Financial Transaction Tax: Here Comes a Really Bad Idea

Personally I think an FTT (as in a material level of tax on nominal trade value, not the microscopic levels of current SEC etc. fees) is unlikely as no president will want to be responsible for possibly tanking the market. On the other hand, if momentum builds, Wall Street might actually get behind it: from the perspective of established players it's effectively a profit guarantee and permanent ban on competition, if there are exemptions for MMs and dealers as there almost certainly must be.

In terms of overall cost structure, more than likely it would just bring us back to 1970s-80s levels when commissions were much higher. Many famous traders and speculators were operating in those days and did just fine, in fact it's often said that markets were easier to trade back then compared to today. Day trading as such would go extinct but there would still be plenty of opportunity on higher timeframes.
 
tortoise said:
In the spirit of intellectual honesty, you'll no doubt admit that the Section 31 fee is not remotely what FTT advocates have in mind.
More...
Given that there are as many different variations as there are people proposing an FTT, to be honest we have no idea what FTT advocates have in mind and there is far from universal acceptance on what it would look like even among those who are advocates. Which is too my point, we should be discussing the level and type of these fees, not the idea that any fee at all is some kind of catastrophe.
 
Sig said:
Given that there are as many different variations as there are people proposing an FTT, to be honest we have no idea what FTT advocates have in mind and there is far from universal acceptance on what it would look like even among those who are advocates. Which is too my point, we should be discussing the level and type of these fees, not the idea that any fee at all is some kind of catastrophe.
More...

Sure we do. The proposals clump together pretty well, actually.

Here's one mainstream example.

https://www.robinhoodtax.org/
 
Specterx said:
Personally I think an FTT (as in a material level of tax on nominal trade value, not the microscopic levels of current SEC etc. fees) is unlikely as no president will want to be responsible for possibly tanking the market. On the other hand, if momentum builds, Wall Street might actually get behind it: from the perspective of established players it's effectively a profit guarantee and permanent ban on competition, if there are exemptions for MMs and dealers as there almost certainly must be.

In terms of overall cost structure, more than likely it would just bring us back to 1970s-80s levels when commissions were much higher. Many famous traders and speculators were operating in those days and did just fine, in fact it's often said that markets were easier to trade back then compared to today. Day trading as such would go extinct but there would still be plenty of opportunity on higher timeframes.
More...

Depends on the president, of course. Democratic candidates (including Gilliland) have staked their position in favor. Wall Street is, in fact, quietly behind it, for the very reasons you've said.

As for higher timeframes, exactly. Smaller traders will be out of business but those with a larger wad will be fine. That's the irony, of course: FTT will really only affect "Main Street" small-timers. The rest of us will be fine.
 
Sig said:
Certainly that's one of literally hundreds of different ideas. I would advocate that those of us worried about an FTT work to make it look more like the SEC Fee rather than simply rail against it altogether.
More...
Hundreds of different ideas which all come down to one biggest idea of all: free money for the socialist govt at the expense of free capital flow. Right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top