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

[listedguru]

Here's a little blurb from Politico's Morning Money regarding the Senate moving left and the ftt:

CAUTION BANKERS: SENATE MOVES LEFT - From a top political analyst: "Looking at the composition of the 2013 Senate post-election, as pertains to financial services in particular: Even where Democrats are replacing Democrats, the caucus becomes markedly more progressive. We now have: Jim Webb - Tim Kaine; Joe Lieberman - Chris Murphy; Olympia Snowe - Angus King; Scott Brown - Elizabeth Warren; Herb Kohl - Tammy Baldwin. The replacements are generally more progressive than the Senators they replace. Also think Sherrod Brown's reelection in the face of enormous outside expenditures positions him to continue to be a nationally prominent progressive voice as well.

"In short, you are going to have many more progressives in the caucus and national ones at that (Tammy and Elizabeth both superstars nationwide). Add to that some of the members who are toying with a potential presidential run, since 2016 begins tomorrow, and it won't just be Levin and Merkley who see an attractive target in financial transaction taxes and Dodd-Frank, and continued Wall Street reform."

 

[zdreg]

Quote from listedguru:

Here's a little blurb from Politico's Morning Money regarding the Senate moving left and the ftt:

CAUTION BANKERS: SENATE MOVES LEFT - From a top political analyst: "Looking at the composition of the 2013 Senate post-election, as pertains to financial services in particular: Even where Democrats are replacing Democrats, the caucus becomes markedly more progressive. We now have: Jim Webb - Tim Kaine; Joe Lieberman - Chris Murphy; Olympia Snowe - Angus King; Scott Brown - Elizabeth Warren; Herb Kohl - Tammy Baldwin. The replacements are generally more progressive than the Senators they replace. Also think Sherrod Brown's reelection in the face of enormous outside expenditures positions him to continue to be a nationally prominent progressive voice as well.

"In short, you are going to have many more progressives in the caucus and national ones at that (Tammy and Elizabeth both superstars nationwide). Add to that some of the members who are toying with a potential presidential run, since 2016 begins tomorrow, and it won't just be Levin and Merkley who see an attractive target in financial transaction taxes and Dodd-Frank, and continued Wall Street reform."

congrats. this is probably the 1st time you haven't put a polyannish spin on a piece of news.

 

[TraDaToR]

Quote from zdreg:

congrats. this is probably the 1st time you haven't put a polyannish spin on a piece of news.

OK. So next time it's your turn. Try to find an article which doesn't predict FTT armaggedon for retail traders with Wall Street conspiracy for the end of 2012. I swear it's not that hard to find.

 

[Humpy]

The obvious and sad truth is that democracy doesn't work at all well. It is high time that the financial and political systems need upgrading fast.

Unless it happens properly , the same ole way will produce debts near $30 trillion by 2016.

 

[Explorer]

[...]London has reportedly indicated that it will not give the green light to enhanced cooperation. The 27 must approve the principle by qualified majority, but a vote will not take place until December 2012 at the earliest.[...]

http://www.europolitics.info/united-kingdom-comes-up-with-new-demands-art344868.html

 

[Rantany]

Hmm.. what would be those 'astonishing' new demands

Whole article:

http://www.europolitics.info/united-kingdom-comes-up-with-new-demands-art344868.html

United Kingdom comes up with new demands
By Tanguy Verhoosel | Thursday 08 November 2012

"London does not want to participate in anything, but interferes in everything," came the irritated cry from various embassies this week. On 7 November, the United Kingdom came up with new demands concerning the enhanced cooperation that 11 eurozone member states want to launch regarding the financial transaction tax (FTT).

On 13 November, finance ministers from the 27 member states will carry out an 'inventory' of the dossier. Their meeting was prepared by the Committee of Permanent Representatives (Coreper), on 7 November.

During this meeting, the United Kingdom (which was more or less supported by countries such as Sweden, Malta, Ireland and Luxembourg, none of which want enhanced cooperation) issued new demands that have "astonished" the eleven countries - France, Germany, Austria, Belgium, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain and Estonia, soon to be joined by other countries, such as the Netherlands - that want to cooperate on the FTT.

London has reportedly indicated that it will not give the green light to enhanced cooperation. The 27 must approve the principle by qualified majority, but a vote will not take place until December 2012 at the earliest.

The European Parliament must give its assent before certain specifications on the project can be obtained. On the one hand, Parliament wants to know the substance of the Commission's new proposal for an FTT. On the other, it is calling for an in-depth evaluation of the impact which enhanced cooperation is likely to have on the good functioning of the internal market. In this context, it says that the proposal for a decision supporting the tax, which the Commission adopted on 23 October (see Europolitics4514), has not been sufficiently developed.

"The United Kingdom knows the rules of the game," it was pointed out.

These are laid out in Articles 326 and 334 TEU, the Council's legal service emphasised, on 7 November. The rules state that the Commission should not put a new FTT proposal on the table (which should be negotiated between participating states before being adopted unanimously) before the Council and Parliament have given their agreement in principle to launching enhanced cooperation. The Community executive has already announced that this proposal will not stray far from that which was proposed in September 2011: a tax of 0.1% on the trading of shares and bonds, and a tax of 0.01% on the trading of derivatives, based on the principle of the state of residence. In short, the UK's demands are "misplaced," Europoliticswas told.

Nonetheless, France and the UK are anxious to maintain peace within the European household, and have therefore promised to demonstrate "the utmost transparency". They also said they would be diligent. "We shall not hesitate to call for a vote, if necessary. And we will obtain a qualified majority."

 

[sheda]

Nonetheless, France and the UK are anxious to maintain peace within the European household, and have therefore promised to demonstrate "the utmost transparency". They also said they would be diligent. "We shall not hesitate to call for a vote, if necessary. And we will obtain a qualified majority."

Sorry its been a long day, the UK And France are anxious to what? France are standing with the UK on this to? They will demonstrate the utmost transparency with and call a vote for what?

 

[bjw]

Quote from sheda:

Sorry its been a long day, the UK And France are anxious to what? France are standing with the UK on this to? They will demonstrate the utmost transparency with and call a vote for what?

i wondered about this as well, and i think it's a typo. likely meant to say "germany and france".

 

[Rantany]

Quote from sheda:

Sorry its been a long day, the UK And France are anxious to what? France are standing with the UK on this to? They will demonstrate the utmost transparency with and call a vote for what?

It's not very clear to me too. I think that europolitics.info has spoken with an EC/EU representative (or something). The sentence: 'We shall not hesitate to call for a vote, if necessary. And we will obtain a qualified majority.' are the words of this EC representative, and not the words of France or the UK. It means (in my view) that if 'they' call for a vote (asking permission to initiate an enhanced cooperation), they will obtain a qualified majority anyway, regardless the position and new demands of the UK.
It seems that France and the UK have done a promise (to demonstrate "the utmost transparency") in the past, but it seems to me that it's just an extra argument of this EC/EU representative to remind the UK of their promise, and therefore not to resist the other EU members in the process of forming an enhanced cooperation.

 

[TraDaToR]

IMO The UK is simply telling the 11 "If you want to tax all YOUR residents, no problem,If you want to tax everything issued in YOUR country, no problem, If you want to tax everybody on YOUR exchanges, no problem, but if you think our institutions will pay you a tax everytime we accidentally make a deal with your institutions on any worldwide exchange, then you are out of your mind, we will do anything to make your project collapse, will go after every jurisdiction and make your tax man life a living hell"