1/4% Tax on all stock trades pushed in NY Times today

seasideheights · Jan 18, 2009

"I think what this policy confuses is a flurry of activity with a flurry of speculation. High trading volumes are good. Having a diverse group of market participants with different savings horizons, goals, and risk appetites is good. Even the knowledgeable people who think that speculation is bad think that. So why punish those activities we know to be good to discourage a policy (speculation) which is at best of unknown value. If we want to target speculation, we should do that directly. We currently do that by having a different capital gains rate for short term and long term holding. We can also do that by regulating or taxing leverage. "

http://www.belligerati.net/archives/2009/01/will_a_tobin_ta.html

FightTheFuture · Jan 19, 2009

New York Times begging for a bailout. How is it possible for a newspaper to be in debt $1.1 Billion?! From speculation?

Make traders and investors pay for the NYT bailout as we are the ones responsible for what they have done!

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Reports-Billionaire-could-apf-14095210.html

seasideheights · Jan 19, 2009

Another article needing comments to shoot down the idea.

http://blogs.bankingtech.com/blog/2009/01/19/more-publicity-for-a-transaction-tax/

Math_Wiz · Jan 20, 2009

Maybe we'll follow suit with this one (?):

http://www.bworldonline.com/BW012109/content.php?id=051

+-*/ Math_Wiz

clacy · Jan 20, 2009

Quote from seasideheights:

"So why punish those activities we know to be good to discourage a policy (speculation) which is at best of unknown value. If we want to target speculation, we should do that directly. We currently do that by having a different capital gains rate for short term and long term holding. We can also do that by regulating or taxing leverage. "

http://www.belligerati.net/archives/2009/01/will_a_tobin_ta.html
More...

Isn't ANYONE who buys a stock a speculator????

Don't these fucking monkeys get that? Why the hell is speculation bad anyway? It doesn't matter if your hold time is 10 seconds or 50 years, you are still speculating.

Robert Weinstein · Jan 21, 2009

Quote from seasideheights:

Pro Transaction Tax blog article with comment section.

Get commenting folks.

http://davidemeadows.newsvine.com/_...new-taxes-on-the-super-rich?commentId=4820392

If we overwhelming shout down each of these articles, these proponents won't know what hit them & they may pipe down.
More...

Thanks for posting the link.

I gave him more than he wants to read in the comments.

weewilly · Jan 21, 2009

Will active traders also have to wear yellow armbands?

zzt · Jan 21, 2009

Quote from Robert Weinstein:

Thanks for posting the link.

I gave him more than he wants to read in the comments.
More...

likewise

Anaconda · Jan 21, 2009

Quote from Angrycat:

Yes, it would be nice for the exchanges (and, yes, I do realize that Merrill and Goldman pretty much own the NYSE because they can threaten to cross trades in house and SIG owns the PHILEX, etc.) to get the spreads and commissions back the way they were before ECNs and commission deregulation drove down cushy, easy profits for them. The thing is, 30 years ago, foreign exchanges weren't providing significant competition to them. Today they are. The price elasticity of demand has increased. So, for every unit increase in transactions costs, there's a decrease in volume as traders simply find something else to trade abroad. Certainly, going to Singapore will be no problem for a pro trader. Retail guys are always screwed no matter what.

Because of this international competition, I don't think the big guys are going to be getting that edge (economic rent) back because if they do it by raising prices, they will lose volume to the competition. The only way they can win is by increasing volume by decreasing price. Already the big guys have cottoned on to this and they're providing locked markets on large trades for a commission instead of the bid/ask spread. No small market making firm can safely make that kind of market. If they add a tax to that, more of those huge trades cross on foreign exchanges and the big guys will lose commission.

If the only guys who are exempt are the big guy and that drives the small guys out of business, then no tax revenue (or virtually no tax revenue) will be collected. The only transactions will be infrequent ones by long term investors and volatility as well as the cost of raising capital for firms will go up as a result - which is how I define "killing the capital markets". Collecting a couple of dollars in tax revenue doesn't seem worth killing the capital markets for. But then....we're talking about government and government is fully capable of so much bullshit that nothing it does amazes me anymore.
More...

You're just not getting it. It's about power & putting barriers to entry. It is about putting the little guy and the smaller financial players out of business. It's not about tax revenue, and as long as you keep referring to that, you simply do not understand what is going on.

You're reaching for rationalization without even attempting to understanding those who are pushing for this tax. By blowing it off as stupid government bullshit, you're allowing yourself to be tricked.

And no, it won't kill the capital markets, not even close. Lose the illussion that the daytrader is soooo important to today's markets, it's simply not true. The effect will be less significant than you think.

FightTheFuture · Jan 21, 2009

Here are a few terms being tossed around or are active and implemented.

STET SECURITIES TURNOVER EXCISE TAX

FTT FINANCIAL TRANSACTION TAX

APT AUTOMATIC TRANSACTION TAX

APT AUTOMATED TRANSACTION TAX

APTT AUTOMATED PAYMENT TRANSACTION TAX

TT TOBIN TAX

GCTT GLOBAL CURRENCY TRANSACTION TAX

CTT CURRENCY TRANSACTION TAX

CTT CASH TRANSACTION TAX

CTT COMMODITIES TRANSACTION TAX

CTT COMMODITIES TURNOVER TAX

SDRT STAMP DUTY RESERVE TAX

SST SECURITIES STAMP TAX

STT STOCK TURNOVER TAX

STT SECURITIES TURNOVER TAX

STT SECURITIES TRANSFER TAX

WHPFY WE HAVE PLANS FOR YOU