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

Quote from Spydertrader:

I contacted Sherrod Brown's Office (along with all House and Senate Members from ohio) regarding this very topic. I have yet to receive a response.
More...

Dear

Thank you for getting in touch with me about the Let Wall Street Pay for the Restoration of Main Street Act of 2009.

This legislation would impose a 0.25 percent tax on the sale or purchase of financial instruments such as stocks, options, derivatives, and futures. The revenues from this tax – estimated to be $150 billion each year – would be used to reduce the deficit and fund job creation projects. In addition, this tax would seek to discourage financial institutions from participating in speculative trading that has caused economic turmoil.

I can understand concerns that this tax would place undue costs on investors and financial institutions during these turbulent times. While proposals that reduce the deficit and promote job creation deserve consideration, I realize that imposing taxes on financial transactions could have unintended consequences on investors and the prospects for long-term economic growth.

Should this legislation reach the Senate for a vote, I will be sure to keep your views in mind. Thank you again for getting in touch with me.

Sincerely,

Sherrod Brown
United States Senator
 
Quote from Spydertrader:

Dear

Thank you for getting in touch with me about the Let Wall Street Pay for the Restoration of Main Street Act of 2009.

This legislation would impose a 0.25 percent tax on the sale or purchase of financial instruments such as stocks, options, derivatives, and futures. The revenues from this tax – estimated to be $150 billion each year – would be used to reduce the deficit and fund job creation projects. In addition, this tax would seek to discourage financial institutions from participating in speculative trading that has caused economic turmoil.

I can understand concerns that this tax would place undue costs on investors and financial institutions during these turbulent times. While proposals that reduce the deficit and promote job creation deserve consideration, I realize that imposing taxes on financial transactions could have unintended consequences on investors and the prospects for long-term economic growth.

Should this legislation reach the Senate for a vote, I will be sure to keep your views in mind. Thank you again for getting in touch with me.

Sincerely,

Sherrod Brown
United States Senator
More...




Check the co-sponsors of the Harkin Senate version of the transaction tax bill. Sherrod Brown is one of them!!!


http://thomas.loc.gov/


Go to the above link, and type in s.2927 under bill number search, and you'll find the three co-sponsors to the bill. They are Sen. Sherrod Brown - OH, Sen. Bernard Sanders - VT, and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse - RI.
So basically, the letter Brown's office sent you was pure bullshit, as he is a supporter of the transaction tax.
I love how Brown tries to give the impression that he's against the tax by saying, "I can understand concerns that this tax would place undue costs on investors and financial institutions during these turbulent times. I realize that imposing taxes on financial transactions could have unintended consequences on investors and the prospects for long-term growth."
This bullshit artist should change his name to Pelosi.
 
Quote from TraDaToR:

Who starts? I already lost too much money this morning debating about it... I need to focus on trading.
More...
hahaha...
yeah... we have to keep our eyes on the ball!

Llewellyn Rockwell from the Ludwig von Mises Institute said the best thing capitalists can do is to take care of their own businesses...


anybody ever frequents this web site?
http://www.shtfplan.com/
 
Hello everyone,

This is my first post here. I have been lurking on this thread for some time so I am up to speed with what is happening.

I started a blog about the transaction tax. You can find it here: http://save-us-from-world-improvers.blogspot.com. The blog is aimed at the general public and not at traders. It is meant to be educational and to archive the various reasons why the tax is a bad idea. I have not yet covered all the arguments. My posts are somewhat long so it takes some time to write them. I thus have a bit of a backlog but I will eventually get around to archiving more reasons.

Feel free to check it out and link to it if you feel that any particular post would be helpful in explaining the issue to a non-trader. Suggestions are welcome.
 
Quote from rc822:
So basically, the letter Brown's office sent you was pure bullshit, as he is a supporter of the transaction tax.
[/B]
More...
Agreed. Any letter from a politician that says "Should this legislation reach the Senate / House for a vote, I will be sure to keep your views in mind" is a bullshit letter. The only way to be sure is for them to unequivocally say they will vote against it.
 
there was at least 1 post which show the estimated revenue from a transaction tax vs. the actual revenue in a foreign market. the difference was very large

this could be used in a letter to congress.

please post again.
 
Well, I'm beginning to believe that Adair Turner may be the closest nominee to the James Taggart Award! This so-called Lord actually has complained in the past about how many folks were hired by the financial industry. That what they do is not a so-called social good. Last I checked, Britain doesn't have that many other industries to fall on. It is one of the world's financial centers. But I doubt, if people like him stay in power, that it would remain to hold on to such a position. Honestly, its like the Governor of Michigan complaining that the Big 3 hire too many of it's citizens, or that the Governor of Florida pondered if the tourism industry was producing a social good?

Now this Limousine Liberal has been asked by the various government bankers and finance ministers to help come up with how to re-regulate the industry. He's already noted that he thinks taxing trades to curb risk is the way to go. Heaven help us.


Here's a snippet from the Bloomberg piece:

Turner triggered controversy in August when he first floated the transaction tax idea and criticized the size of the U.K. financial sector in an interview in Prospect, a British journal. At a black-tie gathering of financial executives in London on Sept. 22, Turner said banks should move away from products, such as complex derivatives, that don’t benefit society.

“Some financial activities which proliferated over the last 10 years were socially useless, and some parts of the system were swollen beyond their optimal size,” he told the gathering.

‘Appalled, Disgusted, Ashamed’

Turner’s remarks have been condemned by executives who say it’s ridiculous to introduce a moral dimension to regulation.

“Quite honestly, I am appalled, disgusted, ashamed and hugely embarrassed,” wrote Howard Wheeldon, a senior strategist at BGC Partners LP, in an August note. “How dare he?” Wheeldon now says. “Markets will decide if something is too big or too small. It’s not for an individual, however powerful, to slam and damn nearly 1 million people.”
 
DC at-tax Wall St.
Obama administration mulls financial firm levy

The Obama administration is floating the idea of imposing a tax on Wall Street, possibly tied to bonuses, as part of its next budget, The Post has learned.
According to two people familiar with the matter, the White House has circulated a draft budget, and in it is a line under the revenue category that reads, "Wall Street and taxes." The vague reference to Wall Street offers no details about what kind of tax or an amount the administration hopes to collect, according to two sources, one a high-ranking executive at a bulge-bracket firm and the other a person close to the Treasury Department.
While the idea of a tax on securities transactions has gained momentum in Congress, one source said Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner is disinclined to impose that kind of tax because it could be disruptive to the markets.
"Treasury would never agree to a transaction tax," this person said.
What is more likely on the table, the sources said, is a tax on bonuses, though such a move could be disruptive to New York.
Treasury did not return calls seeking comment.


http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/dc_at_tax_wall_st_PuijlzW9Ed5ySH7XIkwF7I#ixzz0c5ppTZSZ
 
Quote from seasideheights:

DC at-tax Wall St.
Obama administration mulls financial firm levy

The Obama administration is floating the idea of imposing a tax on Wall Street, possibly tied to bonuses, as part of its next budget, The Post has learned.
According to two people familiar with the matter, the White House has circulated a draft budget, and in it is a line under the revenue category that reads, "Wall Street and taxes." The vague reference to Wall Street offers no details about what kind of tax or an amount the administration hopes to collect, according to two sources, one a high-ranking executive at a bulge-bracket firm and the other a person close to the Treasury Department.
While the idea of a tax on securities transactions has gained momentum in Congress, one source said Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner is disinclined to impose that kind of tax because it could be disruptive to the markets.
"Treasury would never agree to a transaction tax," this person said.
What is more likely on the table, the sources said, is a tax on bonuses, though such a move could be disruptive to New York.
Treasury did not return calls seeking comment.


http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/dc_at_tax_wall_st_PuijlzW9Ed5ySH7XIkwF7I#ixzz0c5ppTZSZ
More...

This is really great. If it is well presented, the transaction tax is dead in the US and then in the world.

I hope it is more than just a tax on bonuses and that it clearly target Wall Street Vs Main street.

This is the best piece of news in a long time.
 
All people in the financial services industry should call the Treasury every day for a month to get your point across.

We should also call up Defazios office everyday and all the constituents to let them know that this bill is bullshit. Its clear to me he doesn't have a clue how the markets work and how his stupid bill could destroy Wall Street and put more people out in the street.

The purpose of the bill was to recover bailout expenditures. As institutions are paying back the TARP money, there is no need for this assine bill. It was merely created by some Democrats who got all emotionally worked up in "outrage" as a way to make themselves look good. Whether they realize it or not, they stand to bring down the house of cards.

Read HR 1068 again and its purpose - IT IS NO LONGER VALID. Wall Street and the financial service industry should not be held responsible for paying taxes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top