Financial Transacation Tax

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Financial Transacation Tax

Post by PattyF on Fri Oct 21, 2011 1:10 am

A Financial Transaction Tax was included in the first draft (that I was aware of) but now seems to be missing. Is there a reason why? My understanding is that Europe is going to recommend a global FTT at the G20. Representative DeFazio of Oregon and Senator Harkin of Iowa are poised to sponsor legislation and labor groups are working hard to have it dedicated to schools and infrastructure. My ideal would be 40% infrastructure 30% schools 20% higher ed and 10% debt reduction, but those of us who support it are open.

Generally, FTT is opposed by wall street but supported by over 1000 economist worldwide. It also is estimated to raise almost twice what a tax on the 1% would raise and gets at the "speculation" fluxuation of the by reducing profit margins to a point where that type of trading is no longer attractive.

There is a lot of information on the internet about a FTT. The best is what has been written by Dean Baker from the CEPR. If you would like information from an antiFTT view point ICI has a full page dedicated to it.

The last point I would make is that I think it's a great organizing tool and could be a "quick win". Maybe you aren't thinking of those things, but I think you need a strong win to make a strong impression.

I will check back. It would be nice to know whether you are going to include it again. I will check back in from time to time to answer any questions.

Best regards.

Patty

PattyF

Posts: 2
Join date: 2011-10-20

Back to top Go down

Re: Financial Transacation Tax

Post by randallburns on Fri Oct 21, 2011 5:16 pm

Nader has endorsed this basic idea. I'm willing to listen, but I wonder how wel this will work when markets are becoming global. I can easily imagine stock trading just moving someplace like the Cayman Islands.

randallburns

Posts: 398
Join date: 2011-10-18
Age: 55
Location: WA-03

Back to top Go down

Financial Transacation Tax

Post by PattyF on Fri Oct 21, 2011 5:25 pm

Well Dean Baker has written on that as has the IMF - but probably the best answer is that EU is going to bring up the idea for a global tax at the G20 in November. It's not going to even get out of the gate if the US isn't willing to talk about it. If OWS were to help mobilize support it would be eaiser for the President to have the discussion. This could be a great win for OWS in terms of influence and of course could tie OWS closer to the movement overseas.

I should also note that over 1000 economists worldwide (including Krugman Stigletz, and others) have endorsed it - so it's not just pie in the sky.

PattyF

Posts: 2
Join date: 2011-10-20

Back to top Go down

Re: Financial Transacation Tax

Post by Alstein on Sat Oct 22, 2011 2:58 am

I'd argue for this being a bill, of a limited variety. Maybe it should only apply to corporations and individuals above a certain net worth.

That said, they would be likely to just move the transactions overseas, so I suspect such legislation would be worthless in the end.

Alstein

Posts: 100
Join date: 2011-10-19
Location: NC-06

Back to top Go down

Re: Financial Transacation Tax

Post by occupystephanie on Sun Oct 23, 2011 2:42 am

Alstein wrote:I'd argue for this being a bill, of a limited variety. Maybe it should only apply to corporations and individuals above a certain net worth.

That said, they would be likely to just move the transactions overseas, so I suspect such legislation would be worthless in the end.

If a FTT is effected, it would need to be global. The EU was considering it but the US said NO. They will reconsider it in November.

Not sure, but I think that the global market is the only casino in town.

This is a small tax (0.05%) which has two results:

1. It brings in billions of dollars,

2. It quells market and currency volitility.

occupystephanie

Posts: 11
Join date: 2011-10-20
Location: OR-4

Back to top Go down

Re: Financial Transacation Tax

Post by richard in norway on Tue Oct 25, 2011 6:54 pm

I'm for it but not because of the money it might raise, in fact I hope it raises a lot less than proponents expect. I think we really need to slow down the markets and get the most dangerous gamblers out of there, this tax would go a long way to making that happen
flower

richard in norway

Posts: 137
Join date: 2011-10-22
Age: 47
Location: NO

Back to top Go down

Re: Financial Transacation Tax

Post by Guest on Tue Oct 25, 2011 8:58 pm

PattyF wrote:A Financial Transaction Tax was included in the first draft (that I was aware of) but now seems to be missing. Is there a reason why?

Michael has made many changes to the document without a lot of consensus.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Financial Transacation Tax

Post by Alstein on Wed Oct 26, 2011 6:49 am

I'd support a limited tax- maybe on derivatives and other "non-tangible" assets, as well as commodities.

Mostly to discourage short-term speculation.

We still have the problem of use of international markets to circumvent anything we do.

I don't think a tax should apply to 401Ks or micro-transactions under say $10,000 per day.


Alstein

Posts: 100
Join date: 2011-10-19
Location: NC-06

Back to top Go down

Re: Financial Transacation Tax

Post by Post Gold Standard on Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:44 pm

Stop trying to use the tax code to modify human and business behavior.

1. Net Government spending (deficits / gov. debt) = non-government sector savings.
2. Net Gov. spending - net imports (imports - exports) = private sector savings.

US Federal Government deficit spending creates new net financial assets and taxing destroys them. Federal taxes only serve to reduce overall aggregate demand (spending power) of the economy.

Essentially tax increases and spending cuts are functionally the same. They both reduce aggregate demand and shrink the economy (take money out).

Learn more here:
http://pragcap.com/resources/understanding-modern-monetary-system

Post Gold Standard

Posts: 37
Join date: 2011-10-21
Location: TX-17

Back to top Go down

Re: Financial Transacation Tax

Post by Post Gold Standard on Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:48 pm

Instead of a financial tax increase, we should be asking for a FICA tax suspension, the most regressive tax in existence. Benefits should remain unchanged, just suspend the tax removal. It also has the added benefit of adding money at the bottom of the income brackets which is the exact people who will spend the money vs. save it, which is what this economy needs, more spending.

Post Gold Standard

Posts: 37
Join date: 2011-10-21
Location: TX-17

Back to top Go down

Re: Financial Transacation Tax

Post by randallburns on Thu Oct 27, 2011 12:25 am

Post Gold Standard wrote:Instead of a financial tax increase, we should be asking for a FICA tax suspension, the most regressive tax in existence. Benefits should remain unchanged, just suspend the tax removal. It also has the added benefit of adding money at the bottom of the income brackets which is the exact people who will spend the money vs. save it, which is what this economy needs, more spending.

I would agree-suspending low end FICA would help a lot of people that need it VERY badly. That is BTW part of the allure of fairtax-but I think it can be done better. That said, with deficits at the level they are now, I think any tax cut will be watched closely.

randallburns

Posts: 398
Join date: 2011-10-18
Age: 55
Location: WA-03

Back to top Go down

Re: Financial Transacation Tax

Post by Post Gold Standard on Thu Oct 27, 2011 2:14 am

Watched closely only because they falsely fear the national "debt".

Post Gold Standard

Posts: 37
Join date: 2011-10-21
Location: TX-17

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum