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

Quote from listedguru:

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

There's that. But a lot of folks are disenchanted with the stock market these days. They see their paltry mutual fund returns, then read about investment banking bonuses and say, "screw 'em"--even if, in fact, they're the ones who would be screwed by this tax.

The appeal of F.T.T. is not logical. It's emotional. It's irrational. The pro-F.T.T. forces are playing off that, and playing to win.

But there's one emotional area where the F.T.T. people are on shaky ground.

JOBS.

In that article I linked to earlier, Baker himself conceded that "many" people would be unemployed as a result of the tax. He went on to say that this would be a good thing, just like it would be a good thing if we were to fire two-thirds of this country's truckers yet still be able to transport the same amount of goods. After all, he said, economic efficiency is good thing, and what rational person isn't in favor of economic efficiency?

I was glad to see Baker thinking like an economist and not merely like a political hack. Alas (for him), his economist's argument will not gladden the hearts of a lot of folks--rank-and-file union types, for instance. And it's not something any administration will want to champion in the teeth of a recession.

But now that Mr. Baker's on record with what he really thinks, let's make the most of it. Let's make the argument about jobs. Let's quantify the economic impact of this petty, nonsensical, punitive tax.

Let's hammer home the way an F.T.T. will hit Main Street--and I don't mean how it will hit Main Street's already sorry 401ks. I mean let's make sure everyone sees how an F.T.T. would put the stock brokers of Main Street and the accountants of Main Street and insurance agents and financial planners of Main Street out on the street. Let's make sure the police union and the fireman's union sees how it would deprive the beat cop and the fireman who trades fx at night a way to help put their kids through college, or a spouse through grad school.

Let's lay bare the hypocrisy of the pro-F.T.T. forces for all of Main Street to see. If our society wants to do something about HFT, or Jon Corzine, or Fat Cats (real or imagined), it can be done without depriving honest, hardworking people of Main Street the opportunity to better their lives, to better the lives of their families, to contribute to their communities.

Let's make clear that an F.T.T. would decimate the livelihoods of tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of individuals on Main Street. Let's not allow our elected representatives to forget that these citizens would no longer be able to contribute to their communities as they would be looking instead to government aid while they sought to remake their lives and careers in the teeth of the most ferocious recession in memory.

Let's do that, and this sucker is dead.
 
Quote from Robert A. Green:


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.

Spot on! At last, Baker has exposed the stone-cold, elitist, technocratic heart of the F.T.T. for all to see.

Bottom line: BAKER WANTS TO THROW ORDINARY AMERICANS OUT OF WORK SO HE CAN HAVE HIS WAY WITH WALL STREET.
 
Baker, "If this does not prevent the industry from performing its essential role of financial intermediation, then the tax will have effectively made the industry more efficient."

FTT causes substantial loss in GDP.

Baker logic: lower GDP means greater efficiency.

GDP of zero must mean 100% efficiency.
 
I'm not suggesting we give up the fight... but if this tax passes in the US:

- The tax gives foreign exchanges a competitive edge to offer the same products now dominated by US exchanges.

- Many US companies will move to or list themselves on foreign exchanges. If the feds make this very unattractive the business will flee the country taking jobs and tax revenue.

- Products traditionally denominated in USD will stop being denominated in USD... threatening USD reserve status.

- Capital and participants will leave the US markets causing a fair amount of chaos. The hardest hit (short term traders) can leave town in a heartbeat.

- 2nd tier exchanges will rise as they take capital and transaction volume away from US.

And most importantly for us...

- Foreign prop shops will pop up offering remote "employment" to US (and likely European) traders. They will be set up so the US citizen is not making the transactions directly... hence avoiding the tax.

After years of economic damage the tax will be repealed.

There was a transaction tax in the US in the first half of the 20th century. Back then there was no globalization... so the consequences above were not even possible! A transaction tax in 2011 just doesn't work.
 
Quote from seasideheights:

FT article about effect on money market accounts.

it should be free if you access it thru this link.
http://bit.ly/tfZfhq

The evidence shows how destructive the FTT is, yet the proponents seem more determined than ever to force it on the entire world.
 
Quote from tomdavis:

The evidence shows how destructive the FTT is, yet the proponents seem more determined than ever to force it on the entire world.

Yup. But remember this is what they want. This is a political war against free markets and capitalism. Period. They want wall street gone.
 
Back
Top