European Financial Tax - they're havin' a larf

Really2

lemonjelly wrote: »

I suppose the issue will morph into something a lot bigger than just finance. In order to get support, countries appear to be having significant restrictions and/or sanctions imposed upon them. The worry, is who is controlling some of these restrictions & sanctions?

Basically it is turning in to the EU version of welfare payments. The ones that take the P!ss can do rather well out of it and everyone else foots the bill.

(note that is not knocking people on benefits, just those that play the system )

Thrugelmir

BlondeHeadOn wrote: »

Oh, okay - that makes more sense.

Does this smack a bit of "stitching up the Uk after they refused to join our euro club" ...?........

If you read the article.

A transaction tax would need the approval of the UK in order to be implemented across the EU.

The commission said that if the UK vetoed the tax, it would look to implement it in the eurozone.

So appears cannot be forced onto the UK.

nearlynew

This is what happens when liars and thieves are in charge.

MacMickster

Just another desperate idea to try to prop up the Euro experiment for a while longer.

I have no problem with us mirroring such a tax if it is introduced in the Eurozone, for a level playing field and all that, but the tax on UK transactions must go to the treasury - not to the EU.

Thrugelmir

MacMickster wrote: »

I have no problem with us mirroring such a tax if it is introduced in the Eurozone, for a level playing field and all that, but the tax on UK transactions must go to the treasury - not to the EU.

Banks already pay levies to the FSA. The cost of the Icelandic bailout is being paid for by mortgage borrowers.

FTBFun

nearlynew wrote: »

This is what happens when liars and thieves are in charge.

Isn't that your reason for everything though?

"It's a bit windy out, isn't it?"
"Yeah, that's them liars and thieves again".

nearlynew

FTBFun wrote: »

Isn't that your reason for everything though?

"It's a bit windy out, isn't it?"
"Yeah, that's them liars and thieves again".

No.

Wind is the movement of air due to pressure differentials.

Imposing arbitary, punitive taxes in a vain attempt to fix the economy and allowing snouts to remain in the trough is not.

IronWolf

Under the proposals, the financial tax would be levied at a rate of 0.1% on all transactions between institutions when at least one party is based in the EU. Derivative contracts would be taxed at a rate of 0.01%.


Cue financial institutions inventing a multitude of derivative contracts to replace actually transferring money. What muppet thought up this scheme, the UK better veto it.

And they go on to talk about the Eurobond. Seriously have they not learned their lesson yet, you can't trust countries to act in the collective good, some will just take the p*ss then come asking for bailouts.

michaels

Lots of times the UK in theory has a veto (remember the budget rebate which went some way to reduce the amount poorer Brits subsidised the richer French) and yet we end up having to negotiate it away cos the EU propose something dastardly over which we do not have a veto and then force us to give up the veto area in order to prevent the non-veto thing happening.

Thrugelmir wrote: »

If you read the article.



So appears cannot be forced onto the UK.

vivatifosi

The language in the article is very vague. What constitutes a "financial transaction" and what would they deem to be an "institution"? For example, if the pension fund I'm a trustee of wants to draw down some funds to pay its pensioners from its investments, wouldn't that be a financial transaction? Plus if the institution serving our pension incurs higher fees doesn't that mean they will pass on the cost to the schemes? Yeah. Great idea.