1/4% Tax on all stock trades pushed in NY Times today
- Thread starter seasideheights
- Start date
From the 12/4/09 issue of IBD. Nothing new here. (Although the instant Pavlovian response in my head when I see this guys face is amazing. Sorry - emotions are now back in check)
Defazio's bill is HR 4191
http://www.defazio.house.gov/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=532
He is claiming the middle class is exempt from the tax. Here is his example of that:
The Middle Class is Exempt:
To ensure the tax is appropriately targeted to speculators and has no impact on the average investor and pension funds, the tax will be refunded for:
1) tax-favored retirement accounts,
2) education savings accounts,
3) health savings accounts,
4) mutual funds and,
5) the first $100,000 of transactions annually that are not already exempted.
For example, a 60 year old couple with $500,000 in retirement funds, another $100,000 in Health Savings Accounts, $400,000 in mutual funds that cashed out any of it, would not pay any transaction taxes. If they also hold $200,000 in IBM stock, they still donât pay any transaction taxes. If they sold half of their IBM stock in a year, they still donât owe any taxes. If they sold all $200,000 of their IBM stock in a year, they would owe $250. This couple is generally held harmless by the tax, just like 99% of taxpayers who donât speculate in financial markets.
-Guru
http://www.defazio.house.gov/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=532
He is claiming the middle class is exempt from the tax. Here is his example of that:
The Middle Class is Exempt:
To ensure the tax is appropriately targeted to speculators and has no impact on the average investor and pension funds, the tax will be refunded for:
1) tax-favored retirement accounts,
2) education savings accounts,
3) health savings accounts,
4) mutual funds and,
5) the first $100,000 of transactions annually that are not already exempted.
For example, a 60 year old couple with $500,000 in retirement funds, another $100,000 in Health Savings Accounts, $400,000 in mutual funds that cashed out any of it, would not pay any transaction taxes. If they also hold $200,000 in IBM stock, they still donât pay any transaction taxes. If they sold half of their IBM stock in a year, they still donât owe any taxes. If they sold all $200,000 of their IBM stock in a year, they would owe $250. This couple is generally held harmless by the tax, just like 99% of taxpayers who donât speculate in financial markets.
-Guru
Quote from DirkDigler:
From the 12/4/09 issue of IBD. Nothing new here. (Although the instant Pavlovian response in my head when I see this guys face is amazing. Sorry - emotions are now back in check)
These liberal clowns need to go bye bye...one way or the other
How long have these yoyo's been in office anyways??
This is an absolute must read:
http://mobile.politico.com/story.cfm?id=30200&cat=topnews
"Speaker Nancy Pelosi gave her strongest endorsement yet of a global financial transaction fee Thursday after raising the issue directly with Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner in a conversation this week."
"Geithner was widely seen as opposing such a levy when it was proposed by Gordon Brown, the British prime minister, at a meeting of G-20 finance ministers last month in Scotland. But after their phone conversation Wednesday, Pelosi told colleagues that the secretary indicated he was more open to some such fee than had been reported."
Getting greater clarity on Treasuryâs position is difficult.
âShe said that Geithner felt he had been misrepresented,â said House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (DâMass.), who has also been open to such a fee, so long as would be imposed on a worldwide basis.
But after promising a quick response Thursday, the department waited more than three hours before saying it would have no comment beyond passing on a month-old transcript of Geithnerâs remarks in Scotland Nov. 7.
Those remarks were more nuanced than a truncated but widely quoted excerpt from a Geithner television interview that appears to flatly oppose such a fee. But Treasury refused to provide more clarification of where secretary stands on the issue or whether he felt his views had been mischaracterized.
Going forward, the secretaryâs support is vital to the speakerâs vision of applying the fee globally to protect American competitivenessâa concern Geithner is said to share.
Didn't Geithner come out against the tax in his interview on Fox Business today? Way too many mixed signals lately...
-Guru
http://mobile.politico.com/story.cfm?id=30200&cat=topnews
"Speaker Nancy Pelosi gave her strongest endorsement yet of a global financial transaction fee Thursday after raising the issue directly with Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner in a conversation this week."
"Geithner was widely seen as opposing such a levy when it was proposed by Gordon Brown, the British prime minister, at a meeting of G-20 finance ministers last month in Scotland. But after their phone conversation Wednesday, Pelosi told colleagues that the secretary indicated he was more open to some such fee than had been reported."
Getting greater clarity on Treasuryâs position is difficult.
âShe said that Geithner felt he had been misrepresented,â said House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (DâMass.), who has also been open to such a fee, so long as would be imposed on a worldwide basis.
But after promising a quick response Thursday, the department waited more than three hours before saying it would have no comment beyond passing on a month-old transcript of Geithnerâs remarks in Scotland Nov. 7.
Those remarks were more nuanced than a truncated but widely quoted excerpt from a Geithner television interview that appears to flatly oppose such a fee. But Treasury refused to provide more clarification of where secretary stands on the issue or whether he felt his views had been mischaracterized.
Going forward, the secretaryâs support is vital to the speakerâs vision of applying the fee globally to protect American competitivenessâa concern Geithner is said to share.
Didn't Geithner come out against the tax in his interview on Fox Business today? Way too many mixed signals lately...
-Guru
Quote from Stok:
These liberal clowns need to go bye bye...one way or the other
How long have these yoyo's been in office anyways??
I want to see the looks on their faces when their proposals are quickly flushed down the shitter, just like all of Defazio's previous ones regarding a transaction tax.