital more difficult to obtain. So this tax is qualitatively different than an income tax.