Small Trading Tax

www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1051076486&play=1 Small Trading Tax, Big Impact? Airtime: Tues. Mar. 3 2009 | 2:14 PM ET A small trading tax with Rep. Peter DeFazio Oregon. A person with $500,000 that made 100 trades of $100,000 in a year would face a $25,000 tax

www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1051076486&play=1

Small Trading Tax, Big Impact?

Airtime: Tues. Mar. 3 2009 | 2:14 PM ET

A small trading tax with Rep. Peter DeFazio Oregon.

A person with $500,000 that made 100 trades of $100,000 in a year would face a $25,000 tax

That guy thinks US market is not bad enough and he wants to kill it completely with his congressional power and ignorance of economics. Good timing though. Need to find out if he or his relatives are in massive shorts.

Edited by redfoliage2, 03 March 2009 - 09:37 PM.

There's several threads about this in the "Important Topic" section of the website above. I would encourage everyone to review those threads, then contact your Senators and Congressmen. IT

www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1051076486&play=1

Small Trading Tax, Big Impact?

Airtime: Tues. Mar. 3 2009 | 2:14 PM ET

A small trading tax with Rep. Peter DeFazio Oregon.

A person with $500,000 that made 100 trades of $100,000 in a year would face a $25,000 tax

Its not 25% its .25% so it will be $250 in tax. Close though.

www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1051076486&play=1

Small Trading Tax, Big Impact?

Airtime: Tues. Mar. 3 2009 | 2:14 PM ET

A small trading tax with Rep. Peter DeFazio Oregon.

A person with $500,000 that made 100 trades of $100,000 in a year would face a $25,000 tax

Its not 25% its .25% so it will be $250 in tax. Close though.

$100,000 x 100 trades = $10,000,000 taxed at .25% = $25,000

There's several threads about this in the "Important Topic" section of the website above. I would encourage everyone to review those threads, then contact your Senators and Congressmen.
IT

And if you haven't already, you really need to read those threads and follow through. If you don't like politics, consider it an environmental issue. This bill is aimed directly at you and the base of the market ecosystem. Follow the link to the video posted by "research_stuff" and see what DeFazio thinks of traders!

www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1051076486&play=1

I just don't get it. In this video Representative DeFazio quips on complaints about the 1932 Trader Tax, but doesn't address many of the current questions about his bill. As I recall, everything I've read about the earlier period says it took the ramped-up production of World War II to get us out of the Depression. And it took the market 25 + years to recover, with the DJI finally reaching a new (eom) high in November 1954. Yet this seems to be a time-table and style of economic recovery Mr. Defazio favors.

His attitude toward day-traders seems to be the equivalent of a dog-person's opinion about cats (or visa-versa). He just doesn't like them. There's no recognition of their contribution to liquidity and stability in the market.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I still don't understand why he is intent on taxing traders! I really don't see traders as causing the financial crisis or getting much benefit from the "bailout." Why doesn't he go after the folks who gave inaccurate ratings to the CMOs, the CDOs, and their spawn which became the toxic financial assets.

...... .....I have seen the enemy and it is NOT us.

Alton 3-4-09

PS - Here's another letter/petition site. I think Mark mentioned this organization in one of the threads pinned at the top of the FF board. This link goes directly to their response form.

................... ..........Security Traders Association

Edited by Alton, 04 March 2009 - 01:05 AM.

Here's a thought. Although this bill had been mentioned in the press earlier, HR 1068 was introduced on February 13, 2009, and the final text was probably known a few days before by people who follow that arena carefully. Has the market's action since then been discounting its passage? To some extent I think, "Yes." OT - Why did the fonts in my earlier post get so scrunched? I think the default is Verdana 2 and that was the setting when I clicked <Add Reply>.

Edited by Alton, 04 March 2009 - 10:07 AM.

OT - Why did the fonts in my earlier post get so scrunched? I think the default is Verdana 2 and that was the setting when I clicked <Add Reply>.

No clue. Formatting on message boards can be tricky. Sometimes browsers can mess with it too. I'm using Chrome now and it is a joke trying to format in here.

Mark