How do you know it's one-time? Remember when the income tax in the US was first introduced, it was single digits % and only imposed on the very rich, the people were told it was just a stop-gap. Eventually it went over 70% and applied to anyone making a living. If you trust a government to keep promises on tax, rather than look at their *actions* to judge their likely future behaviour, then you are being pretty naive.
Really? One city firm has already announced plans to migrate their entire staff abroad. I know at least two traders who are leaving the UK by the end of the tax year in response to the measures on the bonus tax and the higher rate income tax.
But firms are being taxed which did not get any bail out at all, and which would have survived and even thrived without one (due to competition being reduced, and buying assets at incredible bargain prices). Individuals, who now are responsible for soaring government debt, are being taxed more, regardless of whether they were helped or hurt by the bailout. The bailout was not applied to everyone, it was applied to a few banks. The bonus tax is applied to everyone working at a bank, even if they are an asset manager or a risk manager, even if they made a killing for their employer in 2008 by correctly anticipating the crisis. The higher rate tax is applied to all higher earners - whether independent traders, brokers, pop stars, football players, deep value investors, and other people who did not benefit at all from the bailout. If the tax was applied only to those who took the bailouts, it would be fair. But it isn't.
exactly. Banking and weatlh will be no different than other jobs. The government starts trying to get oppressive, and the jobs will permanently go elsewhere Govt does not know the meaning of "one time" tax.
"ludicrous" "bullshit" these are colorful words coming from people who are short on facts and cannot present a persuasive argument. __________ "How London is losing its global appeal" http://www.economist.com/businessfinance/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15124793
I think that Jamie Dimon's misunderstood the situation. His bank was used as an intermediary to take the UK to war, at the cost of 2 million sterling salary for Tony Blair. The on going payments to a discredited and corrupt politician, and some might say war criminal, do not mean that he controls the UK government. He can take his failed business model elsewhere. Who gives a fuck...
One corporate phone call trying to lobby against a tax hike is fascism? You live in arguably the most spoiled, mollycoddled, privileged and free society and era in history - there are still some serious things worth whining about but this phone call isn't one of them. SS guards gassing 250,000 people in 3 months = fascism Jamie Dimon complaining about a capricious bill of attainder by an incompetent government that is about to get booted out of office = not fascism