I have not seen one or come accross something like that in searches that have been done for that reason. The one after ww2 was to rebuild and raise money. But I see your point about tool of punishment. Its like tabacco industry they could do it and punish for an outright well almost ban but they dont they just raised taxes on tabacco and it didnt do much in a sense to stop or ban smoking, I think when there is a lot of money involved they are like trying something that is smoke and mirrors trying to tax to punish and stop bad beahvior( so it looks good in the mainstream) but in a sense it does not really work. As in the case of tabacco but the tax here on transactions can hurt the industry. Some countries have a financial transaction tax not only on the financial transactions like trading, but also on withdrawing cash from atmsand banks and uses of credit /debit cards etc, and not just on companies but on consumers as well. That tried to encourage savings and punish people from using the money. I will have a look this weekend to see if there is anything like what you mentioned ever used and see what I can find. So far I have not seen anythihng like it but you never know whats hidden there.
1/4% Tax on all stock trades pushed in NY Times today
- Thread starter seasideheights
- Start date
The tax is akin to a sales tax, but if you want a recent example of a tax that affected business, then maybe the luxury tax imposed under Bush 1 which tacked an additional 10% tax obligation on luxury goods, such as furs, jewelry, cars, and yachts. The tax nearly obliterated the boating industry in this country:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/federation/feature/?id=110010377
By extension, you can extrapolate the effect on periphery workers of the financial industry should such a detrimental tax be imposed.
(interesting point: "Perhaps the greatest irony was that in 1991 the federal government paid out over $7 million more in unemployment benefits to those workers than it collected in luxury tax revenues.")
Is this what you are looking for? Now while it is not business cost related but consumption related, the effect I think would be very similar in effect.
A few months back, Obama stated that he envisions a much smaller Wall Street down the road. Well, if this tax were to pass, then his mission would certainly be accomplished, wouldn't it? Tax it to death so it forces traders to leave, and then find some minimum wage, crap job that they could never survive on. I guess this is one of the ways in which Obama plans to "change" America. 
I've just started a thread ...
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?threadid=179601
... to discuss next steps for u.s.-based traders in the event the transaction tax becomes a reality. The time to begin planning is NOW.
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?threadid=179601
... to discuss next steps for u.s.-based traders in the event the transaction tax becomes a reality. The time to begin planning is NOW.
Just keep an eye out tortoise, you have more countries who want to pass this tax way more than we do for lots of different reasons, and if we take the lead and do it, those countries will follow. So chances are there will be little ways around the tax if most countries do it. The thing we can hope for are products with in the US that can mimic the products we like to trade that would not be taxed this way, like some countries alreay have. But anyways, I dont think the tax here will happen any time soon, maybe in the EU first but we shall see. There are countries with decent financial centers, that have companies that offer some trading you cannot do in the states , for example, Malta is one whom I traded through before. But now the US made it illegal to do so. So the fact that they are closing all the loop holes for tax havens not a good thing . The way I am treating preperation for this tax is just holding a bit longer in one of my accounts. Instead of scalping , I would just be more of a swing trader. So start demoing instead of trying to make few hundred a day or so, make a 1k-2k a week or how ever much you make. Just try it off less trades is all and the tax will be a cost of doing business but atleast you can still trade. I trade forex so for me i trade different time frames all intra day so I would be killed by the tax, so thats why my preperation consists of now daily charts and trading off thos so the tax wont hurt and I can still make good money. Just being proactive as I dont think I have reason to worry about the tax for sometime.
Good work Scott. Keep up the good cause.
Regradless of how much Scott and his company makes or how much overide he makes we all still do not wwant the tax. He is self serving with his comments to Geitner becuse he doesnt want to be out of business just like we are all self serving becuase we do not want to be out of business. So good for him for makin a ton of money. Just like us who trade we dont need to focus on our personal ramifications of what a tax might do to us, but rather focus on how it will hurt mainstreet and how mainstreet will be taxed or how retirements will suffer, and how the backlash of trading firms whether big or small will be out of business and the ripple effect it will have on buisness and employment of companies that service these trading companies. Big companies like Schwab or Etrade , they have lots of employees, so they will be a lot of layoffs, then consider technology companies that supply these firms will have less business, back office support will have less business , they companies surrounding these companies like food services will have less business etc.. just a ripple effect if enough people get laid off. I try to stay focused on the mainstreet effect it will have as I would respectfully suggest others to do.
Does anyone know of Obama's stance on the transaction tax? The reason I ask if I've come across 3 or 4 different blogs where it mentions that Obama came out in favor of the tax when he was a Senator. Unfortunately I can't find the blogs where I remember reading this. I don't remember any of the pieces backing up their statements but I do remember reading that. I also remember reading something about Obama talking about it on a campaign stop but again I can't recall where I read that info...
Not that it really matters as it would need to clear the house and the senate before he would get a chance to sign it or veto it - not to mention it sounds like Geithner is not fond of it nor is Summers...
-Guru
Not that it really matters as it would need to clear the house and the senate before he would get a chance to sign it or veto it - not to mention it sounds like Geithner is not fond of it nor is Summers...
-Guru