It is
my personal opinion that the only workable tax regime is some form of
flat transaction tax with natural offsetting to prevent double
paying. It needs to be applied to interest as well as fees but never
to capital. The same method also needs to be applied to incomes and
goods. With the same constraints thought out well. Importantly this
allows the income tax to be vacated.
In
this manner, increasing money velocity means a sharp increase in tax
revenue and a natural damper to inflation and bubble building.
However
I do not understand how these measures do anything in the short term
except to underwrite the present austerity drive. What is needed is
a restoration of consumer lending to produce an improving credit
environment. The cost of four years of contraction and credit
destruction is inevitably a decade of credit rebuilding to restore
economic health. It is no longer going to be that easy that way.
While
this is underway, it is necessary to underwrite a massive government
guaranteed capital rebuilding program. This will provide real
stimulation.
How Congress Could
Fix Its Budget Woes, Revisited: The Financial Transactions Tax
Alternative
Thursday, 21 February
2013 10:37By Jack Rasmus,
In a February 13
article at Truthout, economist Ellen Brown wrote "How Congress
Could Fix Its Budget Woes, Permanently." The essence of her
piece was a suggestion to engage in a quantitative easing (or "QE")
policy for households and consumers. To date, the Federal
Reserve, the US central bank, has pumped more than $3 trillion
directly into banks, speculators and other investors via its
three-plus QE programs since 2009. The result has been minimal
economic stimulus and growth, as banks have either sat on the cash,
invested it offshore, or loaned it to hedge funds and other
speculators, who have pumped up the stock and junk bond markets to
near-bubble levels. Brown argues for a populist form of QE for Main
Street which would jump start the real economy. Her point is, of
course, true. Central banks can pump all the supply of money they
want into the economy, but if the demand to hold cash (hoarding)
exceeds that supply injection, and if the velocity of money (how fast
it circulates) slows dramatically (which it has), then the negative
effects of both the demand for money and velocity of money more than
negate the injection of money by the central bank. So, Brown argues,
why not bypass the banks and investors hoarding or diverting the cash
they're given by QE and the Fed to date and inject money into the
economy directly?
Brown's argument is
economically sound but politically difficult to realize. One reason
is that monetary policy is perceived as so arcane that it is too easy
for bankers and their media talking heads to oppose a given proposal
and confuse the issue with the public. Another problem is that
monetary solutions typically have long lag times before they have an
effect, and the money doesn't always get to where it was intended to
end up.
So, here's another
approach that achieves the same results as the path Brown proposes
and is more comprehensible to the layperson and, therefore, likely to
gain broad public support and be more difficult for the banksters and
their friends to oppose.
I'm referring to a
more direct fiscal action - the financial transaction tax.
As this piece is being
written, a fight over the same financial transaction tax is raging in
the European Union. It is the best political and ideological, as well
as economic, tool with which to oppose the nonsense of austerity
deficit-cutting that has been ravaging the euro economies for four
years now. The result of austerity, euro style, has been an
inexorable march into chronic and deepening recession throughout the
Eurozone. Not only are virtually all the "euro-periphery"
economies - Greece, Spain, Portugal, et cetera -mired in a deep
recession that has characteristics of a bona fide depression, but the
core euro economies are now in recession as well. Germany in the
fourth quarter has officially registered a -0.6 percent GDP decline,
France a -0.3 percent GDP dip; the UK is in a triple-dip recession,
and so forth. Collectively, the EU is an economic region about
the size of the US economy, which itself recorded a -0.1 percent
decline in the fourth quarter.
On the other side of
the world, Japan just recorded its third consecutive quarter of
negative GDP and is now also experiencing its third recession since
2008. Its policymakers have recently responded by setting off a
global currency war that will further depress the global economy.
China's GDP growth is officially around 7.5 percent, down from the
10-12 percent range. Actually, however, it is really around 5
percent, given the way China manipulates its official GDP figures.
India, Brazil and other emerging economies are also slowing rapidly
or in recession. In short, the world economy is clearly on a slow but
inexorable downward trajectory at present that shows all the signs of
continuing - as is the US economy. Much of this downward trend can be
attributed to various forms of austerity programs.
Instead of
counterposing a "monetarist" approach, as Brown has
proposed, I would propose a people's "fiscal" approach in
the form of a robust financial transactions tax. Better to tax the
trillions of dollars wealthy investors and their corporations are
hoarding and keeping on the sidelines and for the government to
directly and immediately inject the tax revenue back into the
economy, where it has the biggest bank for the buck. That's where the
alternative idea of a financial transaction tax comes in.
A financial
transaction tax today is a growing reality, with significant momentum
underway for one right now in Europe. A report issued by the European
Commission, the European Union's executive arm, this week summarized
the financial tax proposed for the EU, noting that a mere 0.1 percent
tax on stock and bond trades plus a miniscule 0.01 percent tax on
derivative trades in just 11 countries in the EU would produce
annually roughly $47 billion in tax revenue from just the 11
economies. Those 11 regions represent an economic region about
two-thirds the size of the US economy. One might therefore assume the
larger European Union economy including the UK - together about the
size of the US economy in terms of GDP - might easily produce $75
billion a year from the extremely modest Euro Financial Transaction
Tax.
The EU financial tax
proposal is really miniscule at 0.1 percent for stocks and bond
trades and 0.01 percent for derivative trades. It is also limited to
stocks, bonds, and derivatives and leaves out other major financial
transactions, such as foreign exchange currency trades. It is
reasonable, therefore, to have a tax ten times that proposed in the
EU. After all, a financial transactions tax is just a sales tax, and
if consumers can pay 8-10 percent sales tax on purchases, so should
stock traders and speculators. That equivalent "sales tax"
would mean a still very modest 1 percent tax on stock and bond trades
and a 0.1 percent tax on derivative trades. Those 1 percent and 0.1
percent financial taxes produce an annual financial tax revenue of
$750 billion in the United States.
If the financial
transactions tax were also extended to speculative trades in foreign
exchange, the biggest speculative financial market on the globe in
terms of dollar value (worth trillions of dollars annually), the
combined result of this broad-based financial transactions tax - that
is, 1 percent on stocks and bonds, 0.1 percent on derivatives, and 1
percent on forex trades - would easily yield $1 trillion a year in
combined new tax revenue. That's $10 trillion over the coming decade
- which retires the entire run-up of around $10 trillion in the US
debt from 2001-2012 under Bush-Obama. In other words, one simple tax
would resolve not only annual US budget deficit issues, but also the
entire cumulative deficits since 2001 to date!
Tax the banksters is
something the general populace can get also their heads around more
easily than "QE for all." "Make the banksters pay"
should be the thrust of recovery programs - not deficit reduction, a
k a "austerity, American style," which is still the driving
policy force in Washington DC. A financial transaction tax frightens
banksters. That's why US banksters are becoming apoplectic about the
growing public support for a financial transactions tax in Europe.
For example, the Wall
Street Journal on February 14 declared in its lead article, "U.S.
Slams EU's Tax-on-Trades Plan." It is not just the banksters who
are seriously worried about a financial transactions tax; their good
friends in the US Treasury have weighed in now in support of the
banksters, slamming the Europeans' idea, declaring, "We do not
support the proposed European financial transactions tax ... because
it would harm US investors." That's a good sign of something
real happening.
As the Wall Street
Journal further noted, "The potential reach of proposed
[financial] taxes, and the speed at which they could spread, has
caught Wall Street off guard."
The banksters aren't
presently afraid of proposals for QE for Main Street. They know that
won't fly, or that their business talk show talking heads and
political friends in government can easily deflate and divert the
idea. But they are terrified of the idea of a financial transaction
tax because support could catch popular fire and spread rapidly - as
evident in the idea now taking hold in Europe.
So to summarize: Tax
the banksters and speculators with 1 percent on all stocks and bond
trades, 0.1 percent on all derivatives trades and 1 percent on all
foreign exchange trades - and thereby raise $1 trillion in new
revenue per year. Discontinue all the current nonsense about deficit
cutting and even about raising other forms of new tax revenue. All
that's needed is a real financial transactions tax. The banksters and
speculators aren't spending the $13 trillion they've been given by
the Federal Reserve since 2008 on jumpstarting the US economy,
anyway. Monetary policies don't work for anyone but the banksters.
So, let's tax the SOBs and all those speculators now pumping up the
stock and junk bond markets, creating the new financial bubbles of
tomorrow in stocks, junk bonds and derivatives, bubbles which will
inevitably lead to another financial crash well before the end of
this decade - a crash that will make 2007-2008 pale in comparison.
Just DO it.
ReplyDelete