Except for it to have the same effect on him as what he is proposing would have on us it should be like $100 a word.
not for nothing anaconda but you sir are a jackass, i trade over 2 million shares a month are you trying to say that a firm is not gonna want my 5 to 10k a month religiously every month. and im a light volume trader how bout those boxes pumping 100k a month in fees or more. yeah i dont want that action. pass that pipe please must be some rivoting shit
Exchanges would be against this, volume is their lifeblood. Most clearing houses would also be against it as they are agency not proprietary based. There will be stiff opposition to this type of tax, but the new admin. is going to hike taxes at some point and this looks like it could be on the table. There are some very liberal organizations that have the ear of the new president.... Including the AFL-CIO who's rep was on CNBC talking up this tax. Don't panic but keep an eye on this and if it ever starts to take root we must fight it every way possible.
Says the lower tier financial leech. My activities deal with real goods and create jobs, real jobs, not just buying & selling paper. If you want to see bottom-feeding scum, look in the mirror.
You just can't handle the truth and are quite simpleminded. Your firm means NOTHING in the scope of the big firms who run Wall Street. Your firm has no lobbying power, your volume is a joke when it comes to their black boxes which perform market making and generate great fees from institutions, whose order flow, by the way, you try to scalp. The exchanges don't care, they will just raise transaction costs. They are run & even partly owned by GS, Morgan and JPM. Do you know how Goldman would feel if the armies of prop firm & retail daytraders ceased to exist? Great, means more money for them.
It will follow the same exact logic as short locate rules. Certain entities will be exempt, like primary Market Makers (hmm, Goldman, JP, etc.) and possibly major B/Ds. The reasoning? For the stability & proper functionng of our vital financial markets. You know, this thread illustrates how little streets smarts and clever common sense there is among the ET community. It's not rocket science of why a transaction tax would be pushed by the big boys of Wall Street. It is an opportunity to create an edge due to a very significant barrier to entry. Those who lobby & pay off politicians will get exemptions. Have you seen how much money Goldman contributed to Obama, by the way? Either the top 3-5 firms will have exemption only on their market making, allowing them to fully dominate daytrading/scalping activities via boxes or it will be similiar to UK, where they will be the only firms through whom you can daytrade, giving them a near monopoly on the commission business. A few smaller fish will get in on the racket as well, here and there.
We are entering an era where Morgan, Goldman and JP Morgan need Congress more than Congress needs donations from M,G, JPM. A DEM controlled legislature creates a playing which hasn't been seen sinc eht eearly 1990's, many on this board were probably still in college. Whether you think you're volume is significant does not have the same cache it used to. Congress and Wall Street conduct commerce with a currency based on favors, influence pendling and tax breaks. That's different than the US Dollar you and I use.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...-need-equity-to-become-equitable-1042755.html A short UK article comparing the UK to Italy. UK: Individual investors own only 14% of all listed shares. Italy:More than 25%. UK: Earnings on gambling are tax free. UK Stocks: stamp duty, dividend tax paid by the company, and then the individual, capital gains. Italy: No stamp duty, 12.5% capital gains. Italy: Less volatility, investors are more committed. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1088348 Proponents of the transaction tax like to tell the gullible sheep that the tax will prevent crashes and volatility. The study includes a period 2 years before and 2 years after India introduced a transaction tax in 2004. The tax has had no impact on market volatility. http://www.michiganinvestmentadvise...806/SEC-Announces-Billion-Dollar-Fee-Cut.html The Investor and Capital Markets Fee Relief Act securities transactions and registrations will be reduced by $1 billion in the fiscal year that starts Oct. 1, 2006. "This is terrific news for investors," said SEC Chairman Christopher Cox. "Even by Washington's standards, a billion dollars is a lot of money. Money that ultimately would have come out of investors' pockets can instead now go to retirement accounts, college savings plans, and other investment goals." (But it's okay to remove $100 billion per year from investors' pockets via a transaction tax)
Unfortunately this tax can happen. Let's hope that it does not, but it could. Check this paper out by Larry Summers http://www.tnr.com/afewgoodtaxes.pdf Larry Summers was named the next head of the White House's National Economic Council. Who knows what form this proposal will take.
I didn't read the article but Summers changed the position on transaction tax. Supposedly he is against the tax now.