1/4% Tax on all stock trades pushed in NY Times today
- Thread starter seasideheights
- Start date
Thanks. Very interesting insight. Geithner has stated that he publicly opposes it (which would imply that Obama also opposes it). Do you know if your friend knows if they are acting like Schumer, ie simply posturing and can change their minds, or would they maintain their opposition to the tax?
The 3 month was just looking at when the bill was introduced which was sept 26 2008 and in that bill it said to be enacted on Jan 1 2009 which is about 3 months. In a few news articles where the unions were talking about this tax for the jobs bill they said it could be a 10 year bill and the tax could star year three.
Its hard to believe , I don't mean you guys, but in general. The house has had ample time and 3 different bills to pass this year with the transaction tax, and it didn't even make it up for discussion or debate. Now look what Rangel said just a week or so ago. When Pelosi was mentioning the tax. He said it was on the table and people were talking about it but then he said he cannot think of what is not on the table. They key to what he said was, still no one has brought it up to me or discussed it with me in my committee. His committee is where the bill was referred to , as it has to pass his committee because he writes the tax laws. This bill is an ammendment to the 1986 tax code. So lots of time for this bill to fly through the house with little debate, but yet all year, nothing was even debated or discussed at all in the proper channels of committee. I doubt Geithner would be posturing for one , it could lead to main street backlash since now it seems they are more inclined to support wall street, so I don't think he would risk that if it wasn't true. I am not a conspiracy theorist so I just go by what people say over and over and they way the say it.
rsikit, notwithstanding tomdavis' insightful post, this legislation b/c of its obvious deleterious effects is fringe. It is fringe and will remain there UNTIL the backdrop gets favorble enough for it to mushroom into a monster. We're not there yet but it's in the offing. The increasing media coverage is a sign that it's beginning to poke its head.
I would not be surprised if the bill is watered down, or retirement accounts may have some sort of exemptions, or perhaps the Long term capital gains may be revised to include a credit for the stock transaction tax, but yes I do agree this will be tax on 401ks as well. In the past,people did not depend on 401ks, but did rely on their pension, which were invested in stocks, in part. Schwab and Vanguard were, I believe the first discount brokers that arose in the 70s. My first stock was TMX, I paid $89.95 at Schwab, and I thought long and hard about trading it.
You are probably correct about capital moving, so maybe this will become a world tax. Buying and selling almost anything else has significantly higher costs of entry/exit than stock trading, so we have become very spoiled with $5 round turns and this will take some getting used to. Its just other vehicles sometimes offer the owner the opportunity to add some value and not just turn the vehicle into a gambling casino.
He said you have to look at the spin, the posturing and everything else that goes on. There are a lot of representatives from districts with high unemployment and crumbling housing prices that will be up for re-election next year. They want to tell their constituants that they supported this bill because they want to "stick it to Wall Street the way Wall Street stuck it to you." In many cases they don't even care if it passes. All they care about is getting re-elected. They know that even if it gets killed in the Senate, it's great election PR spin for them because they get to look like they're playing hardball with the fat cats. However, when the bill gets to the Senate, how many Senators would be willing to vote for a tax that will cause further unemployment while we're in the middle of the worst recession/depression since the 1930s? Not many. And, to answer your question more directly, it's unlikely that Obama or Geithner would support a bill that could put tens of thousands of people in the unemployment lines. That's why my friend said that everything rests on the perception of what would happen to the unemployment numbers.
My friend made I what I think is an interesting overall observation. He said this is the "perfect storm" for a bill that gets huge publicity, yet has very little chance of passing. Everyone is pissed at Wall Street, but nobody wants to do anything to worsen the unemployment situation. He thinks it's very unlikely that this tax would get through the Senate.