If you read the above article in its entirety it states the Tobin Tax is one of the possiblities they were tasked with by the g20, we know shortly after the g20 that Stauss Khan came out in opposition of the tax. As well as John Lipsky came out and said he did not prefer the tobin tax, he would rather and FDIC model. They are interested in not raising revenue but preventing future crisis or having a bailout fund like the FDIC, so thats why they perferred to go after that. Then after lobbying by France and Gordon Brown, he agreed to again look at it as one of the options including the insurance premium which by his own words we know John Lipsky favors. So this is the same thing Stauss Kahn said last week at the CBI. He is now willing to atleast look at it as one of the options, just as the G20 asked him to. If you go back and look at a lot of reports from the IMF from time to time they have studied the effect of these taxes, and the studies pretty much found they were not effective, for many reasons. So again, you should write letters to the IMF as well, I have seen letters written to the IMF from all the Eurpean NGOS stating the tax is the only way to go and they want to be involved in the study, so we need to counteract that. Not sure if it will do any good to write them, but it never hurts our cause. We still know what Strauss Kahn and Lpsky feel on the Tobin tax, they played there card too soon, and thats why London was pissed so they re agreed to look at it but we still know there hand. Which is a good thing.
1/4% Tax on all stock trades pushed in NY Times today
- Thread starter seasideheights
- Start date
I don't read into this as being anything new. The IMF has recently stated that they will be looking at a 'tobin tax' as well as 3 or so other options. I still believe the FDIC type insurance model is at the top of the IMF's list (as well as the US). It will be very difficult to get int'l agreement on even this insurance type FDIC levy IMHO...
-Guru
That number has been floated out there as well not from the US side though. 500ths percent is basically 5 bucks on every 100k of money. We have also seen .05, .25, .02, .10, .01 etc.. We have seen plenty of numbers, and sometimes it seems like there is a number trders can live with, like the 5 bucks per 100k doesnt sound bad. Well it is for some and not for alot of others. But its the principle of the matter, we want know taxes and we know if they start with something thats low and what you might think managable, they will always tweak it higher! So no taxes at all. I was comforttable with say an .005% but then realized I am for no taxes at all, becuase once they tax they will increase it!
Yeah, he said "point zero zero five percent" -- but he was just some scrub reporter with no real insight. The 0.005% rate has been mentioned in various Tobin Tax reports.
Quote from GG1972:
"Quote from rsikit:
That number has been floated out there as well not from the US side though. 500ths percent is basically 5 bucks on every 100k of money."
5/100 of 1 % on 100k is $50 bucks one way not $5 --so basically now you are 10 times your original $5 argument
My bad when the op I quoted said 500ths of a percent he meant .005% as they stated on the bloomberg interview. He mis wrote it and I misread it but I knew what he meant. So the number they are quoting on bloomberg is .005% which is 5 bucks per thousand.