1/4% Tax on all stock trades pushed in NY Times today
- Thread starter seasideheights
- Start date
LUXEMBOURG--Estonia's finance minister downplayed expectations of a surefire deal on a financial transactions tax in Europe, saying the relatively small number of countries that backed the proposal Tuesday is a problem.
Asked if it's certain that Tuesday's proposals--supported by 11 countries including Estonia at a summit here--will result in a tax being put in place, Juergen Ligi said: "Nothing is guaranteed. There is not much enthusiasm and clarity on what's going to happen."
"We hoped to have more countries," he added. "It is of course [a problem.]"
Mr. Ligi also said Estonia wanted to target the tax on the riskiest banks thought to be at blame in the financial crisis. Instead the proposals are for a far wider array of financial firms to be taxed, he said.
http://www.nasdaq.com/article/eston...ax-not-guaranteed-20121009-00675#.UHUNZJjA-DE
Asked if it's certain that Tuesday's proposals--supported by 11 countries including Estonia at a summit here--will result in a tax being put in place, Juergen Ligi said: "Nothing is guaranteed. There is not much enthusiasm and clarity on what's going to happen."
"We hoped to have more countries," he added. "It is of course [a problem.]"
Mr. Ligi also said Estonia wanted to target the tax on the riskiest banks thought to be at blame in the financial crisis. Instead the proposals are for a far wider array of financial firms to be taxed, he said.
http://www.nasdaq.com/article/eston...ax-not-guaranteed-20121009-00675#.UHUNZJjA-DE
Seems that Mr. Ligi signed into the agreement thinking that the FTT = FTA (Financial Activity Tax)
This is surreal. However, this is also good news because it means that Estonia is actually NOT backing an FTT.
I was thinking the same thing. Surely a finance minister knows the difference between the ftt and a fat tax? At least I hope so. He should know that an ftt does nothing to punish the banks.
Anyway his pessimism is music to my ears. Let the fighting begin
-Guru
"very dangerous"
"catastrophic consequences"
Swedish Finance Minister Anders Borg said in Luxembourg that the tax would endanger the economic growth of his country. "We still think that the financial transactions tax is a very dangerous thing," he explained.
Dutch Finance Minister Jan Kees de Jager adamantly rejected the proposal. "We have three independent studies that suggest that a financial transactions tax would have catastrophic consequences for the Netherlands. That's why we are very much against it," he said.
http://www.dw.de/dw/article/0,,16295139,00.html
----------------------------------------------
EU and FTT
Sounds like self-defeating personality disorder:
A pervasive pattern of self-defeating behavior.
Drawn to situations or relationships in which one will suffer.
Chooses relationships and situations that lead to failure even when better options are clearly available.
Rejects or renders ineffective the attempts of others to help.
"catastrophic consequences"
Swedish Finance Minister Anders Borg said in Luxembourg that the tax would endanger the economic growth of his country. "We still think that the financial transactions tax is a very dangerous thing," he explained.
Dutch Finance Minister Jan Kees de Jager adamantly rejected the proposal. "We have three independent studies that suggest that a financial transactions tax would have catastrophic consequences for the Netherlands. That's why we are very much against it," he said.
http://www.dw.de/dw/article/0,,16295139,00.html
----------------------------------------------
EU and FTT
Sounds like self-defeating personality disorder:
A pervasive pattern of self-defeating behavior.
Drawn to situations or relationships in which one will suffer.
Chooses relationships and situations that lead to failure even when better options are clearly available.
Rejects or renders ineffective the attempts of others to help.
I am not surprised that Germany and France - drivers of the fiscal compact, banking union and the powers controlling the PIIGS bailouts - could lean on Italy, Spain any many of the other EC-11 to sign on to their FTT move-forward discussions. We all doubted that Italy and Spain could really hold out and figured they would fold.
The Finnish FM tried to convince her parliament that a yes vote at this juncture was not really a yes vote for FTT, but rather for a seat at the negotiating table to craft FTT terms. Many in the EU said they are okay with FTT providing everyone does it and they don't ring fence themselves into a competitive disadvantage. Estonia thought Finland was in and they are not, so now they have cold feet. If all Nordic countries are out of FTT, it leaves Estonia exposed.
For sure Germany and France have the power to keep advancing FTT discussions and proposals, but in the end, can they really pass an EC-9 or 11-wide FTT deal? Especially, an FTT with extra-territorial bite? We all agree that if they have that bite, they probably won't get QMV for passage. Without that bite, they just ring fence themselves for disadvantage.
Nothing has really changed yet, just kicking this problem FTT can down the road. The devil is in the details. They haven't agreed on where the revenues go and how they will spend the money, either. Why the huge fuss? It's not taxing the banks, it's forging the first EU tax. For sure, they want every member to pay that tax, too.
Expect litigation as well. This is too big and too unprecedented inside a political minefield.
The Finnish FM tried to convince her parliament that a yes vote at this juncture was not really a yes vote for FTT, but rather for a seat at the negotiating table to craft FTT terms. Many in the EU said they are okay with FTT providing everyone does it and they don't ring fence themselves into a competitive disadvantage. Estonia thought Finland was in and they are not, so now they have cold feet. If all Nordic countries are out of FTT, it leaves Estonia exposed.
For sure Germany and France have the power to keep advancing FTT discussions and proposals, but in the end, can they really pass an EC-9 or 11-wide FTT deal? Especially, an FTT with extra-territorial bite? We all agree that if they have that bite, they probably won't get QMV for passage. Without that bite, they just ring fence themselves for disadvantage.
Nothing has really changed yet, just kicking this problem FTT can down the road. The devil is in the details. They haven't agreed on where the revenues go and how they will spend the money, either. Why the huge fuss? It's not taxing the banks, it's forging the first EU tax. For sure, they want every member to pay that tax, too.
Expect litigation as well. This is too big and too unprecedented inside a political minefield.
I think that's why Osborne wants to see the details before saying they will not oppose the EC11 FTT...Again, this extraterritorial reach is a fantasy. The best they can do is make the euro part to the deal pay the whole FTT ( for the two counterparts ), otherwise it would create an unprecedented mess on worldwide exchanges. Imagine a ZN trader in Chicago who clicks on a size, "sorry , you inadvertantly made a deal with a euro counterpart, instead of paying 0.40$ or so, you are now paying 10.40$ per lot. Enjoy". They would have to create special tags for euro size in the book so that we are aware FTT is due and require confirmation of the passive non euro liquidity provider if the euro is removing size... LOL...Won't happen.
