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

Quote from bjw:

it's a nice article, but this is just an opinion of someone about what should happen, not fact.
More...

it was to be expected. u were responding to the polyanna of this thread.
 
the story has now also been picked up by dutch media; could be bigger than i had first thought. let's hope so. not only with regards to 2016, also with regards to downplaying ambitions to a sort of a stamp tax.
 
Quote from bjw:

the story has now also been picked up by dutch media; could be bigger than i had first thought. let's hope so. not only with regards to 2016, also with regards to downplaying ambitions to a sort of a stamp tax.
More...

Will the Netherlands continue to insist upon "strict conditions" to join the FTT?

http://www.europolitics.info/busine...x-netherlands-may-join-ranks-art345047-8.html

Its (new) Finance Minister, Jeroen Dijsselbloem, announced, on 13 November, that his country, which has been opposed to the FTT until now, “is seriously considering joining enhanced cooperation” on FTT, but under strict conditions. On the one hand, it rejects the idea of the revenues from the financial transaction tax becoming a new own resource for the EU; on the other, the “impact of the tax” (the Commission provides for a rate of 0.1% for share and bond transactions and 0.01% for derivatives transactions) must be “proportional” to other tax burdens on the financial sector. The Hague also wishes to exclude Dutch pension funds from the scope of the future legislation.

These demands sparked a firm reaction from Belgium’s Permanent Representative to the EU, Dirk Wouters, during the debate: “There are no conditions on the Belgian government’s support for the FTT. However, we consider that the Union’s own resources must be strengthened. Belgium therefore wishes to see the option [to allocate part of the FTT revenues directly to the EU budget] maintained”.

The upcoming negotiations on the future FTT are therefore likely to be tough.
 
Quote from listedguru:

Sounds like things could get ugly in the Senate over the filibuster rule:

GOP warns of shutdown over filibuster:

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=ACE6831F-56E7-419A-8137-85D3D3E7BF5E
More...

Republicans' ability to filibuster may be important both as a matter of FTT legislation and Treasurer confirmation.

As usual, there's no shortage of hipocricy in Washington.

==================

When Republicans tried this in 2005, then Senator Joe Biden spoke for Senate democrats when he denounced any change in the filibuster rules. All Democratic Senators, including Obama and Reid, supported him.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2010/01/19/joe-bidens-filibuster-hypocrisy

Speaking on the Senate floor in May of 2005, Biden said, "At its core, the filibuster is not about stopping a nominee or a bill, it's about compromise and moderation. The nuclear option extinguishes the power of independents and moderates in the Senate. That's it, they're done. Moderates are important if you need to get to 60 votes to satisfy cloture; they are much less so if you only need 50 votes. Let's set the historical record straight. Never has the Senate provided for a certainty that 51 votes could put someone on the bench or pass legislation."

When the Senate was considering President George W. Bush's nomination of Judge Samuel Alito to the United States Supreme Court, Biden held out the prospect of a filibuster to block it. "If he really believes that reapportionment is a questionable decision … then clearly, clearly, you'll find a lot of people, including me, willing to do whatever they can to keep him off the court," Biden said, adding, "That would include a filibuster, if need be."
 
Intrade (Ireland) vs. CFTC (US) highlights issues facing global tax and regulatory reach.

Intrade is Irish betting site and their betting contract is considered an option or future. How? If I hold option I have the right to purchase underlying stock or commodity at a set price. If I bet that some war starts before Jun 30 I do not think I can buy war shares or shares of US presidency if betting on that outcome.

Anyway US customers have to close their accounts with Irish Intrade by Dec 31 and this Irish company faces fines by CFTC (US).

CFTC focuses on "actively soliciting US customers" issue among others in this case.

So much for the talk about EU extraterritorial FTT reach.

Basic issue is this: It is my money and I should be able to do with it whatever and whenever and if this is stupid or money loosing proposition then it is my problem.

I think that our freedoms are slowly melting away and people stand still. When they wake up it will be too late.
 
Quote from vicirek:

Intrade (Ireland) vs. CFTC (US) highlights issues facing global tax and regulatory reach.

Intrade is Irish betting site and their betting contract is considered an option or future. How? If I hold option I have the right to purchase underlying stock or commodity at a set price. If I bet that some war starts before Jun 30 I do not think I can buy war shares or shares of US presidency if betting on that outcome.

Anyway US customers have to close their accounts with Irish Intrade by Dec 31 and this Irish company faces fines by CFTC (US).

CFTC focuses on "actively soliciting US customers" issue among others in this case.

So much for the talk about EU extraterritorial FTT reach.

Basic issue is this: It is my money and I should be able to do with it whatever and whenever and if this is stupid or money loosing proposition then it is my problem.

"I think that our freedoms are slowly melting away and people stand still. When they wake up it will be too late.
More...

"I think that our freedoms are slowly melting away and people stand still. When they wake up it will be too late."
the same is true in europe.



don't forget that non US banks want more or less nothing to do with US people. capital controls are coming to the US.
 
Here's another piece on the Senate filibuster fight:

Filibuster fight seizes senate:

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=CFA1DE23-D7C6-4B69-BE9E-F13C08D3EA5B

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Monday blasted Democratic-led efforts to reform the filibuster, warning that the changes would “poison” relations in the already-gridlocked Senate.

The Kentucky Republican said changing the filibuster – which was designed to protect the minority but has become a tool for constant gridlock in the modern Senate – would fundamentally alter how the Senate operates.

Once a cause championed by a few Democratic senators, changing the filibuster has become a top priority for Senate Democrats who’ve repeatedly complained about Republicans blocking legislation from even being debated on the Senate floor. Reid noted on Monday that in his nearly six years as majority leader, he has faced 386 Republican-led filibusters in the chamber.

Also on the table is a so-called “nuclear option,” which would call for just a simple majority, or 51 votes, to change Senate rules. Changing the rules usually requires two-thirds of the chamber, or 67 votes. The proposed package of changes, which will come in the beginning of the next Congress, has yet to be finalized.

But Republicans have cried foul over the proposals, arguing that those changes would allow the majority in the Senate to run roughshod over the minority party. In the 113th Congress, Democrats will control 55 seats in the Senate, while Republicans will hold 45 seats.

“Make no mistake, what [Reid] is proposing is a Senate where the only rule is his whim, where the rest of us are bystanders, including the members of his own party,” McConnell said. “The Democrats really want to go down this road? They really think they’re going to be in the majority forever?”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top