Robin Hood Tax - will it help?

MacAg

Member
Will this proposed tax on financial transactions solve anything, or will it just prolong the inevitable?

Does Boris (mayor of London) have a good point, or is it scaremongering on behalf of the big banks?

And finally, do you think other governments will follow Europe if it is introduced?

IMHO, in the longterm I don't think it will achieve much, another 'kick the can' scenario. But it could put a dampener on high frequency trading if it was set high enough.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/...n-reject-transaction-tax?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487

Boris Johnson, the London mayor, has urged Brussels to drop plans to introduce a tax on financial transactions "at the earliest opportunity" amid fears that the levy would lead to job losses in the capital, Europe's largest financial centre.

Johnson has written to the European commission president, Jos Manuel Barroso, to warn that introducing a financial transactions tax across member states would drive business to financial centres outside the EU and damage its economy. He has urged Barroso to drop the proposals at the "earliest opportunity".

Both Johnson and the Conservatives in government are opposed to a levy unless it has been agreed globally.

Johnson said the tax would hamper competition with rival financial centres such as New York and Singapore, which would not have such a levy.

In his letter he argues that financial services are a key London industry and a significant employer, accounting for about 330,000 jobs or 8% of London's workforce.

"At a time when many EU member economies are struggling, some on their knees, it would be madness to weigh them down with this new millstone. Apart from weakening its financial sectors and London's in particular, it will hamper the ability of businesses across Europe to compete in the global market and have serious implications for EU jobs.

"These proposals should be dropped immediately and energy directed towards designing sensible reforms which also support and promote the EU's financial services sectors and the growth of member states' economies."

He added: "I would only consider an FTT if it were adopted globally by all our major competitors given the global market in which London's financial services operate. As I believe this to be currently an unfeasible proposition, not least given the opposition of the United States, much further groundwork would be needed before meaningful proposals could be put forward for adoption."

The proposal in Europe for a levy widely known as the Tobin tax after the US economist who proposed it in the 1970s, James Tobin would need the approval of the EU's 27 member states.

The chancellor, George Osborne, reiterated the government's position in the Commons on Thursday after updating MPs on the eurozone rescue deal thrashed out in Brussels this week. He said Britain would not accept a financial transaction tax at an EU level "while other places in the world don't have one".

Labour is seeking to apply pressure ahead of the G20 summit in Cannes next week. Chris Leslie, the shadow financial secretary to the Treasury, accused the chancellor of a "weak and defeatist attitude". He said "concerted efforts" were needed to broker a deal which would see the proposed levy apply in all of the world's big financial centres. "The European Commission's proposals in September for an EU financial transaction tax fall short of the mark, not least because money raised would be used to simply top up the EU budget," Leslie wrote on the Labourlist.org website.

"Whilst there are real barriers to winning this debate on the international stage there is also a real window of opportunity right now to do so. But by suggesting he thinks unanimous agreement at the G20 is not 'terribly likely', George Osborne seems willing to let the matter rest there, giving the impression there is no point even arguing for it."

He added: "Waiting for unanimity before even engaging with the issue means giving a veto to those who have vested interests in killing off the idea, or letting those with very different goals for the idea than the many millions of campaigners around the world set the terms of debate and potentially make it harder for Britain ever to join a scheme.

"The time has come for Britain to step up and show the leadership needed to broker a better deal, by being open to the idea that it is possible to win the argument for a different approach."
 
GST increase is off the table. Negative gearing change is unpalatable for the landed gentry. Why not go with a Tobin tax?
If average voter pays 10% consumption tax, how is it unfair to apply a fraction of a percent to speculative financial transactions?
 
SilverPete said:
"Reduce government expenditure - will it help?"

Understood and agreed, but let's assume that we're going to spend billions on submarines and jets and someone has to pay for it.

Given the tax options, is a Tobin tax feasible if it reduces income and company tax?
 
smk762 said:
Given the tax options, is a Tobin tax feasible if it reduces income and company tax?

It's only as feasible as the timeline until the next demand on government expenditure in other words, it's not.

The only tax option is a reduction in tax.
 
smk762 said:
SilverPete said:
"Reduce government expenditure - will it help?"

Understood and agreed, but let's assume that we're going to spend billions on submarines and jets and someone has to pay for it.

Given the tax options, is a Tobin tax feasible if it reduces income and company tax?

I'm a huge fan of more subs, but there'll be so much political dicking around that we'll end up making a shit decision and spend far too much.

So how about if we could have new subs and jets, better training for the military and for police, lots of cool equipment, etc. without increasing taxes? We could. There are plenty of areas of government spending that could be cut, and why not tackle the big ones first for maximum savings? I'm talking about the inefficiencies, complexity and waste that comes from multiple levels of government, especially when involved with taxation. If we want a genuine "efficiency dividend", do something meaningful about that. And then there is local councils which appear to be little more than a harbour for petty endemic corruption and provide a means for channeling taxpayer funds to criminals who seem to do so well in local government.

Clean that shit up before raising taxes.
 
The wealthy will just emigrate negating any benefit. That's what I would do if there was an extra tax placed on financial transactions or a tax on trading financial instruments like shares or futures etc. There's also Laffer and his drifting curveball
 
^ I wish I had good stock market knowledge to make my spare money work for me instead of earning peanuts sitting in a bank savings account. :/ I will happily pay the tax I earn on it.
 
Why would you be happy to pay more tax? To pay for other people's middle class welfare, government incompetent policy decisions or paying for TheEnd's lifestyle choices? You would already be paying CGT if you invested in shares.
 
SilverPete said:
So how about if we could have new subs and jets, better training for the military and for police, lots of cool equipment, etc. without increasing taxes? We could.

Can't happen while there is a monopoly on the provision of such services.
 
Caput Lupinum said:
Why would you be happy to pay more tax? To pay for other people's middle class welfare, government incompetent policy decisions or paying for TheEnd's lifestyle choices? You would already be paying CGT if you invested in shares.


For the extra money I could earn on profits from share market trading if I was knowledgeable in that area but I'm not. I was just making a point because of the peanuts return I'm getting on my savings account.
 
Back
Top