I would tend to agree with you on this. Just look at state taxation of Internet transactions. If they are under pressure, they will surely look for additional sources of revenue.
http://www.cepr.net/index.php/op-eds-&-columns/op-eds-&-columns/what-can-mayor-de-blasio-do Ideally the United States would impose a tax on financial transactions similar to the one now being debated in the euro zone. While the city could not impose a large tax on the industry for fear of driving away business, certainly a very modest tax â say 0.01 percent would be doable. Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan will not pick up stakes and move across the river over a tax of one hundredth of a percent. A tax of this size could raise billions of dollars a year.
Goldman and JP Morgan will be exempt from any such taxes. CEPR is funded from tax money and those pseudo economists are talking their book. Before raising new taxes lets check what happens with tax money currently collected.
Every year Dean Baker writes this column with little variance, depending on changing political or economic realities. When he started this quest, he was pushing .25%, claiming it would raise (pinky to mouth) 150 BILLION DOLLARS a year. Then it was about banks paying their fair share (until one analyzes that most of the banks paid back their loans with hefty profits - only car makers and their unions screwed the tax payers). Now it's just a "modest" .01 percent. But even that modest tax is just the camel's nose which would bring higher rates. DeFazio should be along any day now with his own FTT bill proposal, too.
Arnie, If they implement 0.01% tax, it will gradually increase. Very hard to remove a tax after it's implemented.
Seems like the US government is searching for any source of revenue. I donât like this as it seems like a conduit to further taxes. Whatâs next, sales tax on stock purchases?