Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Germany's "Robin Hood" €57billion tax on EU banks: do you agree with it?

  • 27-12-2011 11:20AM
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,420 ✭✭✭


    People are often saying why don't the banks pay more for this crisis which is largely of their own making. So now the Germans are proposing a €57 billion tax on financial institutions. It will tax trading in stocks, bonds and derivatives. Noonan said Ireland would be prepared to accept such a tax on condition that Britain did; otherwise Ireland would be at a disadvantage. Britain, alone in the EU, has rejected such an EU-wide tax claiming that the City of London would lose many of its financial corporations if it happens. The Germans are saying if they cannot get EU-wide support, they will try to have this tax for corporations based in the Eurozone only, something which would benefit Britain hugely and disadvantage Ireland.

    Are the Germans correct to promote such an EU-wide tax, or should the EU step back and avoid such taxes in case these financial institutions move outside the EU?






    Germany defiant on 'Robin Hood' tax:


    German finance minister Wolfgang Schaeuble vowed in an interview published today to push ahead for a financial transaction tax in the European Union in 2012 despite objections from Britain that it could harm London as a global financial centre.

    Mr Schaeuble also told Bild am Sonntag newspaper that Europe's sovereign debt crisis would not trigger a financial market crash in 2012.

    "I consider the situation to be controllable," Mr Schaeuble said referring to the prospects of collapsing markets. "In the EU there's a high degree of determination among the member states to stabilise the situation.

    "There will certainly be some surprises and bouts of excitement along the way but we're capable of managing the situation. I'd advise everyone to have a bit more serenity about it all."

    Mr Schaeuble (69) added he was confident that investor confidence in the euro zone would return despite all the turmoil related to the sovereign debt crisis in recent years.

    "Europe is one of the strongest economic regions in the world and investors want to put their money in places where they can earn profits," he said.

    But he added it was essential that highly indebted countries reduce their deficits and debts while improving their competitiveness. He said it was important that a European economic government needed to be established.

    Mr Schaeuble said Germany would continue pushing for a financial transaction tax. He said if it cannot be introduced in the EU as a whole then at least in the euro zone.

    "In the EU we've agreed to explore the chances of a financial transaction tax in the first months of the new year," he said. "If the hurdles are too high then Germany and France will push for introducing the tax only in the euro zone."

    The European Union's executive proposed a bloc-wide tax on financial transactions it said would raise €57 billion a year even though. Banks called the plan nonsense and Britain said it would only support a global levy.

    The EU's executive European Commission formally adopted plans in September for a financial transaction tax, which will need unanimous approval from EU states. Under the plan, stock and bond trades would be taxed at the rate of 0.1 per cent, with derivatives at 0.01 per cent.

    The EU executive said the tax would be imposed on all transactions in financial instruments between financial firms when at least one party to the trade is based in the bloc.

    Mr Schaeuble said he wanted to see the tax now.

    "I don't want to wait until such a tax is introduced worldwide. Otherwise we would risk not only the stability of our financial markets... but we would also be endangering the legitimacy in the public eye for the entire system.

    "That's why I'm fighting with such determination for a financial transaction tax. It might not be able to stop the ludicrous developments in financial markets but it would at least brake them a bit." Mr Schaeuble said he wanted the tax to slow down the pace of financial transactions and possibly make some speculative business unprofitable.

    "The markets are a bit too preoccupied with themselves these days rather than supporting the real economy," he said. "We've got to decelerate the pace of transactions." He said he wants to see Europe out in front with a financial transaction tax.

    "I'm very much in favour of Europe leading the way," he said. "That can possibly mean that certain speculative business models are no longer profitable. But that is what we want."

    Are the Germans right to propose a €57bn EU-wide tax on financial institutions? 65 votes

    Yes
    0%
    No
    100%
    Executive SteveDiscoStuAnnasopraMike 1972jimmycrackcormR0otA Dub in GlasgoFGRkollegeknightmelekalikimakaocallaghRoyalMarinech750536bikosdanseo[Deleted User]galwayrushGatorPrincess Consuela Bananahammockspank_inferno 65 votes


«13

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,318 ✭✭✭Fishooks12


    I'm no economist but would taxing the banks lead to these institutions being even more reluctant to provide financing and loans, thus stifling economic growth even more?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,420 ✭✭✭Dionysus


    No
    Fishooks12 wrote: »
    I'm no economist but would taxing the banks lead to these institutions being even more reluctant to provide financing and loans, thus stifling economic growth even more?

    Many of them are, surprisingly enough, back making massive profits. They're even declaring very good profits:

    €942m third quarter profits at Deutsche Bank (25 Oct 2011)

    €662m third quarter profit at Societe Generale (8 Nov 2011)

    HSBC profits of $11.5bn in first 6 months of 2011 (1 Aug 2011)


    Multi-million pound bonuses to bankers are now back in at least one country's financial institutions already:
    Banks and ABI to hold talks over 'out of control' bonuses


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,017 ✭✭✭Mike 1972


    No
    Id agree with it provided its not implemented on a "per transaction" basis which would only lead to it being passed onto customers in new/increased bank charges.
    Dionysus wrote: »
    Britain, alone in the EU, has rejected such an EU-wide tax claiming that the City of London would lose many of its financial corporations if it happens.
    How exactly would this happen if it applied to all 27 EU states equally ? More bloody Daily Mail (or possibly Daily Telegraph -given who its proprieters are) inspired shyte I reckon.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    I am just tired of frigging Germany and France shoving stuff down the throats of the people in Europe.
    Honestly, if Sarkosy or Merkel was stood in front of me, I wouldnt be my normal polite self.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,137 ✭✭✭44leto


    This is bad for us, you can kiss the Ifsc jobs of which there is a lot, goodbye. Also there is no-way Britain will forego its London city revenue so they can't sign this deal.

    There is unsure times ahead.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭padd b1975


    Biggins wrote: »
    I am just tired of frigging Germany and France shoving stuff down the throats of the people in Europe.
    Honestly, if Sarkosy or Merkel was stood in front of me, I wouldnt be my normal polite self.
    Sorry to be pedantic, but by the law of averages the French lad would be stood beneath you, unless he had his platforms on.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 43,305 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Fishooks12 wrote: »
    I'm no economist but would taxing the banks lead to these institutions being even more reluctant to provide financing and loans, thus stifling economic growth even more?

    I don't know, that one kind of reminds me of the arguments about new worker rights. Basically, they would say that, wouldn't they.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,137 ✭✭✭44leto


    K-9 wrote: »
    I don't know, that one kind of reminds me of the arguments about new worker rights. Basically, they would say that, wouldn't they.

    They would, but the reality of globalisation is banks can operate anywhere and they could move to a zone that does not impose this tax overnight.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,488 ✭✭✭Yahew


    No
    Mike 1972 wrote: »
    Id agree with it provided its not implemented on a "per transaction" basis which would only lead to it being passed onto customers in new/increased bank charges.


    How exactly would this happen if it applied to all 27 EU states equally ? More bloody Daily Mail (or possibly Daily Telegraph -given who its proprieters are) inspired shyte I reckon.

    presumably the idea is that the financial sector goes to America.
    44leto wrote: »
    This is bad for us, you can kiss the Ifsc jobs of which there is a lot, goodbye. Also there is no-way Britain will forego its London city revenue so they can't sign this deal.

    There is unsure times ahead.

    If the IFSC goes then houses become even cheaper. Great.
    Biggins wrote: »
    I am just tired of frigging Germany and France shoving stuff down the throats of the people in Europe.
    Honestly, if Sarkosy or Merkel was stood in front of me, I wouldnt be my normal polite self.

    Even if the idea is good.
    44leto wrote: »
    They would, but the reality of globalisation is banks can operate anywhere and they could move to a zone that does not impose this tax overnight.

    The thing is that Europe can always say that retail banks need to have financial sectors here.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,910 ✭✭✭✭padd b1975


    When is everyone going to realise that there are only 2 solutions to the euro crisis?
    1. Let it fail and deal with whatever problems that will bring.
    2. Print more money(issue euro bond) and deal with the high inflation that will bring.

    Anything else that has been suggested simply has not worked.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,255 ✭✭✭getz


    am i right in thinking that its wrong for other EU countries to have to pick up the tab to bail out the eurozones mismanagement of their eurozone club ?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,137 ✭✭✭44leto


    Yahew wrote: »
    presumably the idea is that the financial sector goes to America.
    India, China anywhere with a phone line, it doesn't matter



    If the IFSC goes then houses become even cheaper. Great.
    its about 20000 jobs and well paying jobs contributing to our tax revenue and our economy, its a big sector




    The thing is that Europe can always say that retail banks need to have financial sectors here.

    The IFSC are not retail banks, they are corporate and investment banks, they don't deal with the public. Also this will be the nail in the coffin of our beleaguered retail banks, all they could do is increase charges and raise interest rates. In the end this is a charge on the consumer.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,488 ✭✭✭Yahew


    No
    Thats always the excuse when corporations are taxed. Might as well say that corporation tax is a tax on the consumer. It proves, by the way, there is a cartel. Tax is just a cost of business, if they can all pass it on, then there is no real competition.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 490 ✭✭doomed


    No
    A lot of the work banks do serves no purpose to either business or the personal customer. Financial products become an end in themselves and just something else to bet on and to generate earnings. If you had some form of transaction tax it might depress some of the lunacy.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,373 ✭✭✭Executive Steve


    No
    It's definitely a step in the right direction.

    EU wide laws in the same spirit as the Glass-Steagall act would be a good move too (and America needs to follow suit there as well).


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    No
    Biggins wrote: »
    I am just tired of frigging Germany and France shoving stuff down the throats of the people in Europe.
    Honestly, if Sarkosy or Merkel was stood in front of me, I wouldnt be my normal polite self.

    Yeah, I mean look at the malignant Bastards having the nerve to reign in big business.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,970 ✭✭✭laoch na mona


    No
    bout time the pay for their mess


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,137 ✭✭✭44leto


    It's definitely a step in the right direction.

    EU wide laws in the same spirit as the Glass-Steagall act would be a good move too (and America needs to follow suit there as well).

    Europe wide means nothing these days, I don't know if you have heard of the internet and globalisation. Banks will just up sticks and move to a country that does not impose this tax. Then the consumer will follow.

    This act will just make New York, London, Shanghai more powerful and give them more control over our lives. Banking is to important a key industry, what Europe needs is more banks not less.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,816 ✭✭✭✭galwayrush


    No
    Will Bankers have their bonuses calculated before or after the tax?:rolleyes:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,369 ✭✭✭✭ejmaztec


    padd b1975 wrote: »
    Sorry to be pedantic, but by the law of averages the French lad would be stood beneath you, unless he had his platforms on.


    This how Sarkozy travels with Angela these days:o


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,446 ✭✭✭✭jesus_thats_gre


    Dionysus wrote: »
    Many of them are, surprisingly enough, back making massive profits. They're even declaring very good profits:

    €942m third quarter profits at Deutsche Bank (25 Oct 2011)

    €662m third quarter profit at Societe Generale (8 Nov 2011)

    They are nothing profits for banks of that size in fairness.

    Dionysus wrote: »

    This is a significant profit for a bank of that size though!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,779 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    No
    Biggins wrote: »
    I am just tired of frigging Germany and France shoving stuff down the throats of the people in Europe.
    Honestly, if Sarkosy or Merkel was stood in front of me, I wouldnt be my normal polite self.

    Is this before or afte the hand over the bail out money?

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 16,391 ✭✭✭✭mikom


    Ikky Poo2 wrote: »
    Is this before or afte the hand over the bail out money?

    Not a gift.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    padd b1975 wrote: »
    Sorry to be pedantic, but by the law of averages the French lad would be stood beneath you, unless he had his platforms on.

    ...Or climbed up his soap box again.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,255 ✭✭✭getz


    Ikky Poo2 wrote: »
    Is this before or afte the hand over the bail out money?
    i have a lovely metal wall sign from the 1940s,with two bulldogs looking over the english channel, with the words on it,what we have we hold,its just as true today as it was then,


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    Ikky Poo2 wrote: »
    Is this before or afte the hand over the bail out money?

    Before they turned up the pressure for heads in Dublin to take it!
    The public hasn't seen the bail out money as far as I can see - only the banks has.
    You know the ones that F&G (France & Germany) want to prop up so that any possible investment of their own, not goes down the tubes!

    They don't give a rats arse about us, just their own arse in the end - lets not kids ourselves.
    ...But still, we are going to pay - with interest!

    P.S.
    Another 1.25 BILLION is going to the banks in January 25th.
    Link


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 55 ✭✭donadoni


    No
    Biggins wrote: »
    Before they turned up the pressure for heads in Dublin to take it!
    The public hasn't seen the bail out money as far as I can see - only the banks has.
    You know the ones that F&G (France & Germany) want to prop up so that any possible investment of their own, not goes down the tubes!

    They don't give a rats arse about us, just their own arse in the end - lets not kids ourselves.
    ...But still, we are going to pay - with interest!

    P.S.
    Another 1.25 BILLION is going to the banks in January 25th.
    Link

    Thats interesting. So all the bail out money is going to the banks.
    I wonder where the money to pay nurses, doctors, fire fighters etc. is coming from right now?
    Furthermore, have you looked at the central bank figures to see whos investment is really going down the drain if the banks are not propped up?
    Have you ever wondered why Merkel was promoting bondholders to take a hit from the very start of this mess and why people like Timothy Geithner are strictly against it?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    No
    getz wrote: »
    i have a lovely metal wall sign from the 1940s,with two bulldogs looking over the english channel, with the words on it,what we have we hold,its just as true today as it was then,

    For fucks sake....


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    No
    44leto wrote: »
    Europe wide means nothing these days, I don't know if you have heard of the internet and globalisation. Banks will just up sticks and move to a country that does not impose this tax. Then the consumer will follow.

    This act will just make New York, London, Shanghai more powerful and give them more control over our lives. Banking is to important a key industry, what Europe needs is more banks not less.

    So they're going to avoid dealing with Europe entirely? I can see that working out allright.


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    donadoni wrote: »
    ...Have you ever wondered why Merkel was promoting bondholders to take a hit from the very start of this mess and why people like Timothy Geithner are strictly against it?

    Yes the BONDHOLDERS - not the banks!

    O' and she did a u-turn on that anyway!
    However, in a major climb-down, the German Chancellor said that the new bailout rules would not force losses on the bondholders that lend money to countries before they get into difficulty.

    In June last year when the permanent bailout mechanism was created, Germany insisted on the clause to include losses for bondholders in any bailout from 2013.

    This has now been dramatically withdrawn from the new deal to be announced on Friday.
    Source: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/business/business-news/merkels-eu-treaty-reform-climbdown-over-bondholders-losses-16087227.html
    I wonder where the money to pay nurses, doctors, fire fighters etc. is coming from right now?
    I would say that you and I is coughing up the vast bulk of it.
    More-so next year.
    have you looked at the central bank figures to see whos investment is really going down the drain if the banks are not propped up?
    I have and you know what, sometimes you have to try ones best doing your own thing and suffer the consequences.
    Its not as if we are not suffering already! Financially and in numbers vacating the country this year alone (70,000+ SOURCE).


Advertisement
Advertisement