Transaction Tax Bill has now been introduced

Discussion in 'Trading' started by Bullet, Feb 18, 2009.

  1. "You are the fool and the rest who think like you. In total denial. You have no chance of ever getting everything accomplished until you get a clue, research and THINK."

    Funny - my pnl doesn't say I am a fool.

    I go long, short whatever. And you can kiss my happy ass....You sound like you have a chip on your shoulder - sorry about that.

    Anyone that trades for a living needs to write to their representatives regardless of whether or not you think it will matter. It it doesn't matter - you tried. If it does you just protected your livelihood.
    #51     Feb 18, 2009
  2. If you don't mind me asking, how did you acquire your second passport?
    #52     Feb 18, 2009
  3. wjk


    I was wondering why they had such big grins after passing such a monstrous bill.
    #53     Feb 18, 2009
  4. Here is a letter I drafted that you can feel free to send to your congressman or whatever:

    Dear Sir,

    HR 1068 IH (Let Wall Street Pay for Wall Street's Bailout Act of 2009) Legislation

    I feel very strongly that this legislation should not be introduced. It would seem on the face of it attractive to tax the "Wall St. Fat Cats" in terms a per-transaction tax, and recoup some of the costs of the bank bailouts.

    What is not being looked at, however, is the effect this will have on the small trader/investor. There are many of us who are not fat cats who make a living from the markets, and this would make it all but impossible for us to do so. (The IRS would then be deprived of the taxes on what we make also).

    There are also many foreign small traders and investors who are active in the US markets, adding capital and liquidity to our financial system, and they would likely then flee to other world markets who would be only too glad to have them.

    I estimate that trading volume on our exchanges would immediately drop somewhere between 50% and 80%, were this to be introduced, hurting both those seeking capital and those broking firms who depend on trading commissions (which are some of the same firms the government is trying to help).

    Please, in the name of all that is good, don't take away one of the last real competitive advantages the US has left, which is the liquidity and openness of our markets.


    #54     Feb 18, 2009
  5. If you honestly believe that, I think you should go get sterilized.

    Although you are right in one extent. They are not the same big boys. Back in the day they would not have been able to just take trillions of the taxpayers money with a stroke of the legislative pen against the people's wish.
    #55     Feb 18, 2009
  6. Have fun ranting- I just realized I had forgot we have an ignore button on ET- YES!
    #56     Feb 18, 2009
  7. LOL, it's funny, your mentality is exactly the type I described. You can't even think about mentioning your lame P&L. Please kid, you have no idea and never will. My activies involve dealing & trading with products that go way beyond three to four letter ticker symbols. I made a living from daytrading for years, which allowed me to build my capital & stake to move on to new ventures. Until you reach that state, STFU and learn.

    Go ahead and write your representatives which simply just do not give a sh*t about you. Need proof? Check TARP bailout.

    For the record, I did write letters about TARP. The people I work with contribute more to their representatives than you will ever make in your lifetime. All their concerns were still ignored at the final stage. That alone signals a huge warning sign of serious problems, way beyond this silly tranny tax.

    Wake the fuck up or perish.
    #57     Feb 18, 2009
  8. This is a great idea...Just an FYI according to wikipedia Pete Stark the liberal democrat from CA is next in line to chair the ways and means committee. His name is all over this transaction tax proposal. We certainly don't need that...

    #58     Feb 18, 2009
  9. Apparently, the chief writer of this bill is Peter DeFazio, Democrat from Oregon. Check out his financial disclosure statements that can be found on this page--

    On the latest disclosure from 2007, Rep. Defazio seems to have no stock transactions. He only had mutual funds which do not seem to be included in his bill. I will have to check the disclosures of the other co-sponsors. It is easy for Rep. Defazio to want to tax the heck out of traders when he doesn't buy or sell any stock or futures.

    I checked my representatives disclosure. He had hundreds of thousands of dollars in transactions, so he won't be in favor of this bill. :)
    #59     Feb 18, 2009
  10. gkishot


    The taxes on transactions of underlying stocks that constitute mutual funds will be passed to the shareholders. Maybe he just does not realize it.
    #60     Feb 18, 2009