Within minutes of election confirmation, this Independent described to Oz reporter his priority plan to help end the fillibuster: http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2019640393_king09.html This interviewee sounded borderline hysterical: http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Artic...r-Seat-on-Senate-Banking-Committee.aspx#page1
This is direct attack on the UK and London!! Disguised to look more palatable by using china in the example. Replace all instances of china by UK or London to see what they really mean! This is the real intention: Example 1: A UK bank and a UK investment firm, who acts in the name of a UK branch of an industrial company established in Germany, conclude a currency futures contract in London for operations of the industrial company in Germany. ⢠EU FTT is due at the German rate as both the UK bank and the UK investment firm are deemed to be established in Germany (Art. 3.1.e). ⢠If the notional value of the agreement at the time of conclusion of the future contract was EUR 600.000, and Germany applied the minimum rate of 0.01%, both the UK bank and the UK investment firm would have to pay EUR 60 FTT. Also they use a small 600K derivative in the example, to make it seem the tax is tiny. However the tax on a single 10 Billion euro notional derivative deal is 1 million euro which is huge and would cost many jobs on its own. Obviously no one is going to pay 1million or even 100K tax on a single notional derivatives deal. So their real intention must be wanting to shutdown derivatives trading almost completely.
Another point, if a foreign subsidiary or foreign bank does a transaction on behalf of an EC-11 company, they want the foreign entity to pay the tax. This is wrong, they should instead make the company that is based in the EC-11 country (that is effectively sending or hiding its transaction offshore) pay the tax that is due. I cant see their approach working anyway. If it was possible they would use it already to hit offshore entities facilitating offshore tax avoidance for existing taxes. But by making it EU enhanced co operation legislation they can force banks in the UK to comply!! This is why the are going down the enhanced co-operation route and not just implementing this themselves as a group. But no Chinese or US bank will ever pay up, they wont be bound by EU tax laws like the London banks would be. So London could lose a lot of european business to New York if this gets passed.
Allways nice to see some "great" political ideas,being withdrawn in a year. In this case the idea wasn't even such a bad thing. First this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15137948 And then that: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-20280863 As said by the ministry: 1 the tax inflated prices 2 jobs were put at risk 3 residents were crossing the borders
The Italian Government has proposed the introduction of an Italian Financial Transaction Tax to come into force in January 2013. http://www.elexica.com/en/Article-T...ly proposes its own financial transaction tax
They need to start voting on just 1 thing we don't want or need 1000 pages of pork added to every bill ! comment
So this indicates that the proposal for the ftt under the enhanced cooperation procedure will be based on the EC's previous proposal. So I guess this means it will have extra territorial reach (at least for the time being)? If so the fight is just beginning. The UK, Sweden and others will fight this tooth and nail. Like was previously mentioned let's hope Poland votes against this once the actual QMV votes are cast. This could likely wind up in a court somewhere. -Guru
It's not just the UK, Sweden who will fight this tooth and nails, it's the whole world... Never a tax with such an extraterritorial reach has been conceived... France has just got fined by an european court for a much smaller attempt to tax delocalising entities, and it's just an european court. For this FTT, they will go in front of every commercial jurisdiction... IMO the max they can hope for is to tax both their institutions everywhere and foreign entities on their exchanges, and even that they will have trouble getting it...
Financial Transaction Tax Reach New Stage http://www.taxationinfonews.com/2012/11/discussions-on-eu-financial-transaction-tax-beginning/ Just catching up here on extra territorial reach and residence principal. Seems confusing, difficult to implement and enforce and easy to avoid or evade. We need the EC commissioner to release the substance he promises in the link above._ I hope Obama, Geithner and other Democrats are not letting FTT snowball in the EU so they can join in for global consensus and passage later. If U.S. funds start paying FTT to Brussels, the U.S. would probably want its own FTT payable to Washington, denying Brussels the chance to tax the U.S.tax base. The EU seems to be designing the tax to encourage other countries to join in and share in the tax booty, or in effect be penalized. 2013 and 2014 are going to be very challenging for U.S. debt-ceiling negotiations. First, Obama is insisting on tax hikes on the upper income in the fiscal cliff. The deficit won't be fixed and they will hunt for other tax revenues soon. If EU FTT is working well in their eyes, Democratic leaders may borrow additional taxing ideas from the EU. Geithner will be gone and the next Treasury Secretary probably won't be from the financial services industry and perhaps more friendly to FTT - especially if he is from academia and doesn't like banking. I really hope EC-11 FTT is voted down in QMV. If the EU passes this FTT in enhanced cooperation, its a very bad escalation for traders. I think EU FTT leaders view it as a savior for keeping the EU together. They need EU revenue eventually to be paid to Brussels and will give this their all. My first articles on EU FTT years ago said this very point. Don't count on Republicans to block all taxes forever.