Registered User
Joined: 12/5/2008
Posts: 81
|
I wonder if this would have an effect on people who trade everyday:
http://www.reuters.com/article/reut...E52N4M020090324
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 12/5/2008
Posts: 81
|
Let's try this again, shall we:
http://www.reuters.com/article/reutersEdge/idUSTRE52N4M020090324
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 12/2/2004
Posts: 1,775
|
The transaction fee increase will not be noticeable for individual traders imo; after all, it was higher per the article in 2003 than it will be starting later this year, and I never noticed it back then, but I don't make hundreds of trades per day like some of the big boys do. What's of true concern is the unbelievably high transaction tax that would truly put the hurt on anyone making more than a few dozen trades per year. I forget the figures being proposed by a few congressmen, but it was a shockingly high tax. Anyone recall what that figure was?
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 12/5/2008
Posts: 81
|
QUOTE (fpetry)
What's of true concern is the unbelievably high transaction tax that would truly put the hurt on anyone making more than a few dozen trades per year. I forget the figures being proposed by a few congressmen, but it was a shockingly high tax. Anyone recall what that figure was?
Sure fpetry. Here's the info from my original post:
I saw this on another forum:
Hello fellow traders,
The potential financial transaction tax was re-introduced in the
house last Friday February 13th by U.S. Congressman Peter DeFazio.
The bill proposed is H.R. 1068: "Let Wall Street Pay for Wall
Street's Bailout Act of 2009". It would inpose a .25% tax on every
stock, option and future transaction. In other words, if you
purchase 1000 shares of a stock at $10, and then sold that same stock
at $10 (for no profit), you would owe the government $50 ($10,000
X .0025 plus $10,000 X.0025). Please understand, this is NOT a tax
on your profit, it is simply a tax on the total amount of your trade.
The link for the aforementioned bill is here:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.1068.IH:
Not only is this proposed tax mentioned in the above bill, it is also
is listed as a line item in "The National Health Care Act" (HR 676
Section 211, Sub-Section C - "Funding".)
The link to that bill is here:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-676&version=ih&nid=t0%3Aih%3A173
There is a petition at the link below that you can "sign" showing
your opposition to this tax:
http://www.rallycongress.com/no2tradertax/1536/tell-congres-to-block-
trader-tax/
I also urge you to contact your own U.S. Representative and let them
know how this tax would negatively affect you.
Thanks for your help,
John
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 12/2/2004
Posts: 1,775
|
Thanks Tootsie for posting and sharing that info again....scary stuff for sure.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 10/7/2004
Posts: 2,126
|
This tax is a great thing. It will take the noise produced by little players out of the market. Folks who usually are making the wrong bet anyways and don't really know what they are doing.
Those who think will become millionares with a $2000 account.
Perhaps then we can get back to business.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 2/21/2007
Posts: 797
|
BigBlock: don't you make money from the little players who are usually making the wrong bet? How does the small player adversely affect you? Until wall street comes up with minimum account balances, then we are all free to trade.
One way or the other, i disagree with ANY tax the government imposes on people. When the government can prove to me that they are efficient and non wasteful with tax dollars, then they can come see me for more money.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 9/25/2007
Posts: 1,506
|
QUOTE (johnlc)
One way or the other, i disagree with ANY tax the government imposes on people. When the government can prove to me that they are efficient and non wasteful with tax dollars, then they can come see me for more money.
Well ...
Some level of taxation is necessary ...
But we need to get back to intended purpose of our government ... and not all of this "feel good" crap that has been built into it ...
"Provide for the common defense ... promote the GENERAL welfare ... and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity ..."
And they have really screwed up those last two ...
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 2/21/2007
Posts: 797
|
Yes,Reality, paying taxes is a necessity, but what they do with it, is enough to make a billy goat puke.
I'll be interested to see how much D.C. donates to some third or fourth world country, when said country is hit with some natural disaster. I always thought that's why we donated so much money to the U.N. so that organization could disperse funds to needy countries. Oh well, that kind of stuff is way above me.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 9/25/2007
Posts: 1,506
|
QUOTE (johnlc)
I'll be interested to see how much D.C. donates to some third or fourth world country, when said country is hit with some natural disaster. I always thought that's why we donated so much money to the U.N. so that organization could disperse funds to needy countries.
The "global" redistribution of wealth ...
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 2/5/2006
Posts: 1,148
|
QUOTE (Tootsie) QUOTE (fpetry)
What's of true concern is the unbelievably high transaction tax that would truly put the hurt on anyone making more than a few dozen trades per year. I forget the figures being proposed by a few congressmen, but it was a shockingly high tax. Anyone recall what that figure was?
Sure fpetry. Here's the info from my original post:
I saw this on another forum:
Hello fellow traders,
The potential financial transaction tax was re-introduced in the
house last Friday February 13th by U.S. Congressman Peter DeFazio.
The bill proposed is H.R. 1068: "Let Wall Street Pay for Wall
Street's Bailout Act of 2009". It would inpose a .25% tax on every
stock, option and future transaction. In other words, if you
purchase 1000 shares of a stock at $10, and then sold that same stock
at $10 (for no profit), you would owe the government $50 ($10,000
X .0025 plus $10,000 X.0025). Please understand, this is NOT a tax
on your profit, it is simply a tax on the total amount of your trade.
The link for the aforementioned bill is here:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.1068.IH:
Not only is this proposed tax mentioned in the above bill, it is also
is listed as a line item in "The National Health Care Act" (HR 676
Section 211, Sub-Section C - "Funding".)
The link to that bill is here:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-676&version=ih&nid=t0%3Aih%3A173
There is a petition at the link below that you can "sign" showing
your opposition to this tax:
http://www.rallycongress.com/no2tradertax/1536/tell-congres-to-block-
trader-tax/
I also urge you to contact your own U.S. Representative and let them
know how this tax would negatively affect you.
Thanks for your help,
John
the above proposed bill and the transaction fees mentioned in the thread starter are not one in same.
The SEC needs to collect $1.02 billion to meet a target set by Congress, and beginning on April 10 it will charge $25.70 per $1 million in securities sales, up from the current $5.60, for equity and option trades on exchanges and over-the-counter markets.
$25.70 for every million dollars? so thats an extra 2 cents on every thousand dollars.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 8/15/2006
Posts: 132
|
The whole idea to me seems a bit unfair. I am a little player, I trade for myself and see it as just another tax when the Federal Reserve takes trillions from us already and does not have to explain where it all goes, they created this mess and are making it worse and now traders have to pay extra fees so they can have more money. I do not mind paying taxes but any trader will have to pay more of a tax increase than any other profession, how and why is that fair. How about government employees start, let's see Obama take a pay cut to show how much he cares. How much does uncle Ben make anyway? (not that he works for the government)
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 12/18/2008
Posts: 150
|
i dont think it will get the ok but you guys can contact your local govt via email or mail to complain.
by approving it, i think it would cause a meltdown in the market, all liquidity would be gone, all volume would dry up, and we'd get false volatility. to do something like that, the only way they would save the market is to merge all the exchanges into a 24 hour exchange which is possible but highly unlikely...
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 1/12/2009
Posts: 235
|
QUOTE (BigBlock) This tax is a great thing. It will take the noise produced by little players out of the market. Folks who usually are making the wrong bet anyways and don't really know what they are doing.
Those who think will become millionares with a $2000 account.
Perhaps then we can get back to business.
Bigblock you are an idiot. A lot of the market players are small investors. Who the hell are you to decide who has a right to be in the market and who doesn't.
Go back to your horse and buggy moron.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 3/21/2009
Posts: 8
|
I think my math at least average. The way I see this special tax is that it does not matter how much account size is, does not matter if 10thou or 100thou or 1mil, the percent hit will be the same and where it will hurt is the ACTIVE trader. So if a little man with a 10thou account who trades active with 1000 trades per year he will easily be taxed 25% to 50% of his starting account size!!!! If a man with 1million dollar account trades 1000 time a year he also will be hit easily with a tax amounting to 25% to 50% easily of that starting 1million!!!. So my figureing say this tax hurts any active trader. Think about it, there are many who trade more than 1000 trades a year, even if trade only 500 times a year the tax will hurt bad. All this figureing I did was say the average trade is about 1/10 or 1/20 account size, like a man with 10thous account with each trade about 1thou or $5oo, or a one million acctount size where each trade 100thou or 50thou.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 7/1/2008
Posts: 889
|
here's the work-around:
trade the Forex markets instead.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 2/5/2006
Posts: 1,148
|
QUOTE (ben2k9) here's the work-around:
trade the Forex markets instead.
could trade options, since the dollar amount is usually much less than stocks.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 8/15/2006
Posts: 132
|
I still see it as they want me to pay more money for making money on my already taxed money. I am not trading in a 401K, I trade for a living so I need the income to live, so I can spend it and pay more taxes.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 10/7/2004
Posts: 2,126
|
QUOTE (mmscottyb) The whole idea to me seems a bit unfair. I am a little player, I trade for myself and see it as just another tax when the Federal Reserve takes trillions from us already and does not have to explain where it all goes, they created this mess and are making it worse and now traders have to pay extra fees so they can have more money. I do not mind paying taxes but any trader will have to pay more of a tax increase than any other profession, how and why is that fair. How about government employees start, let's see Obama take a pay cut to show how much he cares. How much does uncle Ben make anyway? (not that he works for the government)
Scott - why did you change your user name? Does it make you any better?
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 8/15/2006
Posts: 132
|
BigBlock,
Not sure what you mean, I have never changed my user name. What would it make me better at?
Scott
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 10/7/2004
Posts: 2,126
|
QUOTE (mmscottyb) BigBlock,
Not sure what you mean, I have never changed my user name. What would it make me better at?
Scott
Weren't you Scottnlena on the board before?
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 7/1/2008
Posts: 889
|
QUOTE (mmscottyb) I still see it as they want me to pay more money for making money on my already taxed money. I am not trading in a 401K, I trade for a living so I need the income to live, so I can spend it and pay more taxes.
For an explanation read Obama's memoir. He worked on Wall St. for a few months. He says it was like "being dropped behind enemy lines" not making this up.
Once you understand this, everything he does will make more sense.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 7/1/2008
Posts: 889
|
QUOTE (mmscottyb) I still see it as they want me to pay more money for making money on my already taxed money. I am not trading in a 401K, I trade for a living so I need the income to live, so I can spend it and pay more taxes.
For an explanation read Obama's memoir. He worked on Wall St. for a few months. He says it was like "being dropped behind enemy lines" not making this up.
Once you understand this, everything he does will make more sense.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 7/1/2008
Posts: 889
|
QUOTE (BigBlock) QUOTE (mmscottyb) The whole idea to me seems a bit unfair. I am a little player, I trade for myself and see it as just another tax when the Federal Reserve takes trillions from us already and does not have to explain where it all goes, they created this mess and are making it worse and now traders have to pay extra fees so they can have more money. I do not mind paying taxes but any trader will have to pay more of a tax increase than any other profession, how and why is that fair. How about government employees start, let's see Obama take a pay cut to show how much he cares. How much does uncle Ben make anyway? (not that he works for the government)
Scott - why did you change your user name? Does it make you any better?
foot ----> mouth
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 8/15/2006
Posts: 132
|
QUOTE (BigBlock) QUOTE (mmscottyb) BigBlock,
Not sure what you mean, I have never changed my user name. What would it make me better at?
Scott
Weren't you Scottnlena on the board before?
BigBlock,
I was not Scottnlena before, I have been on here many years but more of an observer. I guess after trading for so many years I thought it might be time to give something back, sort of a pay it forward thing. I have read many of your post and I am not a big trader as you are, I am a person that trades for himself, started in 91 part time and 99 fulltime, but that by no means makes me a great trader so if you have any suggestions, methods, anything, I still consider myself a student of the market, I am sure I always will be trying to improve.
Scott
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 8/15/2006
Posts: 132
|
QUOTE (ben2k9) QUOTE (mmscottyb) I still see it as they want me to pay more money for making money on my already taxed money. I am not trading in a 401K, I trade for a living so I need the income to live, so I can spend it and pay more taxes.
For an explanation read Obama's memoir. He worked on Wall St. for a few months. He says it was like "being dropped behind enemy lines" not making this up.
Once you understand this, everything he does will make more sense.
ben2k9,
This is the first administration that truely makes me nervous.
Scott
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 8/15/2006
Posts: 132
|
I am not really into talking about politics and religion but when I had the chance to talk to Senator Mel Martinez about Let Wall Street Pay for Wall Street’s Bailout Act (H.R. 1068) I was shocked to find that the Senate really believes Wallstreet created this whole mess and Wallstreet should pay for it. And here I was thinking the Federal Reserve created the real mess, guess it shows I don't know jack!? The questions I have is, Why do we need a private company (Federal Reserve) controling the peoples money, they take it from us to loan it back to us at an interest rate and they decide for themselves who, what, and where this money goes. Thomas Jefferson was correct when he stated the end result of a private bank controling the peoples money would be exactly what has happened now! Here is the qoute
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."
My point, the Senate thinks Wallstreet did this..............
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 2/21/2007
Posts: 797
|
Scott: My opinion is that the best defense is a good offense. So D.C. tells the ignorant press that Wall Street is to blame. Feed the ignorant press a bunch of lies, the press prints it and the uninformed masses believe it.
Now we (D.C.) have to penalize (tax the hell out of) you, the hard working citizens of our country. We really hate to do this but just blame wall street. Who is going to refute it?
|
|
|
Guest-1 |