You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
1/4% Tax on all stock trades pushed in NY Times today
- Thread starter seasideheights
- Start date
Here is another fact:
For every $6 in FTT tax they would have gotten from me, IRS loses $3.2 in capital gains tax from me. So, they say "hey we can get $6 from Stok in FTT!". But since I am outta business they lose $3.2 in tax revenue. That is what is so dangerous how they spin this...never talk about the obvious downside. So $6 in FTT = negative $3.2 to the IRS. Liberals are so smart!!
Total disaster!
For every $6 in FTT tax they would have gotten from me, IRS loses $3.2 in capital gains tax from me. So, they say "hey we can get $6 from Stok in FTT!". But since I am outta business they lose $3.2 in tax revenue. That is what is so dangerous how they spin this...never talk about the obvious downside. So $6 in FTT = negative $3.2 to the IRS. Liberals are so smart!!
Total disaster!
Quote from Stok:
What is the status of the defagio bill?
Right now it only has 19 co-sponsors in the House and probably won't get out of committee for a vote.
As we get closer to the 2012 elections, expect there to be more support for the FTT because the unions have made it clear that to get their money and votes, pols will have to support the transactions tax.
"]Right now it only has 19 co-sponsors in the House and probably won't get out of committee for a vote. "Quote from tomdavis:
Right now it only has 19 co-sponsors in the House and probably won't get out of committee for a vote.
As we get closer to the 2012 elections, expect there to be more support for the FTT because the unions have made it clear that to get their money and votes, pols will have to support the transactions tax.
you best work towards a republican victory.
I'm seriously concerned.
I see this thing enacted within a few years.
I see this thing enacted within a few years.
Quote from jackpearson:
I'm seriously concerned.
I see this thing enacted within a few years.
If you trade for a living and you're not concerned there's something seriously wrong!
We're all concerned. The question is, what are you doing about it?
1) Are you in contact with your congressional representatives telling them how destructive the FTT will be?
2) Are you in touch with your brokers, educating them and pushing them to get involved to stop this tax?
3) Are you educating yourself on the latest research that refutes the tax and sending it on to your representatives and brokers?
4) Are you finding anti-FTT candidates to support in the next election?
Being concerned should be a call to action.
Quote from jackpearson:
New Info. A must read. Definite spin but new info as well.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/16/financial-transaction-tax-obama-2012_n_1153841.html
There certainly is a lot of spin in this piece. Really nothing new from it regarding actual news though. I do find it interesting that Harkin talks about the ftt being part of a package. I guess he thinks they can get it through as part of an overhaul of the irs tax code? Any way I still believe the Harkin/Defazio bill is DOA and won't even make it out of committee. We also know that this doesn't have the support in the Senate either.
I guess if Obama does get behind the tax at some point hopefully we can educate everyone about how this is actually a tax on investment and their pensions (you too unions) and not a tax on the banks. I think the administration knows this and that it won't play well to the people and thats way they are pushing the crisis responsibility fee - which they can call a direct tax on the evil banks. I think they know that pushing a direct tax on the middle class and not the 1% (evil bankers) is bad politics.
-Guru
Quote from tortoise:
This is interesting, I think. It's the latest from our friend Dean Baker. Here's the url, which I've purposefully not posted as a link:
www.counterpunch.org/2011/11/04/the-specious-case-against-a-financial-transactions-tax/
This is the smoothest, most professional presentation I've seen from him. Seems to me he's tightened his arguments, perhaps in response the the excellent work of Robert Green, among others.
In so tightening, however, he's conceded a point that effectively turns this F.T.T. into a political third rail. In fact, I'll go so far as to say that he's just torpedoed F.T.T. in the U.S. in the current recessionary environment.
Thanks for the Christmas gift, Mr. Baker!
Thanks Tortoise.
Baker is wrong again, especially on his facts this time.
He says the UK has a FTT. Wrong, they have a stamp duty on shares, which is very different. Stamp duty is retail only - just what Geithner doesn't want - and stamp duty is easier to enforce on final share stamps of slow retail buyers. It would be almost impossible with HFT and cascading transactions with intermediaries. To say the UK has FTT shows Baker intends to deceive, or is out of touch, and I think it's the former.
Next, Baker is wrong about banks passing on costs. That misses the point, retail traders will be hit directly with this tax, and spreads will widen with higher costs, costing retail investors even more. It's not just about banks raising their prices.
FTT will makes markets dysfunctional, putting some farmers out of business in some cases, and making other peoples' lives miserable with lost jobs and businesses. Is that an "intermediate good" to Baker? Financial transactions are the life blood of our economy and taxing them will lead to blood clots. Baker disrespects finance and he prefers liberal- academic economics.
Liquidity providers and maker makers in today's environment can't afford this huge hike in toll charges on each trade. After changing prices from fractions to decimals, which narrows spreads, you can't go back in time to a different era to argue there is room for FTT, there isn't. We had specialists back then on the floor, and wider spreads and pricing, so it's apples and oranges to todays markets.
Baker wants to tar and feather financial services and he is twisting the facts and his logic to justify it.
Quote from jackpearson:
"I pressed some people on this. Their position was that it is an arrow in our quiver -- and we don't have that many," he said. He said he also got the impression that Obama's team was considering waiting until the right moment, and continuing to reap Wall Street money in donations until then.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/16/financial-transaction-tax-obama-2012_n_1153841.html
Read it. Total wishful thinking by the author and people he interviewed. Obama wants his bank liability fee in his budget, and not FTT, plus he no longer discusses that fee anyway. Obama can't afford to scare banks more in our recovery and while Europe melts down.
FTT raises taxes on the middle class and Obama wants to be considered a tax cutter on the middle class - so the Obama administration won't support FTT. Democratic leadership in Congress won't bring up FTT in any serious bill making and Republicans would block it anyway with the tax-protection pledge.
This article shows the FTT wishful thinkers in the US have nothing going for them.