1/4% Tax on all stock trades pushed in NY Times today

Quote from listedguru:

I'm not sure exactly what angle Cameron is playing here but I would be shocked if he softened his (Britain's) stance on the ftt. How in the world would he explain that flip flop?

-Guru

"shocked"

explain to whom? you?
it is in a politician's nature to flip flop.

once a pollyanna always a pollyanna.
 
Quote from Banjo:

http://bit.ly/ysPA0w


[...]

Thus, the whole mess will soon come flying apart unless Cameron snatches defeat from the jaws of a "Triumph of One" victory by signing a revised treaty before the French presidential elections.

So most likely that's the main reason why the FTT is removed from the fiscal/budget pact. (besides that, also Sweden, Malta, Ireland, etc. would never want to sign this pact if the FTT was part of it)
 
I don't think Cameron wanted to leave the EU when he argued vigoriously against FTT and onerous EU regulations on financial services, or weakening of UK's own bank and market regulations. In other words, Cameron wants a vibrant and properous City of London, maintaining its role as the banker and banking capital of Europe - that's where the big money is, not by being isolationist.

So this means stay pro-Europe and respect his coalition partner Nick Clegg, but continue to block FTT. In Germany, it's similar with Merkel opposing Cameron on wanting FTT, but her coalition partner in the FDP insisting on no FTT to strike a deal with Cameron.

Maybe, this side deal was made. No FTT or onerous bank regulations for Cameron to sign the fiscal compact and show unison on Monday. Then maybe the EU can pick up strength in their bailout of Greece. Remember, without a signed fiscal compact - and all 27 is better - Germany won't loosen up the money for the bailouts.

Cameron is not giving up much here, as the fiscal compact is on fragile legal ground anyway. Cameron also wants Germany to loosen up the money and for bailouts to pick up steam. A meltdown is not good for the City.

Cameron is playing this right. Der Spiegel says the fiscal compact is probably not legally binding anyway.

Legal Loopholes: Critics Question Merkel's Fiscal Pact Proposal - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News - International
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,811791,00.html. PS, just saw Rantany's link with this same article, thanks.

Bottom line, all we care about is no FTT or stamp-duty-plus in Europe and we want the bailouts to fix Europe rather than have contagion. We don't need Cameron to be a euro-skeptic.
 
About a month ago I read an article (which I can't find now) stating that Finland would require a referendum on this agreement because of something in their constitution. I haven't heard anything about it since, but this could be another fly in the Merkozy ointment.

Also, back in early December, Malta said they would not accept any EU agreement that included the FTT or a common tax base.

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20111210/local/EU-treaty-agreed-but-without-UK.397672

In spite of Malta losing a major ally in the battle to safeguard financial services – on which both countries depend significantly – the Maltese government’s lobbying still paid off because the introduction of a financial transaction tax and a common corporate tax base were dropped from the final communiqué agreed upon.

“This is a successful summit for Malta because we have managed, albeit with difficulty, to safeguard our national interest,” an exhausted but satisfied Lawrence Gonzi said yesterday afternoon after marathon talks that ran through the night, save for a short break between 5.30 and 8 a.m.





Quote from Robert A. Green:


Irish want referendum on fiscal treaty - FT.com
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/7c4feb24-4a6f-11e1-a11e-00144feabdc0.html

Trading no FTT for a fragile fiscal compact is fine and hopefully that is the deal for the UK. If there are referendums, that stern German-designed compact may not stand up.
 
Hollande promised to boost state spending by €20bn by 2017, create 60,000 teaching posts and 150,000 subsidised jobs for young people.

That is to be paid for by higher taxes for the wealthy, a tax on financial transactions and a 15% rise in taxes on bank profits, a ban on stock options and trading in "toxic" financial instruments, plus caps on bonuses

Ah banning stock options that will save the day.
 
Back
Top