financial transaction european union ftt investors


financial sector transaction costs tax rate issuance high frequency liquidity vat tobin

Attacks on Financial Transactions

by Fred E. Foldvary, Senior Editor, 18 February 2013

The European Union has proposed a tax on financial transactions for eleven members that use the euro, including Germany, France, Italy, and Spain. The EU would impose a tax of one-tenth percent on the trading of shares of stock, bonds, and other financial assets, both on the buyer and on the seller. There would also be a tax of one-hundredth of one percent on the trades of derivatives such as options.

The proposed tax would raise about 50 billion euros per year to reduce the European government deficits, and it is claimed that the tax would reduce “irresponsible” financial speculation. On January 23, 2013, the EU’s finance ministers endorsed the financial transaction tax (FTT).

While superficially it may seem that the mere trading of stocks and bonds would not be productive, in fact there is an economic benefit to financial transactions, as they move funds to those areas that the market actors believe are most productive. The financial movement of funds then impacts the real economy, which needs the financial sector for investment. Any economist will tell you that it is best to minimize transactions costs.

Indeed the European Commission has estimated that the FTT would reduce the GDP of the eleven economies by .28 percent. But one also has to consider how the revenues are spent. If the funds are invested in these economies, such as for education or infrastructure, the combined GDPs would increase by .2 percent, for a net loss of only .08 percent. But then the tax revenue would not reduce the countries’ deficits.

A tax on transactions shifts them to less-taxed places. Even though the tax rate seems small, some financial actors make many trades, seeking small discrepancies in prices. They would move their business away. But the proposed tax would cast a wide net, fishing for taxpayers outside the territory of the taxing countries. The proposal uses the “issuance principle,” in which a trade of an asset originating in the home territory can be taxed even if the parties are outside the territory. For example, if an American buys a stock in a French company, and the seller is, in Japan, the transaction would be taxed, on top of taxes imposed by the traders’ countries.

Some European countries already tax financial transactions. France taxes the purchase of shares in large companies at a rate of .2 percent. After the implementation of the tax in August 2012, trading in these shares were reduced relative to non-taxed shares.

Another effect of taxing transactions is avoidance. Financial guys are clever, and they will find ways to circumvent a tax by creating new types of securities and derivatives.

High-frequency trading did not cause the Crash of 2008. An error in the software could cause a temporary fluctuation in pricing, but the normal operation of computerized trading is to thicken the market, to add many more transactions that add liquidity, making it possible for financial actors to quickly buy and sell at the current market prices. Frequent trading involves arbitrage, equalizing the prices of assets in various locations, and that is beneficial. Of course the financial markets can be manipulated, facilitated by high-speed trading, but a tax on transactions will not stop speculation, manipulation, and the fabrication and multiplication of derivatives.

As to government revenue, the root reason for the chronic deficits is that the current tax systems punish production and consumption. Europe has a value-added tax (VAT), a tax on the value added by each stage of production. Is it good or bad to add value? Of course it is good, which is why any produced value should not be taxed. The VAT destroys the essence of the economy, value added. Taxes on income and goods are also destructive.

While Europe punishes production and consumption, it subsidizes its landed aristocracy. Today’s European aristocracy may not have fancy titles and serfs tied to the land, but the economic impact is the same as in the old days of royalty. Today’s landed aristocracy consists of persons having title to land, who do not pay back to the state the rent and land value created by the state’s public goods and welfare spending. People don’t see this implicit reality, because they no longer see the appearance of the old titles of Baron, Lord, Earl, Duke, Prince, and Poobah.

The subsidy of the land barons implies that public revenues have to come from productive activities, including financial transactions. But high taxes on production have the effect of depressing the economy, and meets political resistance, so governments borrow to finance the welfare state. Government welfare ends up pushing up land rent, and so tenants get taxed by paying more for real estate, for which they superficially blame landlords and the market.

The concept of taxing financial trading is old. A tax on currency conversions was popularized by the economist James Tobin, and is sometimes called the Tobin Tax. The term was then applied to taxing financial transactions in general.

London is a major global location for finance, and the economy of the U.K. depends on the finance industry. The FTT would damage the economy of the UK. The tax would impose costs on brokerage firms and banks outside the taxing countries. Its implementation would be costly and add one more bureaucracy to a European Union already suffering from euro-sclerosis.

Europe is slowly committing economic and cultural suicide on many fronts: economic, demographic, and environmental. We may still be able to visit its interesting ruins, but economic dynamics are shifting to Asia. Financial activity will keep shifting to Hong Kong and Shanghai as Europe and also America keep tax-punishing production and transactions.

-- Fred Foldvary

-------------------------

Copyright 2010 by Fred E. Foldvary. All rights reserved. No part of this material may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, which includes but is not limited to facsimile transmission, photocopying, recording, rekeying, or using any information storage or retrieval system, without giving full credit to Fred Foldvary and The Progress Report.

Also see:

Why should Prop 13 be sacrosanct?
http://www.progress.org/2012/sarkozy.htm

Green MP Tells UK to Consider Land Tax
http://www.progress.org/2012/sharing.htm

n LA They Get Caught Cheating on the Property Tax
http://www.progress.org/2012/quinlan.htm

Email this articleSign up for free Progress Report updates via email


What are your views? Share your opinions with The Progress Report:

Your name

Your email address

Your nation (or your state, if you're in the USA)

Check this box if you'd like to receive occasional Economic Justice announcements via email. No more than one every three weeks on average.


Page One Page Two Archive
Discussion Room Letters What's Geoism?

Henry Search Engine