Financial transaction tax a long shot http://www.thedeal.com/dealscape/2009/12/financial_transaction_tax_a_lo.php DeFazio has offered a similar measure in the past and got no traction with his colleagues. This time it's got a better shot, he said, because of public anger over the bailout of Wall Street, and the big investment banks' continuing practice of paying huge bonuses to top employees. ''The American taxpayers bailed out Wall Street during a crisis brought on by reckless speculation in the financial markets,'' DeFazio said. "This legislation will force Wall Street to do their part and put people displaced by that crisis back to work.'' <b>But even with that added wind behind their effort, DeFazio and Harkin are likely to fail. The measure is opposed by the Obama administration, leaders of the banking-related committees and the financial industry. That triumvirate would likely be impossible to push past.</b>
Dems consider tax on big stock trades An NPR marketplace story--this continues to get way way too much press There is a comments section co please contribute http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2009/12/04/pm-stock-tax/ It is a disappointingly unbalanced story
Small Traders Fear Transaction Tax Would Wipe Them Out http://industry.bnet.com/financial-...s-fear-a-transaction-tax-would-wipe-them-out/
This is a given. Probably in 2011-2012. That's why it is crucial that we get a republican majority in nov 2010. We haven't yet seen the apex of the populist fervor. Yesterday's jobs report is a mere countertrend blip. 11.5% or higher by sometime 2011.
The npr marketplace story was so poor i wrote them a letter about it: I am responding to the story "Dems consider tax on big stock trades" which ran yesterday. I am so disappointed in you! First of all, this is an unbalanced story. You name the bill sponsor and quote two supporters, one the sponsor and one a supporter. Second of all, you have misrepresented the facts. 100,000 a year is NOT--absolutely not--just a tax on "big trades." Anyone who is involved in the market who does over 100k/year gets hit by this âtaxâ. This involves all sorts of people, many of whom have account as big as 10 or 20 thousand dollars but who make a number of investment decisions. Third and most important, you do not get at the real reason this is such a bad idea (your critic quoted is not even a critic of the actual legislation). Wall Street has gone democratic since the 1980's and there are millions of investors, active investors, part time traders and full time traders who now have the same access only the pros used to. AND there is a whole industry and infrastructure to support these people. This "tax" is anything but small in its implications. It will cream discount brokers, websites, chat rooms, website designers, accountants, and many, many other people. NONE of these people had anything to do with the financial fiasco of the last 2 plus years. Please do more balanced and more thorough reporting in the future. Yours Sincerely
This is another given. Can you even imagine the heat on wall st. when this occurs? Our fate is most likely tied to the nov 2010 election results.
I have an idea and i think its fair. APPLY THE TRANSACTION TAX TO PROFESSIONAL TRADERS THAN WORK FOR BROKER DEALERS LIKE GS,BAC,MS. i think thats very fair since they caused the crisis.
that is a terrific idea since most posters on ET are not professional except in their own minds. how do u convince them they qualify for the exemption.
Regardless of what we think we know that will not happen. They will be exempt, and in the off chance they are not they will make up the difference by passing huge cost increases to us.
The constitution doesn't go into detail about taxes. A head tax or, as someone else pointed out, an inheritance tax are legal. Also, you pay a section 31 tax every time you sell stock, regardless of whether you made a profit.