MFOHome About Commentary Discussions Funds The Best Resources Support Us!

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Categories

In this Discussion

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

7 of the 8 Democrats running for president support a tax on stock trades

johnNjohnN
edited February 2020 in Off-Topic
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/7-of-the-8-democrats-running-for-president-support-a-tax-on-stock-trades-141743317.html

7 of the 8 Democrats running for president support a tax on stock trades

/Many are quick to point out that a financial transaction tax would impact every 401(k), mutual fund, and ETF, not just when a consumer buys or sells/


Extra 0.1%transaction fees...not a good ideas for those like us trade or buy etf funds regularly...trying to pick pocket us as much as possible
Same fee cost annually if you have a good etf in your portfolio

Hillary was not as aggressive as these folks. Wish if she run again

Comments

  • LewisBraham
    edited February 2020
    Historically, it wasn't just Democrats who supported the tax on short-term trading. It was John Bogle who for most of his life was a Republican and only switched when the party went bananas: https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/is-it-time-for-a-trading-tax/
    To its advocates, the idea is a no-brainer: Charge a tiny tax on each stock, bond or derivative trade to raise badly needed revenue, discourage dangerous short-term speculation and make Wall Street help clean up its own mess.

    “It seems like an idea whose time has come,” says Jack Bogle, founder and retired CEO of The Vanguard Group, the mutual fund firm, who argues that a transaction tax would help curb speculative trading. “Speculation has triumphed over investment, and the implications of that are very bad.”

    The concept has been around for decades. In 1972, Princeton economist James Tobin, a Nobel laureate, proposed a transaction tax to calm the currency markets. The idea has since been suggested for stock, bond and derivatives markets as well. “It’s an old question in finance — whether you want to throw some sand in the wheels of the financial markets,” notes Wharton finance professor Itay Goldstein. “I can certainly see the benefit in having [a] tax, because in some cases I do think that speculation might be getting out of control.”

    Recently, the idea has gained momentum. In September, the European Union’s executive body recommended a 0.1% tax on stock and bond trades, and a 0.01% tax on derivatives trades. In the United States, where members of Congress have introduced transaction tax bills several times, only to see them stall in committee, the issue is getting renewed attention.

    What has changed? Following the financial crisis, many want to make Wall Street pay. And, of course, governments are eager to find new revenue. Also, the soaring growth of computerized “high-frequency trading” has triggered concerns that too much speculation is roiling the markets and hurting ordinary investors. The “flash crash” of May 2010 — when stocks inexplicably plunged 700 points, then quickly rebounded — raised concerns about the potentially damaging effects of high-frequency trading. A very small tax could curb the practice by wiping out the tiny profits produced on individual trades, millions of which are conducted daily.
  • expatsp
    +1 @LewisBraham
  • JoJo26
    Taxing trades is not going to impact income inequality. Wall Street professionals don't get rich because of the frequency of trades they make.

    The one loophole that would have the greatest impact would be the elimination of the carried interest loophole.
  • Simon
    If the Republican party went bananas what does that make the Democrats?
  • MarkMark
    Ask Mr Bogle. Move along.
  • CrashCrash
    "Recently, the idea has gained momentum. In September, the European Union’s executive body recommended a 0.1% tax on stock and bond trades, and a 0.01% tax on derivatives trades..." Derivatives would get better treatment? I don't pretend to really understand derivatives, but I know that they are equivalent to a sub-market, or secondary entity. If I'm not misrepresenting "derivatives," I know them to be by definition, synthetic. Talk about yer speculation! I'd tax those boogers more, not LESS.
  • CrashCrash
    Simon said:

    If the Republican party went bananas what does that make the Democrats?

    You asked.
    I carry water for neither the Repugnants (sic) nor the Demublicans (sic.) But I didn't just fall off a turnip truck. I can easily identify a political party that has become a cult, and which has sold its soul, and worships Big Green Sweaty MONEY. As for the Demublicans, I give them that moniker because they've responded to the Radical Right-wing crazies by... caving-in. I reckon the date of the start of that process to the Clinton years. A lotta people admired him. (Cigars and vaginas aside.) But what I saw back then was a Democrat in the White House playing ball with wing-nut Rightist banana-brains. Ever since Ronny Ray-guns, the USA took a hard-right turn. It REALLY sucks. Ray-guns, the "Great Communicator?" Crap. He constantly bumbled and fumbled his way through addresses and speeches.
Sign In or Register to comment.