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

gkishot · Sep 1, 2009

Quote from trader_t870:

Also, A Zogby poll released on 8/21/09 shows Obama's approval rating at 45%, down from 62% back in early July. This guy's approval numbers are sinking faster than the Titanic. I highly doubt that Obama, or the Democrats would approve a Stock Transaction Tax. Well, that is unless Obama wants to see his approval numbers go down into the 30's, which would be the quickest, sharpest presidential approval nosedive in history. By the time Bush's presidency was over, "8 years", his approval numbers were in the 30's, but Obama could be there in just one year if he keeps governing from the left.

You don't hear as much from the guy any more. Only time I heard from him was at Kennedy's funeral.

tomahawk · Sep 1, 2009

Quote from KK70:

India is removing STT (securities transaction tax) and also lowering income tax rates drastically from 2011.

http://business.rediff.com/report/2009/aug/12/new-direct-taxes-code-released.htm

Good find ... thanks.

zdreg · Sep 1, 2009

Quote from rsikit:

And even though todays article made a big deal of the Brit who said it was a good idea, the decision making part of his own goverment doesnt want it, and they distanced themselves from his comment! We know that UK already has a stamp tax anyways, but they still have other ways of trading like CFDS,and spread betting that get around it.

not quite. it is very inefficient and expensive and resembles a bucket type of operation
________________________________

Quote from KK70:

India is removing STT (securities transaction tax) and also lowering income tax rates drastically from 2011.

http://business.rediff.com/report/2...de-released.htm

kudos. thx.

SpreadSeller · Sep 1, 2009

The NYTimes link appears to be down. I haven't read the proposal, but if they are trying to protect the "small investor", wouldnt' this tax still have a large effect on Mutual Funds? The tax/expenses would be very large. No one would ever have an investment that produced tax efficient growth. Perhaps they specified what the time range is for the tax to not apply (i.e. must hold 1 year?).

S

gkishot · Sep 1, 2009

Quote from SpreadSeller:

The NYTimes link appears to be down. I haven't read the proposal, but if they are trying to protect the "small investor", wouldnt' this tax still have a large effect on Mutual Funds? The tax/expenses would be very large. No one would ever have an investment that produced tax efficient growth. Perhaps they specified what the time range is for the tax to not apply (i.e. must hold 1 year?).

S

I am sure even the "small investors" do not want this tax. Only the profits should be taxed not *the transactions* regardless of whether they will result in profits or not.

SpreadSeller · Sep 1, 2009

Quote from gkishot:

I am sure even the "small investors" do not want this tax. Only the profits should be taxed not *the transactions* regardless of whether they will result in profits or not.

I agree 100%, just curious what their rationale for this crap is.

zdreg · Sep 1, 2009

Quote from SpreadSeller:

I agree 100%, just curious what their rationale for this crap is.

the government in a static analysis says x number of shares were traded last year. this is a great way to raise revenue and punish speculators.

gkishot · Sep 1, 2009

Quote from SpreadSeller:

I agree 100%, just curious what their rationale for this crap is.

The rationale is very simple: greed. They think they can collect billions of dollars in additional tax revenues. But it's going to disrupt many strategies that are currently profitable. The profits will fall, the volume of transactions will fall and the tax revenues will fall as well. They will end up with nothing. Classic example of greed at work.

LEAPup · Sep 1, 2009

Quote from EMRGLOBAL:

massive taxation and reform of Capital Market is coming. Obama nation, that is what the country's majority voted for.

However, might not see such tax until 2010/2011.

Truly sad! People in America too dumb to be allowed (imo) to vote anymore.

seasideheights · Sep 2, 2009

TERRIFIC job with your responses to the reuters story. James Pethokoukis wrote another article with the responses from some of you in it. THIS is exactly the purpose of this thread. To give our viewpoint visibility. You folks hit a home run here.

http://blogs.reuters.com/james-peth...-the-union-dem-plan-for-new-investment-taxes/

Now that we have Mr. Pethokoukis's ear, adding comments at the end of the story at that URL would be very useful. Please comment if you can. Thank you.