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

The FTT is a dumb idea from a government revenue perspective.
And this is from where I believe it needs to be attacked.
With something like this, less transactions will be made, less profit incurred and therefore less overall revenue to the government.
Traders are already paying taxes on their profitable trades.
If someone has the time, I am sure that it could be shown that an FTT will result in an overall net drop in tax revenue to the government.
This is what needs to be pounded home, and I believe the most effective argument.
People are pushing this based on fantasy numbers.
 
Quote from jaygould:

The FTT is a dumb idea from a government revenue perspective.
And this is from where I believe it needs to be attacked.
With something like this, less transactions will be made, less profit incurred and therefore less overall revenue to the government.
Traders are already paying taxes on their profitable trades.
If someone has the time, I am sure that it could be shown that an FTT will result in an overall net drop in tax revenue to the government.
This is what needs to be pounded home, and I believe the most effective argument.
People are pushing this based on fantasy numbers.
More...

The tax proponents have to know that they intend to destroy jobs and decrease revenue.

http://www.ibo.nyc.ny.us/iboreports/stocktransfertax.pdf

This study examines what would happen to just NYC if the NYSE and AMEX were to be taxed. Their worst case scenario of trading volume dropping by only one third results in substantial job loss and overall negative revenue.

Others think if the current trans tax proposal goes through, volume would drop as much as 90%. And consider if the tax were on all exchanges, the above study's negative numbers would be multiplied by several times. So as another one of the largest industries gets shipped overseas, expect the cascading effects of hundreds of thousands, maybe a million or two, to lose their jobs.

Even if the tax somehow would be applied to every country, trading volume and financial activity would drop just as much anyway.

The tax proponents' greed blinds them to the facts that: Traders are only trying to surpass the market's 8% average annual yield. The proposed tax's one half percent per RT alone is huge. And they do not consider the bid-ask spread increasing and costing more than the tax itself at about 2% per RT. So if traders, especially even if investors are going to take such a huge risk with their life savings and are definitely going to lose at least 2.5%, there is the much safer alternative of money markets.
 
Quote from FightTheFuture:

The tax proponents have to know that they intend to destroy jobs and decrease revenue.

http://www.ibo.nyc.ny.us/iboreports/stocktransfertax.pdf

This study examines what would happen to just NYC if the NYSE and AMEX were to be taxed. Their worst case scenario of trading volume dropping by only one third results in substantial job loss and overall negative revenue.

Others think if the current trans tax proposal goes through, volume would drop as much as 90%. And consider if the tax were on all exchanges, the above study's negative numbers would be multiplied by several times. So as another one of the largest industries gets shipped overseas, expect the cascading effects of hundreds of thousands, maybe a million or two, to lose their jobs.

Even if the tax somehow would be applied to every country, trading volume and financial activity would drop just as much anyway.

The tax proponents' greed blinds them to the facts that: Traders are only trying to surpass the market's 8% average annual yield. The proposed tax's one half percent per RT alone is huge. And they do not consider the bid-ask spread increasing and costing more than the tax itself at about 2% per RT. So if traders, especially even if investors are going to take such a huge risk with their life savings and are definitely going to lose at least 2.5%, there is the much safer alternative of money markets.
More...
sadly their ears are closed.
 
I wonder if there are any anti-FTT and anti-PDT-Rule guys in the Tea Party movement?
Or is everybody who's not a trader/speculator/investor an anti-markets guy?
 
Quote from FightTheFuture:

The tax proponents have to know that they intend to destroy jobs and decrease revenue.

http://www.ibo.nyc.ny.us/iboreports/stocktransfertax.pdf

This study examines what would happen to just NYC if the NYSE and AMEX were to be taxed. Their worst case scenario of trading volume dropping by only one third results in substantial job loss and overall negative revenue.

Others think if the current trans tax proposal goes through, volume would drop as much as 90%. And consider if the tax were on all exchanges, the above study's negative numbers would be multiplied by several times. So as another one of the largest industries gets shipped overseas, expect the cascading effects of hundreds of thousands, maybe a million or two, to lose their jobs.

Even if the tax somehow would be applied to every country, trading volume and financial activity would drop just as much anyway.

The tax proponents' greed blinds them to the facts that: Traders are only trying to surpass the market's 8% average annual yield. The proposed tax's one half percent per RT alone is huge. And they do not consider the bid-ask spread increasing and costing more than the tax itself at about 2% per RT. So if traders, especially even if investors are going to take such a huge risk with their life savings and are definitely going to lose at least 2.5%, there is the much safer alternative of money markets.
More...



This is not about convincing the proponents. It's about everybody else.
It irks me when folks against the tax say things like, "yeah but it would have to be applied internationally to work and thats not going to happen, so no single country can do it"
Wrong.
It would fail even if it were applied internationally and there was no possible way to avoid it.
Resulting in less government revenue.
Reduction in social services, aid to children, etc.
I would encourage those of you who like to write comments on articles when this issue comes up to not just concede the liberal side of this argument.
Learn to push emotional hot buttons.
It should be easy to do since its actually the truth.
Argue more like a liberal and appeal to feelings, not just reason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top