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

Quote from Explorer:

If the Austrian article is correct in it's numbers, then it may not be possible for any enhanced cooperation agreement to take place as had been feared before.

From wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_co-operation) the mechanism needs a minimum of one third of Member States (nine of the twenty-seven in 2010), who file a request with the European Commission. If the Commission accepts it then it has to be approved by a qualified majority of all member states to proceed.

From the article there only seem to be 8 definite members and possibly 14 or more out of the 27 are opposed.
More...

Good find. Thanks.
 
Quote from TraDaToR:

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/11/07/uk-britain-g-idUKTRE7A63LL20111107

"But what they should not do is try to hide behind proposals for an EU tax as an excuse for political inaction on meeting targets for spending on development or indeed climate change."

:D
More...

Cameron is quite humerous sometimes...

"The current proposals for a financial transaction tax in Europe are so deeply confused that different European countries and indeed European institutions have talked about spending the revenues of such a tax in five different ways," Cameron said.

"On development, on climate change, on social policy, on resolving the banking crisis, and, most recently, to supplement the EU budget."
 
Quote from benwm:

<b>Re: Improving Google Search Rank for www.financialtransactiontaxes.com</b>

I read once that Google Search ranks a site higher if visitors spend a long time on the site when they visit.

So my suggestion is that ALL OF US visit the site each day and keep it open in a browser tab for several hours each day. If each trader opens it up at the start of the day we will quickly send tortoise's site to the top of the rankings and replace the Robin Hood pages...

Let's make it a goal to get to the #1 spot when someone searches for "financial transaction tax"...

We should also contact economics (anti-tax) and trading sites (brokers, exchanges) and get them to link to the site. I already emailed the Tax Payers Alliance so hopefully they will backlink.

In this respect, perhaps someone could create a small logo that is identifiable with our campaign against FTT. Maybe we could sell some t shirts later on and contribute the proceeds towards the charities that don't support FTT! :)

Suggestions for a logo?
1) Something similar to the ghostbusters logo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ghostbusters_logo.svg) but with Robin Hood inside (instead of a ghost).
2) Utilize a symbol of freedom (nice and positive)
eg. http://www.glasswings.com.au/essays/symbol.html
Many possibilities of course.
More...


Also, URGENTLY NEEDED ...

All of you who have gmail accounts, please go to http://www.financialtransactiontaxes.com and click on the +1 buttons on each of the site's four pages.

Those +1 thingies may be important for search engine ranking and, right now, the site is invisible.

And, in keeping with Ben's advice, if you have the time, kindly try to spend a minimum of 30 seconds on each page.

Thanks
 
Excerpts from a letter to the SEC from Vanguard.
--------------------------------

The recent financial crisis has caused terms like "dark pools" and "high frequency trading" to become part of everyday political discussion. Accordingly, some have called for immediate action to regulate and restrict certain aspects of our equity markets. In many cases, these "solutions," often couched as efforts to "penalize Wall Street," are not based on empirical data and do not take into consideration down-stream consequences to the markets at large and the collateral impacts to long-term investors.

Vanguard and its investors have benefited from the competition that today's market structure facilitates. Over the past fifteen years, the competition among trading venues and significant technological advancements have greatly reduced transaction costs for all investors across our markets.

Although Vanguard does not engage in "high frequency trading" and does not operate a "dark pool," we believe much of the public concern over "high frequency trading" is misplaced and believes such activity, appropriately examined, contributes to a more efficient market that benefits all investors.

we conservatively estimate that transaction costs have declined 50 bps, or 100 bps round trip. This reduction in transaction costs provides a substantial benefit to investors in the form of higher net returns. For example, if an average actively managed equity mutual fund with a 100% turnover ratio would currently provide an annual return of 9%, the same fund would have returned 8% per year without the reduction in transaction costs over the past decade. Today's investor with a 30 year time horizon would see a $10,000 investment in such a fund grow to approximately $132,000 in 30 years, compared to approximately $100,000 with the hypothetical return of 8% associated with the higher transaction costs. This roughly 25% decrease in the end value of the investment demonstrates the impact of reduced transaction costs on long-term investors. Thus, any analysis of "high frequency trading" must recognize the corresponding benefits that long-term investors have experienced through tighter spreads and increased liquidity.

Vanguard believes any analysis of market structure must focus on the goal of maximizing liquidity.

Gus Sauter
George U. Sauter Managing Director and Chief Investment Officer The Vanguard Group, Inc.

http://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-02-10/s70210-122.pdf
------------------------

In an article a couple years ago, Sauter estimated the financial transaction tax would cost their investors 2 percent annual yield loss or reduce a retirement account by one half over 30 years.
 
George Osborne has stuck it to EU finance ministers during a debate on a European financial transaction tax.

As the Italian bond crisis threatens to tear the eurozone apart the
Chancellor asked: "There will never be agreement on this. Is this the best way of using our time?".

He warned that pension funds would be hit and that an EU tax would see 400,000 financial sector jobs threatened as companies moved to the US and Asia.

"No bank will ever pay this tax," he said. "It will be pensioners who pay."
More...
 
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9adeec5a-0a2f-11e1-92b5-00144feabdc0.html

Britain has launched a blunt attack on the “fanciful” Franco-German push for a financial transaction tax, amid signs of waning support for the measure both inside and outside the eurozone.

A heated debate between European Union finance ministers, broadcast on live television, laid bare the divisions over the Brussels proposal and potentially brought forward the date when eurozone ministers must decide whether to implement the tax alone[...]

[...]In his most strident condemnation of the transaction tax plans, George Osborne, the UK finance minister, warned his EU counterparts that they were wasting their time on a measure that would cost Europe half a million jobs and lacked the necessary support.

Dubbing the Commission proposal “a big tax on pensioners”, Mr Osborne claimed the costs would be borne by the real economy because “not a single banker would pay”. he said it was “fanciful” to imagine it would win global backing

The intervention will infuriate France and Germany, who have strongly advocated the EU leading the way on a tax that would ensure the financial sector repaid taxpayers for the costs of the financial crisis.

While efforts to adopt the tax at G20 level have stalled, Paris and Berlin are still pressing for the EU to take the global lead and, failing that, for the eurozone to take action alone.

“That’s just an excuse for doing nothing,” said Wolfgang Schäuble, the German finance minister. “We will wait 20 years before doing anything if we wait for the last island on this planet.” He added that non-euro countries should think “very carefully” before creating divisions in the EU. “One day we may have to do [the transaction tax] in the eurozone rather than in the EU,” he said.

Several non-eurozone countries expressed strong opposition, including Britain, Denmark, Sweden, the Czech Republic, Romania and Bulgaria. Some in the currency bloc – including the Netherlands, Italy, Ireland and Finland – also openly expressed reservations, particularly if the measure was not adopted by all 27 member states.

Summing up the “frank” discussion, Jacek Rostowski, Polish finance minister, said: “It was evident that there is quite a divergence of opinion between the member states, not only between the 27 [EU members] but within the eurozone as well.”

Mr Osborne seized on the waning support for the measure to call for an immediate vote on the measures, which need unanimity to be passed given the amount of dissent. His move attempted to call the bluff of those countries that are arguing they will press ahead regardless.
 
All -- I've just replaced the news page at http://www.financialtransactiontaxes.com with something considerably less psychotic then what was previously there.

Here's the new link:

http://financialtransactiontaxes.com/Financial-Transaction-Tax-News.html


On a related note, I must say I'm a bit concerned about the fact that the site. which was on the third page of Google search, now appears to have dropped off the map entirely. Meanwhile, a search for "Financial Transaction Tax" turns up scores and scores of pro-F.T.T. sites. Clearly, the "pro" forces have Google wired.

Honestly, if everybidy thinks this is a good idea I'm happy to proceed, but I do need to feel like folks are in this with me, linking to the site and "+1"-ing it, etc. Otherwise, my time is much better spent focusing on making as much money off the markets as I can before they close it all down -- and they will, folks. If we don't seize the cultural initiative on this, sooner or later, it's gonna be over.

Anyway, I'll keep working on this through the end of the week, then see if it starts to register on search before continuing further.


Thanks
 
Quote from tortoise:



On a related note, I must say I'm a bit concerned about the fact that the site. which was on the third page of Google search, now appears to have dropped off the map entirely.
More...

It has been my experience (limited) that a lot of Google's ranking has to do with how long a site has been in existence. Unless you're a real gearhead for SEO, your expectations are probably a bit too high.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top