• Due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software, some users were "banned" when they tried to change their passwords at the end of February. This does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you were affected by this, please contact us.




Wolfgang Schaeuble and his FTT

McTell

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 16, 2012
Messages
6,208
Twitter
No
Schaeuble Is Putting Financial Transaction Tax on Global Agenda - Bloomberg


This is what we are expected to pay so some politician can become famous in 2050. He failed to do this in the EU, so is trying at the G-20. It would not help the IFSC here. You couldn't make it up.

German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble said on Saturday he’s putting efforts to tax financial transactions on the global agenda after attempts in Europe have stalled, even if results will only materialize after “years.”


(Another good reason for brexit).
 


ruserious

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
29,625
Personally think he hasn't a leg to stand on with these proposals.
 

Fractional Reserve

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2011
Messages
8,327
Schaeuble Is Putting Financial Transaction Tax on Global Agenda - Bloomberg


This is what we are expected to pay so some politician can become famous in 2050. He failed to do this in the EU, so is trying at the G-20. It would not help the IFSC here. You couldn't make it up.

German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble said on Saturday he’s putting efforts to tax financial transactions on the global agenda after attempts in Europe have stalled, even if results will only materialize after “years.”


(Another good reason for brexit).
the brits won't have any of his auld shyte .The brits won't have this , if the rest follow the brits will be on a winner
 

McDave

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
13,562
If Schaueble supports this initiative, it looks like the centre right is joining Piketty on the centre left to promote this sensible proposal.

Sad to see P.iesters sneering this proposal and kowtowing to self-serving banksters.
 

McDave

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
13,562
A Eurobarometer poll of more than 27,000 people published in January 2011 found that Europeans are strongly in favour of a financial transaction tax by a margin of 61% to 26%. Of those, more than 80% agree that if global agreement cannot be reached – a FTT should, initially, be implemented in just the EU. Support for a FTT, in the UK, is 65%. Another survey published earlier by YouGov suggests that more than four out of five people in the UK, France, Germany, Spain and Italy think the financial sector has a responsibility to help repair the damage caused by the economic crisis. The poll also indicated strong support for a FTT among supporters of all the three main UK political parties.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_financial_transaction_tax

Of course this won't go down well with the tooth and claw capitalism Tea Party gun nuts on this forum. :)

Not to mention the risible 'Another good reason for Brexit' assertion in the OP. :D
 

blokesbloke

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 13, 2011
Messages
23,298
If he can't achieve it in the German-dominated EU I don't see how he can in the G20.

Nor do I see why he should - why should other countries listen to him if he can't even make a reality on an EU level?

Why can't politicians just concentrate on running their own countries properly instead of constantly trying to get internationally famous?
 

McTell

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 16, 2012
Messages
6,208
Twitter
No
I can nearly see the point of FTT if it's cheap to collect (all those computers) and a tiny shaving.

It seems to hit "the 1%", and get at the banks that we all despise. Headlines good for politicians.

Problem is, so many tiny countries like Bermuda will say, come over here, we don't charge FTT. Using the G-20 is a way to say "we big boys are agreed so you little guys will have to comply. Sorry if you thought you were sovereign and self-governing, you belong to us".

The real problem with all these new taxes is that they start very low and then grow over time. I pay taxes when I earn something, but expect than anything left over is mine, as in my own money. Very simple concept. If I'm sending 1,000 off to a charity in Africa there will be bank charges but why should I have to pay FTT on top?
 

McDave

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
13,562
I can nearly see the point of FTT if it's cheap to collect (all those computers) and a tiny shaving.

It seems to hit "the 1%", and get at the banks that we all despise. Headlines good for politicians.

Problem is, so many tiny countries like Bermuda will say, come over here, we don't charge FTT. Using the G-20 is a way to say "we big boys are agreed so you little guys will have to comply. Sorry if you thought you were sovereign and self-governing, you belong to us".

The real problem with all these new taxes is that they start very low and then grow over time. I pay taxes when I earn something, but expect than anything left over is mine, as in my own money. Very simple concept. If I'm sending 1,000 off to a charity in Africa there will be bank charges but why should I have to pay FTT on top?
One of the fundamental points of FFT is that by taxing (and recording) transactions, you get to quantify activity in activities previously quite hidden form the public eye. In his major tome of a couple of years back, Piketty went to great lengths to explain how even a notional tax not raising much revenue helps keep tabs on trading movements.
 

McTell

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 16, 2012
Messages
6,208
Twitter
No
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_financial_transaction_tax

Of course this won't go down well with the tooth and claw capitalism Tea Party gun nuts ...

If you look at that poll of 2010, pages 13-14:

Finally, although Europeans are the least enthusiastic about the introduction of a tax on financial transactions, this proposal is nevertheless supported by more than six out of ten respondents (61%). A quarter of Europeans are against it, possibly because of the fear that they themselves might be subject to this tax.

Countries are far more divided on the question of the introduction of a tax on financial transactions: in some Member States, a majority of respondents even oppose such a tax, in particular in Malta (30% in favour versus 46% against) and the Netherlands (36% versus 53%). Respondents in Sweden (45% versus 46%) and the United Kingdom (43% versus 41%) are evenly divided.


Page 32, sampling details: I'll suggest that the 1,600 Germans are better educated than the 1,000 Bulgarians.

Sad to say, I'm never 100% convinced when I read at the start: "This survey was requested and coordinated by the Directorate-General for Communication." As in, they would say that, wouldn't they. TNS the polling company is based in Brussels, not Warsaw. Not remotely biased then.


To repeat from above: "A quarter of Europeans are against it, possibly because of the fear that they themselves might be subject to this tax." Hey, no kidding? 25% knew that such taxes are passed on to the consumer?
 

McDave

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
13,562
If you look at that poll of 2010, pages 13-14:

Finally, although Europeans are the least enthusiastic about the introduction of a tax on financial transactions, this proposal is nevertheless supported by more than six out of ten respondents (61%). A quarter of Europeans are against it, possibly because of the fear that they themselves might be subject to this tax.

Countries are far more divided on the question of the introduction of a tax on financial transactions: in some Member States, a majority of respondents even oppose such a tax, in particular in Malta (30% in favour versus 46% against) and the Netherlands (36% versus 53%). Respondents in Sweden (45% versus 46%) and the United Kingdom (43% versus 41%) are evenly divided.


Page 32, sampling details: I'll suggest that the 1,600 Germans are better educated than the 1,000 Bulgarians.

Sad to say, I'm never 100% convinced when I read at the start: "This survey was requested and coordinated by the Directorate-General for Communication." As in, they would say that, wouldn't they. TNS the polling company is based in Brussels, not Warsaw. Not remotely biased then.


To repeat from above: "A quarter of Europeans are against it, possibly because of the fear that they themselves might be subject to this tax." Hey, no kidding? 25% knew that such taxes are passed on to the consumer?
I'm sorry, but that's just rank anti-EU prejudice. It seems you'll only trust a poll that gives you the result you want. Off you go and get it then. And I'll treat it as I see fit.

As to the tax itself, I get it. You think all tax is theft, and that public authorities should not have a mechanism for tracing and quantifying capital movements. You're basically shilling for financial institutions who don't want any oversight of what they do or earn. Nice one!
 

McTell

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 16, 2012
Messages
6,208
Twitter
No
... You're basically shilling for financial institutions who don't want any oversight of what they do or earn. Nice one!

No, I do believe in a lot more oversight. In my dreams I would have had 20 or so of the bankers, politicians, regulators and developers publicly hanged for what they did, and left swinging in the wind and rain. petunia

Regarding an FTT monitoring trading, imagine a trader who in one day buys and sells $500m 7 times, as he sees the markets moving his way. What does it prove? That's the game he's in. He could have bought and sold that $500m 27 times, or 127. He may win, but lose out on a bigger win each time. Or he may lose.

The frequency of trading only tells us that he is employed as a currency trader; he has some phones; he has some computers. If he loses a lot he will be fired. If he had that $500m in cash in a suitcase, and was selling it on a street corner, it would take him much longer. We know that already!

Supposing you had a market trader wholesaling oranges in Dublin; he may import and sell a load, and then re-purchase part of that load to sell on at a greater profit to 3 new customers. The extra transactions won't make any new oranges.
 

Vega1447

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 18, 2007
Messages
5,783
No, I do believe in a lot more oversight. In my dreams I would have had 20 or so of the bankers, politicians, regulators and developers publicly hanged for what they did, and left swinging in the wind and rain. petunia

Regarding an FTT monitoring trading, imagine a trader who in one day buys and sells $500m 7 times, as he sees the markets moving his way. What does it prove? That's the game he's in. He could have bought and sold that $500m 27 times, or 127. He may win, but lose out on a bigger win each time. Or he may lose.

The frequency of trading only tells us that he is employed as a currency trader; he has some phones; he has some computers. If he loses a lot he will be fired. If he had that $500m in cash in a suitcase, and was selling it on a street corner, it would take him much longer. We know that already!

Supposing you had a market trader wholesaling oranges in Dublin; he may import and sell a load, and then re-purchase part of that load to sell on at a greater profit to 3 new customers. The extra transactions won't make any new oranges.
High frequency trading would be penalised by such a tex. Which would be a Good Thing.
 

McDave

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
13,562
No, I do believe in a lot more oversight. In my dreams I would have had 20 or so of the bankers, politicians, regulators and developers publicly hanged for what they did, and left swinging in the wind and rain. petunia

Regarding an FTT monitoring trading, imagine a trader who in one day buys and sells $500m 7 times, as he sees the markets moving his way. What does it prove? That's the game he's in. He could have bought and sold that $500m 27 times, or 127. He may win, but lose out on a bigger win each time. Or he may lose.

The frequency of trading only tells us that he is employed as a currency trader; he has some phones; he has some computers. If he loses a lot he will be fired. If he had that $500m in cash in a suitcase, and was selling it on a street corner, it would take him much longer. We know that already!

Supposing you had a market trader wholesaling oranges in Dublin; he may import and sell a load, and then re-purchase part of that load to sell on at a greater profit to 3 new customers. The extra transactions won't make any new oranges.
There are a number of points to FTT:

1. It helps track international movements of capital;

2. It can impose a cost on indiscriminate acts of trading, including automated trading;

3. It can be used to raise revenue as decided by public authorities.

There are lots of reasons for FTT, all of which incidentally I actually happen to support.
 

McTell

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 16, 2012
Messages
6,208
Twitter
No
There are a number of points to FTT:

1. It helps track international movements of capital;

2. It can impose a cost on indiscriminate acts of trading, including automated trading;

3. It can be used to raise revenue as decided by public authorities.

There are lots of reasons for FTT, all of which incidentally I actually happen to support.

Ref
1. The EU values free movement of capital. Is that going to end? If so, why, and who benefits?

2. One man's good decision is another man's indiscriminate? The 2008 crisis in the US and Ireland was sub-prime mortgage related, worsened here by a lack of regulation, and was not caused by traders seeking 1/10% here and there.

3. Raising revenue to buy votes? Could we have the EU audit signed off first please? Been waiting since 1994:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Court_of_Auditors#Declaration_of_Assurance
 

McDave

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
13,562
Ref
1. The EU values free movement of capital. Is that going to end? If so, why, and who benefits?

2. One man's good decision is another man's indiscriminate? The 2008 crisis in the US and Ireland was sub-prime mortgage related, worsened here by a lack of regulation, and was not caused by traders seeking 1/10% here and there.

3. Raising revenue to buy votes? Could we have the EU audit signed off first please? Been waiting since 1994:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Court_of_Auditors#Declaration_of_Assurance
1. Your point here doesn't make any sense. Please clarify.

2. You're wrong about Ireland. Most of our problem was PS overspend. So your overall point is rendered invalid.

3. Again, simple 'tax is theft' rhetoric, leavened with anti-EU prejudice.
 

New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top