Stop The Trader Tax !

[MomentumStalker]

DAMN, they will not rest untill they controll the entire WORLD. America is supposed to be leading with freedom NOT COMMUNISM. In the 1950's these people would have been DISGRACED, labelled the COMMIES that they are, and THROWN OUT OF WASHINGTON BY their own freedom loving peers! NOW they can't even be VOTED out because they PAYOFF the IGNORANT PUBLIC with OUTRIGHT BRIBES. MILLIONS of so called Americans are being SUPPORTED by the POLITICIANS they are living the COMMUNIST lifestyle and they LOVE it. THEY WILL KEEP VOTING FOR IT UNTIL WE HAVE A 2nd American revolution or this ONCE great country is DESTROYED BY thier GREEDY WAYS, DAMN WELFARE STATE.... WHERE is the call for MANDATORY DRUG and ALCOHOL TESTING while THESE CUMMUNISTS are getting money or foodstamps from WE THE PEOPLE. WATCH out if the indian reservation's start up a STOCKMARKET we could use fiat ticker symbols based on the real stock markets of the world, lol I admit that the last bit sounds crazy.

[RULiquid]

ALERT! Pelosi Endorses ‘Global’ Tax on Stocks, Bonds, and other Financial Transactions
Monday, December 07, 2009
By Matt Cover, Staff Writer

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/58099

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi arrive for a press conference after House passage of the health care reform bill at the U.S. Capitol on Saturday, Nov. 7, 2009. (AP Photo/J. David Ake)
(CNSNews.com) – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) endorsed the idea of a “global” tax on stock trades and other financial transactions, saying the estimated $150 billion in annual revenue from such a tax could be used to help fund more stimulus spending.

At her weekly press briefing on Thursday, Pelosi said the financial transactions tax (HR4191) currently before Congress would have to be made “global” to keep U.S. investors from taking their business overseas and out of taxable reach.

The House speaker said that a transaction tax could be imposed in conjunction with congressional efforts to divert funds from the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), with funds from both going to fund a second stimulus spending package. (The first stimulus bill, $789-billion, was signed into law by President Barack Obama on Feb. 13, 2009.)

“I believe that the transaction tax still has a great deal of merit,” Pelosi told reporters. “The concern that many of us or others have had is that it will send, it will send transactions overseas.



“Well, let's see, the fact is, what we are talking about is a global transaction [tax],” she said, “something that we would do in conjunction with other G nations, whether it is G8, G20, whatever the current G number is. Because it is really a source of revenue that has really minimal impact on the transaction, but a tremendous impact on helping us meet our needs.”

Pelosi said she thought the idea might have currency among a public eager to see Wall Street firms “pitching in” to help the government grow the economy.

“I think there would be a market for it among the American people to say that we are all participating in the economic prosperity of our country, and we are all pitching in to continue that prosperity,” said Pelosi.

The tax idea, the brainchild of British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, would mean that all major financial centers – Asia, the EU, U.S., and U.K. – would all have to pass a similar transaction tax to avoid disadvantaging one country’s stock exchange. This would ensure that no matter where a person wanted to buy stock, they would have to pay the new tax.

Brown originally proposed the idea on Nov. 7 at a meeting of G20 finance ministers in St. Andrews, Scotland.


Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.)
The American version, H.R. 4191, introduced by Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.), would levy a separate tax on all stock trades, futures contracts, swaps, credit default swaps, and stock options in an effort to tap the trillions of dollars of such transactions.

Seeking to circumvent concerns about further deficit spending on stimulus programs, the bill attempts to raise approximately $150 billion every year.

“The jobless recovery suggests that the Federal Government must continue to prime the economy, but the record deficit is a real obstacle,” the bill reads.

“To restore Main Street America, a small securities tax on Wall Street should be invested in job creation for Main Street,” says the bill. “This transfer tax would be assessed on the sale and purchase of financial instruments such as stocks, options, and futures. A quarter percent (0.25 percent) tax on financial instruments could raise approximately $150,000,000,000 a year.”

The transaction tax proposal was met with opposition from some House Democrats, who signed a “Dear Colleague” letter outlining their opposition to the tax and urging other members of Congress to join them.

“A $150 billion tax on financial transactions will fall on millions of hardworking Americans who are saving for their future through their 401k plans, mutual funds, pensions and other savings vehicles,” wrote Reps. Michael McMahon (D-N.Y.), Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.), and Debbie Halvorson (D-Ill.) in the letter, which is still being circulated on Capitol Hill, a copy of which was obtained by CNSNews.com.

“Supporters of the proposal promote it as a way to make Wall Street pay for economic stimulus, because it would apply only to stocks, futures, forwards and derivatives,” the letter states.

“In reality, it would be a tax on all investment and savings vehicles because mutual funds and money market fund transactions are, by definition, purchases and sales of securities and bonds,” it added.

The three Democrats said that the American version of the proposal would not exempt middle class Americans, as it claims to do, because while the tax would be paid by major stock brokers, those brokers would pass the cost down to everyday investors, pension, and retirement funds.

“Proponents of a transaction tax argue that a small 0.25 percent tax on stocks would be paid for by the highly paid financial traders and would not affect most Americans,” reads the letter. “This is simply not true. A tax on stock transactions would affect every single person who owns and invests in stocks from small business owners to senior citizens.”

“Americans saving for their retirement, to pay for college or ‘a rainy day fund’ to meet future emergencies will be subjected to a tax that will reduce the value of their savings at a time when they are just starting to recover the losses they incurred at the height of the financial crisis,” the letter states.

Pelosi’s office did not return calls for comment on this story.

[BUDDIEE18]

fw: David Wynne Miller (Barrett)

I don't think it fair to vilify David Wynne Miller (Barrett) for his work in showing that the English language has been bastardized so that nothing can be shown to be factual when written in the current format that totally defies English Grammar.

The reason it has caused people trouble is the fact that Courts are administrators of slaves (persons) under the property right (natural law), and thus no evidence that is founded on statutory law or grammar is of any value in defense. David, like most US and Canadian patriots, do not understand that we are all considered to be slaves owned by the corporate State or corporate Crown of the City of London. And, as such, we are administered as slaves in the time proven methods of Rome, and not as the English
people enjoyed as the protection of individual rights as 'liber homo' under the Anglo-Saxon law, based solely on the negative form of the Golden Rule that existed in England after the Roman occupation and before the Norman invasion of 1066.

And, we are NOT slaves by way of contract, explicit or implied. We are slaves by 2 methods - attachments as accessories to the State or Crown owned legal name,
an intellectual property owned by the corporate State or corporate Crown.
Legal Maximum: "An accessory attached to a principal becomes the property
of the owner of the principal". And, as stated in the 13th Amendment to the
corporate Constitution of the corporate UNITED STATES: "Neither slavery nor
involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall
have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place
subject to their jurisdiction." So, what is the crime? Unauthorized use of the State
or Crown owned name. Corporations, as 'make-believe ships at sea' are under maritime jurisdiction (falsely called admiralty) and in maritime law, an accused crewmember
is guilty unless proven innocent. The 'contract means of defense is as useless as
is Miller's 'in the truth' grammar relative to defending oneself from an accusation
of 'disobedience' by Government - the agent for the State or Crown.

Eldon Warman
http://www.detaxcanada.org

[pertains to BOTH the USA and CANADA]

[RULiquid]

Going good PIZZABUSTER1

[PIZZABUSTER1]

GOOD MNG LIQUID HOW WAS YOURE WEEKEND

[RULiquid]

thanks Grumman

[BlockTrade]

Received this e-mail back from, Congressman: Don Young

Dear Mr. XXXXXX,



Thank you for contacting my office regarding H.R. 1068, the Let Wall Street Pay for Wall Street's Bailout Act of 2009. I appreciate having the benefit of your thoughts.



On February 13, 2009, Representative Peter DeFazio (D-OR) introduced H.R. 1068 to impose a tax of 0.25% on all securities transactions. Proponents of this securities transfer tax believe that it would have little or no impact on the average investor and would help provide a disincentive to high volume, speculative short-term traders. However, opponents of this legislation contend that it will greatly impact trading and liquidity in the stock market. They believe that this legislation overlooks the fact that many hard working Americans invest in the stock market and this tax is just another government intervention into the market.



H.R. 1068 has been referred to the House Committee on Financial Services. While I am not a Member of this committee, please rest assured that I will keep your thoughts and concerns in mind should this legislation reach the House floor for a vote.



Once again, thank you for expressing your views on this issue. If you haven't already, I would encourage you to sign up for my e-newsletter at http://donyoung.house.gov/IMA/issue_subscribe.htm and my YouTube channel at

. Doing so will allow me to provide you with updates on this and other important issues. If I can be of any assistance in the future, please do not hesitate to contact me.





Sincerely,

DON YOUNG

Congressman for All Alaska

[RULiquid]

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h1068/show

[RULiquid]

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-1068

[tony montana]

boy oh boy, i must say this sucks, hey liquid we can always get a job at walmart or even get used to sayin...would you like fries to go with that, the government is so far in debt they will do everything they can to make up for losses, the sad thing its to late to bailout wallstreet or mainstreet now in my opinion this law will pass and thats the end of trading as we know it, kiss investorshub goodbye as traders as yourself and others will not be able to afford to trade, time to move to ecuador.

[BigUpTick]

Democrats screw everything up.

[Vance]

I'm sure the people who proposed it are not well informed of the implications, and they will be!

[Risicare]

I believe it is not likely to get anywhere, but you never know for sure.

[Vance]

Given that information, there is no way they will get this tax to pass anyway!

[Risicare]

The liquidity that would walk away from the US markets would destroy them. One of the primary things that makes the US markets desirable is the liquidity. This tax would also instantly destroy HFT which is now a huge part of the market.


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/13/versace-high-frequency-trading-growing-in-populari/
"Many firms use high-frequency trading to exploit minute shifts in stock prices by using automated programs to repeatedly trade retail-size orders through ultra-high-speed data lines. Those strategies have become so popular that they are currently estimated to account for more than 70 percent of all U.S. trading volume. Unlike traditional shareholders, the average life of stock ownership by high-frequency traders is typically measured in seconds"

[Vance]

Scenario with the tax

Purchase 10k shares at $1 per share with Etrade basic commission of $12.99 a trade

10,000 X $1 + .025% + $12.99 = $10037.99

Sell 10k shares at $1.05 per share with Etrade basic commission of $12.99 a trade

10,000 X $1.05 - .25% - $12.99 = $10460.76

Profit of $422.77 with $25.98 paid in commissions and $51.25 paid for tax.


I don't like it but it certainly would not stop me from trading US stocks. And it would be tax paid as reported on federal income!
And the accumulation from all trades would Really help out the country.

[Risicare]

That would be many thousands of dollars a year.

[Vance]

so given you would have to pay a quarter 0.25 for every hundred 100.00 dollars, you would probably never trade US stocks again? I would.

[Risicare]

I would probably never trade American stocks again and so would tons of people. It would destroy liquidity which is a very maiin thing that makes the US markets desirable.

[Vance]

I will bring it over here.. The new trader tax mentioned in the article you posted says .25%! That would be $25 per $10,000! I do not see that as a problem considering the help that money collectively could do for the country. I wish the Republicans would have thunk it up though!

[RULiquid]

mwwarner1 don't chase it, Tomorrow market closed and Friday 1/2 day. SO may or may not hold up

[mwwarner1]

CYGS it is then don't have a lot of cash in my optionsxpress account to buy lots of IOVE.

[RULiquid]

CYSG started running yesterday off .001 bottom. IOVE looks good hear .011

[mwwarner1]

well back to looking for a cheap pinky, looking at BZCN or CYSG.whats your pick for the day?Im at a loss

[mwwarner1]

c

[mwwarner1]

well I imagine there will be a lot of pissed off investors if it passes but hopefully will be happy after they make it in the foreign market and move to the caribbean and watch congress drive america into the ground.

[RULiquid]

That's where I will go too...

[mwwarner1]

thats congress for ya! shoot themselves in the foot and now they are getting ready to shoot the other foot while fixing the damaged foot.it wont work all trading will go to foreign markets not unless congress has a master plan for that too! is there a form to fill out or something to kill this ludacrist bill.

[RULiquid]

hmmmm interesting Risicare

[Risicare]

Brazil tried this before and it did not work so well.
From "Trading and Exchanges - market micro structure for practitioners" by Larry Harris (excellent book)

[MomentumStalker]

GREAT DD and idea for a board gotcha board marked we might have to move out of the country in order to keep these welfare loving COMMUNIST VAMPIRES out of OUR pockets this makes me sick. We ABSOLUTLY need a 3rd party. Alex Jones has some great videos on youtube about the way this unAmerican government operates.

[RULiquid]

Traders just don't accept it... FIGHT IT!!!

[RULiquid]

CNBC Video Of Peter DeFazio, Ya Know The Guy Who Wants To Shut Down Day Trading

http://timothysykes.com/blog/2009/03/05/cnbc-video-of-peter-defazio-ya-know-the-guy-who-wants-to-shut-down-day-trading/

[RULiquid]

If this bill were to somehow pass, it is doubtful that any exchange in the USA could survive. Market makers and scalpers could not possibly stay in business, liquidity would instantly dry up, and all transaction business would go elsewhere. The job destruction would be enormous, and massive amounts of money would evaporate as markets get crushed.

[RULiquid]

Should traders be worried about H.R. 1068 transaction tax?

by Doug Tucker


On Friday, February 13, U.S. Congressman Peter DeFazio, introduced H.R. 1068: “Let Wall Street Pay for Wall Street’s Bailout Act of 2009”, which aims to impose a 0.25% transaction tax on the “sale and purchase of financial instruments such as stock, options, and futures.” To be clear, this tax is not on the profits, it is on the entire dollar amount of the stock or futures contract. What now costs a few dollars to transact could cost several hundred dollars per round turn. This would end daytrading and most likely swing trading as we know it.

If this bill were to somehow pass, it is doubtful that any exchange in the USSA could survive. Market makers and scalpers could not possibly stay in business, liquidity would instantly dry up, and all transaction business would go elsewhere. The job destruction would be enormous, and massive amounts of money would evaporate as markets get crushed.

To put this into perspective, Peter DeFazio, a democrat from Oregon, has tried on several occasions to get a transaction tax imposed. In fact, since 1991 he has introduced 180 bills on various topics, with 161 not making it out of committee, and only 10 enacted. So the odds of Comrade DeFazio getting this bill through is not good. But with the blame for much of what is happening to the economy going to Wall Street, there is much anger by the general, non-trading public. Reality doesn’t seem to matter. It is perception, however wrong it is, that counts. We are seeing the president trying to pit one class against another, and punish responsible people and reward those not so responsible. If you missed the Rick Santelli rant on this subject please click here to see video.

Nobody in their right mind, with even a rudimentary education in economics, would ever consider such a bill. But we are now in the age of Obama, where congress and the president just signed the largest porkulus bill in the nations history, that nobody even had the time to read or debate. The president said there was not one single earmark. He was right. There were many, many more than one. Passing such a bill would have seemed impossible a year ago. But it happened. Anything can happen. It is a new era. This government is just winging it. Going from one bad idea to another. The trader tax bill, which seems too ridiculous to even consider, could easily get lumped into another bill and slip through, like so much that got through the porkulus bill. And consider Obama’s extreme left leaning education and his early influences and political ties. He probably doesn’t understand the importance of stock and commodity markets. They don’t seem relevant in the kind of utopian society he envisions. I think we’ve seen the best of Obama’s talent and abilities. He ran a brilliant campaign and reads great prepared speeches. There is little more, I’m afraid. The subject of this post is the bill by DeFazio, and not anything Obama is implicated in – yet. But I think it is important to put the timing of the re-introduction of this idea in the current political and economic environment. Obama is now president and the country is leaning drastically and unfortunately to the extreme left. Socialists don’t regard trading financial instruments as necessary to the common good. Traders are not needed. They don’t produce anything other than liquidity, which is a concept too abstract for those in power to understand. They will probably look at the total dollar amount of transactions currently and calculate how much 0.25% of that is. What they don’t understand is that 0.25% of no activity will be very little revenue, as the amount of future activity with the new tax will be next to nothing as exchanges move out of the country. When revenue dries up, they’ll probably raise taxes even higher. They won’t know what happened. They’ll most likely figure out a way to blame Bush.

Do I really think this bill has a chance of getting anywhere? Not really. One thing to consider is that Wall Street, for some mysterious reason, supported Obama. I’m sure there are many now with buyer’s remorse. But I think it would be difficult for Obama to turn on Wall Street, and also to destroy the option and commodity markets in Chicago. I also think Clinton, Bloomberg, and many in the financial centers would sit Obama down and try to explain some simple economic principles to him regarding the functioning of the markets, and the extreme repercussions should this bill see the light of day. Hopefully he is smart enough to veto it if it should get that far.

[RULiquid]

I cannot underscore how devastating this bill would be to most of the people in the active retail (at-home) trading community, other bloggers, and other ‘average investors’ (through the law of unintended consequences) if this bill passes and it does wind up costing 0.25% to buy and sell (or just even on one side of the transaction).

As a hypothetical, If you traded a $100,000 account (full dollar value) each day and assume the 0.25% tax would be levied on one side of the transaction (say, the buy), then you would have to pay $250 per day in tax, which is $1,250 per week, or $5,000 per month… which is $60,000 per year.

I don’t even need to tell you how quickly that would put you out of business and end your retail trading career. You think you can make a 60% return on your $100,000 every year from here on out… just to break even?

Let’s make sure this doesn’t get signed into law.

Corey Rosenbloom
Afraid to Trade.com

[RULiquid]

"The body of the bill suggests that such a tax would have a negligible impact on the average investor. I beg to differ. For example, a $10,000 trade (or approximately 100 shares of stock in Apple, Inc.) would increase the cost... of a round trip transaction by $50. 100 shares is generally considered to be a minimum size for a trade, which would devastate any small business executing even a handful of similar trades each day."

"As someone who does engage in day trading from time to time as part of overall trading, I can say that this will have a large enough impact to dry liquidity up significantly. Without liquidity, markets will become more volatile and losses will become more severe. Many financial models involve risk hedging and the like in financial markets, and the consequences of interference here will be large (IMO)."

[RULiquid]

Recap (from www.traderfeed.blogspot.com):

The goal of this proposal is "To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to impose a tax on certain securities transactions to the extent required to recoup the net cost of the Troubled Asset Relief Program."

The bill indicates that "This Act may be cited as the ‘Let Wall Street Pay for Wall Street’s Bailout Act of 2009’". As many traders have pointed out, this is not at all a situation in which Wall Street would pay for its own bailout. Rather, ordinary traders who had nothing to do with the malfeasance associated with the securitization of questionable mortgages would be punished for the bailout of the offending organizations.

The bill explains that "This transfer tax would be on the sale and purchase of financial instruments such as stock, options, and futures. A quarter percent (0.25 percent) tax on financial transactions could raise approximately $150 billion a year." The net effect of taking 25 basis points out of every trade would be to put high frequency traders out of business and reduce the liquidity of markets. Capital would then flow out of the U.S. to exchanges that do not impose such taxes.

[RULiquid]

Recap (from www.traderfeed.blogspot.com):

The goal of this proposal is "To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to impose a tax on certain securities transactions to the extent required to recoup the net cost of the Troubled Asset Relief Program."

The bill indicates that "This Act may be cited as the ‘Let Wall Street Pay for Wall Street’s Bailout Act of 2009’". As many traders have pointed out, this is not at all a situation in which Wall Street would pay for its own bailout. Rather, ordinary traders who had nothing to do with the malfeasance associated with the securitization of questionable mortgages would be punished for the bailout of the offending organizations.

The bill explains that "This transfer tax would be on the sale and purchase of financial instruments such as stock, options, and futures. A quarter percent (0.25 percent) tax on financial transactions could raise approximately $150 billion a year." The net effect of taking 25 basis points out of every trade would be to put high frequency traders out of business and reduce the liquidity of markets. Capital would then flow out of the U.S. to exchanges that do not impose such taxes.

[RULiquid]

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-1068

[RULiquid]

Democrats push $150B stock tax on Wall Street
By Silla Brush - 11/24/09 12:05 PM ET

http://thehill.com//homenews/house/69295-dems-push-wall-street-150b-stock-tax

A House bill still being drafted aims to raise $150 billion each year to pay for new jobs.

Under a bill being drafted by Democratic Reps. Peter DeFazio (Ore.) and Ed Perlmutter (Colo.), the sale and purchase of financial instruments such as stocks, options, derivatives and futures would face a 0.25 percent tax.

The bill, a copy of which was obtained by The Hill, is titled the “Let Wall Street Pay for the Restoration of Main Street Act of 2009.”

Half of the $150 billion in tax revenue would go toward reducing the deficit, while the other half would be deposited in a “Job Creation Reserve” to support new jobs.

The job fund would be available to offset the additional costs of the 2009 highway bill and other legislation that creates jobs.

The Obama administration and congressional Democrats are looking for ways to create jobs after the nation’s unemployment rate hit 10.2 percent in October and job losses are expected to rise.

House leaders have mentioned the possibility of a tax on stock transactions, but House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) appeared to raise questions about the approach last week. Pelosi said such a move would need to be done in conjunction with efforts in other countries.

“Obviously, we have to work with leadership on this,” said Leslie Oliver, spokeswoman for Perlmutter. “It has a long way to go, but the idea is to stir debate … We think this is one idea that makes a lot of sense.”

The stock tax measure specifies that tax revenue would need to support jobs that pay at least the median wage in the United States, promotes manufacturing jobs and prohibits any recipient of the $700 billion financial bailout from directly benefiting from the job reserve fund.

The bill aims to exempt retirement accounts from the impact of the tax.

A group of consumer watchdog organizations and labor unions sent DeFazio a letter this week supporting the tax bill.

“Your bill would put Wall Street to work for the public good, by placing a modest securities transaction tax on trades of stocks, options and swaps. A tax on these trades has little impact on the average investor or pension fund because they hold their investments for the long term, but it does disincentivize Wall Street gambling and high-volume short-term speculative trading,” the organizations wrote.

The groups include: Americans for Financial Reform, Public Citizen, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the AFL-CIO, among others.

[RULiquid]

[RULiquid]

Trader Tax Controversy Video