1/4% Tax on all stock trades pushed in NY Times today
- Thread starter seasideheights
- Start date
Th truth is this:
The FTT or Tobin tax is being pushed by the EU, OWS, and lefty dem's. This tax will destroy markets. Sweden was the last Country to do this in the 80's and decimated their markets and financial industry. Even thou the EU commission study says this tax will destroy 500,000 jobs, negative GDP and revenue net negative (like in Sweden), the liberals are pushing forward with a bunch of lies to the public.
This tax is to get the banks, when the banks won't pay this tax. It will be passed down and it is investors, pension and mutual fund investors who pay. But it is sold not that way. Not to mention spreads widening and liquidity drying up 50% plus. It's a disaster, but political gold dust.
We are hear to fight this, but more importantly is to reveal the truth of what this tax will really do and who really pays. 100,000s of jobs lost
This is another tax grab from the dem's and it is the middle class who pays.
Below is the letter that I'm sending (via email and fax) to my Senators and House Rep tomorrow.
Feel free to change , borrow, copy word-for-word, etc.
--------------------------------------------------
Dear Senator (or Congressional Representative) [fill in name here],
I am writing to express my opposition to the Defazio-Harkin legislation that I believe will do irreparable harm to the American economy.
Financial Transaction Taxes (FTT) have destroyed jobs and been a net loss to the national treasury everywhere itâs been tried. Swedenâs FTT was repealed because it collected only 3% of the projected revenues and resulted in severe job losses after over 50% of their investment/trading industry left the country to avoid the tax. Today Sweden is one of the FTTâs strongest opponents. The âImpact Assessment Reportâ for the proposed European Union FTT showed that it would reduce EU GDP by 0.5%, cost over 500,000 lost jobs, and reduce net tax revenues by 1.8% (i.e., the taxes collected from the FTT would be less than the income and capital gains taxes lost from the contraction of GDP and resulting job losses). Sweden, the UK, Malta, Ireland and the Czech Republic stand united against the proposed EU FTT.
Introducing the FTT into our economic system would cause thousands of American finance industry jobs to be âoffshoredâ to Switzerland, Hong Kong, Canada, Australia, Russia, Singapore and other countries that have firmly rejected the FTT as destructive economic policy. Schwabish (2005) estimated in his study that the introduction of an FTT in the US âwould cause the loss of 150,000-210,000 private-sector jobs in New York alone.â In addition, the FTT will destroy the livelihoods of thousands of independent traders like myself who support our families and collectively pay millions of dollars in local, state and federal taxes every year.
Sincerely,
[Your name here]
P.S.: Supporters of the FTT often tout the success of the UK âstamp tax,â but fail to disclose that most UK banks and investment firms do not pay the tax. Over 70% of all London Exchange transactions pay no stamp tax, and 100% of all other transactions (e.g., trades on the CME or NYSE) are also exempt. Of all the transactions that originate in the UK, fewer than 3% are subject to the stamp tax. The UK stands firmly against the EU FTT because they know it would decimate Londonâs economy as investment firms relocate to Switzerland, Hong Kong and other non-FTT jurisdictions.
Feel free to change , borrow, copy word-for-word, etc.
--------------------------------------------------
Dear Senator (or Congressional Representative) [fill in name here],
I am writing to express my opposition to the Defazio-Harkin legislation that I believe will do irreparable harm to the American economy.
Financial Transaction Taxes (FTT) have destroyed jobs and been a net loss to the national treasury everywhere itâs been tried. Swedenâs FTT was repealed because it collected only 3% of the projected revenues and resulted in severe job losses after over 50% of their investment/trading industry left the country to avoid the tax. Today Sweden is one of the FTTâs strongest opponents. The âImpact Assessment Reportâ for the proposed European Union FTT showed that it would reduce EU GDP by 0.5%, cost over 500,000 lost jobs, and reduce net tax revenues by 1.8% (i.e., the taxes collected from the FTT would be less than the income and capital gains taxes lost from the contraction of GDP and resulting job losses). Sweden, the UK, Malta, Ireland and the Czech Republic stand united against the proposed EU FTT.
Introducing the FTT into our economic system would cause thousands of American finance industry jobs to be âoffshoredâ to Switzerland, Hong Kong, Canada, Australia, Russia, Singapore and other countries that have firmly rejected the FTT as destructive economic policy. Schwabish (2005) estimated in his study that the introduction of an FTT in the US âwould cause the loss of 150,000-210,000 private-sector jobs in New York alone.â In addition, the FTT will destroy the livelihoods of thousands of independent traders like myself who support our families and collectively pay millions of dollars in local, state and federal taxes every year.
Sincerely,
[Your name here]
P.S.: Supporters of the FTT often tout the success of the UK âstamp tax,â but fail to disclose that most UK banks and investment firms do not pay the tax. Over 70% of all London Exchange transactions pay no stamp tax, and 100% of all other transactions (e.g., trades on the CME or NYSE) are also exempt. Of all the transactions that originate in the UK, fewer than 3% are subject to the stamp tax. The UK stands firmly against the EU FTT because they know it would decimate Londonâs economy as investment firms relocate to Switzerland, Hong Kong and other non-FTT jurisdictions.
ok, I never took it that seriously, but when they started talking about it on tv I figured I better get up to speed so I can start arguing. I'll watch it again tonight on msnbc (it's ok to mention that network here on this thread isn't it? I don't want to unwash any brains) at any rate , I'm use to them talking about things they know nothing about. GM is good because it's publicly owned (by the government), all the rest of the stocks on NYSE are bad and owned by, what did she call them, gold carded elite, like my mother who owns an S&P 500 index fund.
Chill out man, you sound like a nut case and probably are. It's obvious I'm not going to get any objective info here.
Schaeuble Will Push For Global Transaction Tax, Abendblatt Says:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...r-global-transaction-tax-abendblatt-says.html
"Failure to reach an agreement on the tax at the G-20 level may require further talks with the U.S., Schaeuble said, according to the newspaper. Separately, European Union finance ministers will discuss the tax at a meeting in Brussels next Tuesday, and, if those talks are unsuccessful, euro-area countries should consider introducing the tax on their own, he said."
So failure to reach an agreement at the G20 level is going to require further talks with the US? Why can't this idiot just take no for an answer. Hopefully the US tells Schaeuble where to stick his tax
-Guru
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...r-global-transaction-tax-abendblatt-says.html
"Failure to reach an agreement on the tax at the G-20 level may require further talks with the U.S., Schaeuble said, according to the newspaper. Separately, European Union finance ministers will discuss the tax at a meeting in Brussels next Tuesday, and, if those talks are unsuccessful, euro-area countries should consider introducing the tax on their own, he said."
So failure to reach an agreement at the G20 level is going to require further talks with the US? Why can't this idiot just take no for an answer. Hopefully the US tells Schaeuble where to stick his tax
-Guru
That's a good letter. Words infer much to political advisors. Just about that final para "will". (Mostly the letter suggests ''The tax would").
I feel it's always better to write, "the tax WOULD" as opposed to "the tax WILL", because "WILL" definitely suggests the writer is thinking fait accompli.
You might also request a reply requesting the Senators' assurance that he/she are not in favor of the tax. (They usually will avoid expressing a fixed opinion unless they are specifically asked to do so).