Valzard
2021-02-23
so sad!
After the GameStop fiasco, momentum builds for an $800 billion tax<blockquote>游戏驿站惨败后，8000亿美元税收势头增强</blockquote>
免责声明：上述内容仅代表发帖人个人观点，不构成本平台的任何投资建议。
分享至
微信
复制链接
精彩评论
我们需要你的真知灼见来填补这片空白
打开APP，发表看法
APP内打开
发表看法
{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"detailType":1,"isChannel":false,"data":{"magic":2,"id":369587409,"tweetId":"369587409","gmtCreate":1614059782601,"gmtModify":1634551347540,"author":{"id":3575877197345409,"idStr":"3575877197345409","authorId":3575877197345409,"authorIdStr":"3575877197345409","name":"Valzard","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/26b5dd21038b5777aaaba5568d2ce70c","vip":1,"userType":1,"introduction":"","boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[],"fanSize":1,"starInvestorFlag":false},"themes":[],"images":[],"coverImages":[],"extraTitle":"","html":"<html><head></head><body><p>so sad!</p></body></html>","htmlText":"<html><head></head><body><p>so sad!</p></body></html>","text":"so sad!","highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"favoriteSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/369587409","repostId":1129494437,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1129494437","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1614048165,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1129494437?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-02-23 10:42","market":"us","language":"en","title":"After the GameStop fiasco, momentum builds for an $800 billion tax<blockquote>游戏驿站惨败后，8000亿美元税收势头增强</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1129494437","media":"CNN Business","summary":"New York (CNN Business)-Uncle Sam is in search for a pot of gold that could ease the pain of trillio","content":"<p><b>New York (CNN Business)-</b>Uncle Sam is in search for a pot of gold that could ease the pain of trillion-dollar deficits. And some believe Wall Street might just have the answer.</p><p><blockquote><b>纽约（CNN商业）——</b>山姆大叔正在寻找一桶金来缓解数万亿美元赤字的痛苦。一些人认为华尔街可能有答案。</blockquote></p><p> For more than a decade, progressives have tried and failed to impose a financial transaction tax.But there is new momentum for such a levy as the national debt skyrockets during the pandemic and in the wake of the GameStop trading frenzy that shined a bright light market structure concerns.</p><p><blockquote>十多年来，进步人士一直试图征收金融交易税，但都失败了。但随着疫情期间国债飙升以及游戏驿站交易狂潮引发市场结构担忧，此类征税出现了新的动力。</blockquote></p><p> The White House told CNN Business on Sunday that a financial transaction tax on GameStop-like trading deserves additional study and can be part of a greater evaluation of such a tax for revenue and market stability. The leading proposal amounts to a $1 tax on every $1,000 of transactions.</p><p><blockquote>白宫周日告诉CNN Business，对类似游戏驿站的交易征收金融交易税值得进一步研究，并且可以成为对此类税收的收入和市场稳定进行更大评估的一部分。主要提案相当于对每1000美元的交易征收1美元的税。</blockquote></p><p> But there is a deep divide over the wisdom of a financial transaction tax. Progressives see it as a smart way to simultaneously curb predatory trading while funding ambitious programs aimed at easing America's inequality problem.Opponents, on the other hand, paint a financial transaction tax (FTT) as a nightmare. Wall Street, which would take a hit, is already warning such a levy would backfire on Main Street by raising trading costs and depressing market liquidity.</p><p><blockquote>但对于金融交易税的明智性存在很大分歧。进步人士认为这是一种明智的方式，可以同时遏制掠夺性交易，同时为旨在缓解美国不平等问题的雄心勃勃的计划提供资金。另一方面，反对者将金融交易税（FTT）描绘成一场噩梦。将受到打击的华尔街已经警告称，此类征税将提高交易成本并抑制市场流动性，从而对大街产生适得其反的效果。</blockquote></p><p> \"The odds are still against a financial transaction tax being enacted, but for the first time in a decade this proposal should be considered as a viable policy option rather than just another talking point,\" said Isaac Boltansky, director of policy research at Compass Point Research & Trading.</p><p><blockquote>Compass Point政策研究总监艾萨克·博尔坦斯基(Isaac Boltansky)表示：“颁布金融交易税的可能性仍然很小，但十年来第一次，这项提案应该被视为一种可行的政策选择，而不仅仅是另一个话题。”研究与交易。</blockquote></p><p> Last week, House Financial Services Chairwoman Maxine Waters said she's \"very interested\" and \"certainly looking at\" a financial transaction tax.</p><p><blockquote>上周，众议院金融服务主席玛克辛·沃特斯表示，她“非常感兴趣”并且“肯定会考虑”金融交易税。</blockquote></p><p> <b>'Mindboggling' concentration of wealth</b></p><p><blockquote><b>“令人难以置信”的财富集中</b></blockquote></p><p> Lawmakers will surely be tempted to tax transactions because it could raise vast sums of money at a time when Washington is strapped for cash.</p><p><blockquote>立法者肯定会被诱惑对交易征税，因为在华盛顿现金短缺的时候，这可能会筹集巨额资金。</blockquote></p><p> A 0.1% tax on stock, bond and derivative transactions could raise $777 billion for the federal government over a decade, according to a 2018 estimate by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.</p><p><blockquote>根据无党派国会预算办公室2018年的估计，对股票、债券和衍生品交易征收0.1%的税可以在十年内为联邦政府筹集7770亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> \"We have tremendous income inequality in our society and a giant deficit. A financial transaction tax would be an incredibly efficient and progressive way to raise revenue,\" Aaron Klein, a former Treasury Department official in the Obama administration, told CNN Business.</p><p><blockquote>奥巴马政府前财政部官员亚伦·克莱因(Aaron Klein)告诉CNN Business：“我们的社会存在巨大的收入不平等和巨额赤字。金融交易税将是一种非常有效和渐进的增加收入的方式。”</blockquote></p><p> The top 1% of American households would pay 40% of the total amount of the tax, while the bottom 60% would pay just over 11%, according to the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center.</p><p><blockquote>根据Urban-Brookings税收政策中心的数据，收入最高的1%的美国家庭将支付总额的40%，而收入最低的60%的家庭将支付略高于11%的税收。</blockquote></p><p> That makes sense because the wealthiest 10% of US households owned 87% of all stocks and mutual funds, according to 2020 data from the Federal Reserve.</p><p><blockquote>这是有道理的，因为根据美联储2020年的数据，美国最富有的10%家庭拥有87%的股票和共同基金。</blockquote></p><p> \"The concentration of wealth in the stock market is mindboggling,\" said Klein, who is now a senior fellow of economic studies at the Brookings Institution.</p><p><blockquote>“财富集中在股市令人难以置信，”现任布鲁金斯学会经济研究高级研究员的克莱因说。</blockquote></p><p> Even though some argue an FTT would be a disaster, the United States already has a tax, albeit a very tiny one. Roughly 2 cents per $1,000 traded goes toward funding the budget of the Securities and Exchange Commission.Due to surging trading volume during the pandemic, the tax rate to fund the SEC is being lowered to just half a cent per $1,000 starting Thursday.</p><p><blockquote>尽管有些人认为FTT将是一场灾难，但美国已经有了一项税收，尽管规模很小。每1,000美元的交易中大约有2美分用于资助美国证券交易委员会的预算。由于疫情期间交易量激增，从周四开始，为SEC提供资金的税率将降至每1,000美元仅半美分。</blockquote></p><p> \"There is a fee today and the world hasn't ended,\" said Dennis Kelleher, CEO of Better Markets, a group that lobbies for tougher oversight of Wall Street. \"The proposed fee is so puny that no reasonable retail investor would ever notice it.\"</p><p><blockquote>“今天有费用，世界还没有终结，”Better Markets首席执行官丹尼斯·凯莱赫(Dennis Kelleher)表示，该组织游说对华尔街进行更严格的监管。“拟议的费用如此之低，以至于任何理性的散户投资者都不会注意到它。”</blockquote></p><p> <b>'Unintended consequences'</b></p><p><blockquote><b>“意想不到的后果”</b></blockquote></p><p> The financial industry is arguing the exact opposite.</p><p><blockquote>金融业的观点恰恰相反。</blockquote></p><p> They say even a 0.1% levy on transactions will cause market players to pass the costs on to consumers and make it harder to buy and sell securities by decreasing liquidity, which measures how easy it is to buy and sell securities. Some Wall Street firms could even try to move their operations outside the country to avoid the tax. The New York Stock Exchange recently threatened to flee New York,possibly for Texas, in response to transaction taxes mulled by Albany.</p><p><blockquote>他们表示，即使对交易征收0.1%的税，也会导致市场参与者将成本转嫁给消费者，并通过减少流动性（衡量买卖证券的难易程度）来增加买卖证券的难度。一些华尔街公司甚至可能试图将业务转移到国外以避税。纽约证券交易所最近威胁要逃离纽约，可能前往德克萨斯州，以回应奥尔巴尼考虑的交易税。</blockquote></p><p> \"This approach has a long history of unintended consequences that will penalize workers, pensioners and American families,\" a spokesperson for the Coalition to Prevent the Taxing of Retirement Savings told CNN Business.</p><p><blockquote>防止退休储蓄征税联盟的一位发言人告诉美国有线电视新闻网商业频道：“这种做法长期以来一直会产生意想不到的后果，这将惩罚工人、养老金领取者和美国家庭。”</blockquote></p><p> That coalition includes the NYSE,Nasdaq (NDAQ) and UBS (UBS). Citadel Securities andVirtu Financial(VIRT), two high-speed trading firms that would be hurt by a financial transaction tax, are also members.</p><p><blockquote>该联盟包括纽约证券交易所、纳斯达克(NDAQ)和瑞银(UBS)。Citadel Securities和Virtu Financial(VIRT)这两家将受到金融交易税损害的高速交易公司也是会员。</blockquote></p><p> \"An FTT will increase trading costs for investors — including individuals — undermine the competitiveness of our capital markets and harm the US economy just as we work to recover from this pandemic,\" the spokesperson said.</p><p><blockquote>该发言人表示：“FTT将增加包括个人在内的投资者的交易成本，削弱我们资本市场的竞争力，并在我们努力从这场大流行中复苏之际损害美国经济。”</blockquote></p><p> <b>Some countries tried and failed</b></p><p><blockquote><b>一些国家尝试过，但失败了</b></blockquote></p><p></p><p> James Angel, a Georgetown University professor who specializes in market structure and regulation,authored a Chamber of Commerce-funded paper in 2019 that found a financial transaction tax would hurt Main Street by driving up the cost of trading by more than the amount of the tax.</p><p><blockquote>专门研究市场结构和监管的乔治敦大学教授詹姆斯·安吉尔(James Angel)在2019年撰写了一篇由商会资助的论文，该论文发现金融交易税会使交易成本上升超过税额，从而损害大街。</blockquote></p><p> \"There is no such thing as a tiny tax that raises big revenue,\" Angel said in an interview.</p><p><blockquote>安吉尔在接受采访时表示：“没有所谓的小额税收可以增加巨额收入。”</blockquote></p><p> He pointed to how some other countries, most notably Sweden in the 1980s, abandoned such taxes after trading volume vanished and revenue underwhelmed. (Of course, the United States, with its deep financial markets, massive economy and the world's reserve currency, is not Sweden.)</p><p><blockquote>他指出，其他一些国家，尤其是20世纪80年代的瑞典，在交易量消失、收入低迷后，如何放弃此类税收。（当然，拥有深厚金融市场、庞大经济和世界储备货币的美国不是瑞典。）</blockquote></p><p> \"It really messes up the market,\" Angel said.</p><p><blockquote>“这确实扰乱了市场，”安吉尔说。</blockquote></p><p> If US trading volumes fell sharply, the FTT wouldn't raise nearly as much as the $777 billion the CBO estimates.</p><p><blockquote>如果美国交易量大幅下降，FTT筹集的资金将不会达到CBO估计的7770亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> Greg Valliere, chief US policy strategist at AGF Investments, said the chances of a financial transaction tax are \"very slim\" because moderate Democrats would be unlikely to back it.</p><p><blockquote>AGF Investments首席美国政策策略师Greg Valliere表示，征收金融交易税的可能性“非常小”，因为温和的民主党人不太可能支持它。</blockquote></p><p> \"It would be a disaster. It's a pandora's box that should not be opened,\" Valliere said.</p><p><blockquote>“这将是一场灾难。这是一个潘多拉的盒子，不应该被打开，”瓦利埃说。</blockquote></p><p> Of course, it's possible that FTT proposals in Congress get scaled back, including by lowering the rate or excluding smaller blocks of trades.</p><p><blockquote>当然，国会的FTT提案可能会被缩减，包括降低利率或排除较小的交易。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Leveling the playing field</b></p><p><blockquote><b>公平竞争环境</b></blockquote></p><p> During last week's congressional hearing on GameStop and Robinhood, Citadel Securities founder Ken Griffin warned a tax would boomerang.</p><p><blockquote>在上周关于游戏驿站和Robinhood的国会听证会上，Citadel Securities创始人Ken Griffin警告称，征税将适得其反。</blockquote></p><p> \"We firmly believe a financial transaction tax would injure Americans trying to save for retirement,\" Griffin said.</p><p><blockquote>格里芬说：“我们坚信金融交易税会伤害试图为退休储蓄的美国人。”</blockquote></p><p> Klein, the Brookings Institution fellow, called Griffin's comments a \"self-serving lie\" because high-frequency trading firms like his would be among those hurt.</p><p><blockquote>布鲁金斯学会研究员克莱因称格里芬的言论是“自私的谎言”，因为像他这样的高频交易公司也会受到伤害。</blockquote></p><p> The GameStop trading frenzy drew attention onto how Robinhood was able to bring zero-commission trading to the masses.</p><p><blockquote>游戏驿站交易狂潮引起了人们对Robinhood如何将零佣金交易带给大众的关注。</blockquote></p><p> Through a controversial practice known as payment for order flow, Robinhood and other brokers get paid to route retail trades through market makers like Citadel Securities.</p><p><blockquote>通过一种被称为订单流支付的有争议的做法，Robinhood和其他经纪商通过Citadel Securities等做市商进行零售交易获得报酬。</blockquote></p><p> Payment for order flow has made it cheap and easy to trade. However, critics say it's really Wall Street that is getting the better end of the deal by skimming pennies off each trade and racing ahead of retail orders to make a profit.</p><p><blockquote>订单流的支付使得交易变得便宜和容易。然而，批评人士表示，华尔街确实通过从每笔交易中榨取几分钱并抢先零售订单来获利，从而获得了更好的结果。</blockquote></p><p> \"We believe the markets today are rigged to favor high-frequency traders,\" said Kelleher, the Better Markets CEO. \"The industry has taken visible upfront commission fees and disguised it into invisible payment for order flow.\"</p><p><blockquote>Better Markets首席执行官凯莱赫表示：“我们认为，当今的市场受到操纵，有利于高频交易者。”“行业将看得见的前期佣金费用，伪装成订单流的隐形支付。”</blockquote></p><p> In other words, it's not really free to trade.</p><p><blockquote>换句话说，它并不是真正的自由交易。</blockquote></p><p> Kelleher thinks Congress should focus on taxing orders, not transactions, because a staggering amount of all stock trade orders(some estimates say 99%) are canceled because of high-frequency trading strategies. Critics say those orders are evidence that high-speed traders are manipulating the market by creating the appearance of demand where there is none.</p><p><blockquote>凯莱赫认为国会应该专注于对订单征税，而不是对交易征税，因为所有股票交易订单中有惊人数量（有人估计为99%）因高频交易策略而被取消。批评人士表示，这些订单证明高速交易者正在操纵市场，在没有需求的情况下制造需求的表象。</blockquote></p><p> \"A financial fee on orders could be the death knell for predatory high frequency trading,\" he said. \"Everyone will be better off — except for the predators.\"</p><p><blockquote>“订单的财务费用可能是掠夺性高频交易的丧钟，”他说。“每个人都会过得更好——除了掠食者。”</blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>After the GameStop fiasco, momentum builds for an $800 billion tax<blockquote>游戏驿站惨败后，8000亿美元税收势头增强</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nAfter the GameStop fiasco, momentum builds for an $800 billion tax<blockquote>游戏驿站惨败后，8000亿美元税收势头增强</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">CNN Business</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-02-23 10:42</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>New York (CNN Business)-</b>Uncle Sam is in search for a pot of gold that could ease the pain of trillion-dollar deficits. And some believe Wall Street might just have the answer.</p><p><blockquote><b>纽约（CNN商业）——</b>山姆大叔正在寻找一桶金来缓解数万亿美元赤字的痛苦。一些人认为华尔街可能有答案。</blockquote></p><p> For more than a decade, progressives have tried and failed to impose a financial transaction tax.But there is new momentum for such a levy as the national debt skyrockets during the pandemic and in the wake of the GameStop trading frenzy that shined a bright light market structure concerns.</p><p><blockquote>十多年来，进步人士一直试图征收金融交易税，但都失败了。但随着疫情期间国债飙升以及游戏驿站交易狂潮引发市场结构担忧，此类征税出现了新的动力。</blockquote></p><p> The White House told CNN Business on Sunday that a financial transaction tax on GameStop-like trading deserves additional study and can be part of a greater evaluation of such a tax for revenue and market stability. The leading proposal amounts to a $1 tax on every $1,000 of transactions.</p><p><blockquote>白宫周日告诉CNN Business，对类似游戏驿站的交易征收金融交易税值得进一步研究，并且可以成为对此类税收的收入和市场稳定进行更大评估的一部分。主要提案相当于对每1000美元的交易征收1美元的税。</blockquote></p><p> But there is a deep divide over the wisdom of a financial transaction tax. Progressives see it as a smart way to simultaneously curb predatory trading while funding ambitious programs aimed at easing America's inequality problem.Opponents, on the other hand, paint a financial transaction tax (FTT) as a nightmare. Wall Street, which would take a hit, is already warning such a levy would backfire on Main Street by raising trading costs and depressing market liquidity.</p><p><blockquote>但对于金融交易税的明智性存在很大分歧。进步人士认为这是一种明智的方式，可以同时遏制掠夺性交易，同时为旨在缓解美国不平等问题的雄心勃勃的计划提供资金。另一方面，反对者将金融交易税（FTT）描绘成一场噩梦。将受到打击的华尔街已经警告称，此类征税将提高交易成本并抑制市场流动性，从而对大街产生适得其反的效果。</blockquote></p><p> \"The odds are still against a financial transaction tax being enacted, but for the first time in a decade this proposal should be considered as a viable policy option rather than just another talking point,\" said Isaac Boltansky, director of policy research at Compass Point Research & Trading.</p><p><blockquote>Compass Point政策研究总监艾萨克·博尔坦斯基(Isaac Boltansky)表示：“颁布金融交易税的可能性仍然很小，但十年来第一次，这项提案应该被视为一种可行的政策选择，而不仅仅是另一个话题。”研究与交易。</blockquote></p><p> Last week, House Financial Services Chairwoman Maxine Waters said she's \"very interested\" and \"certainly looking at\" a financial transaction tax.</p><p><blockquote>上周，众议院金融服务主席玛克辛·沃特斯表示，她“非常感兴趣”并且“肯定会考虑”金融交易税。</blockquote></p><p> <b>'Mindboggling' concentration of wealth</b></p><p><blockquote><b>“令人难以置信”的财富集中</b></blockquote></p><p> Lawmakers will surely be tempted to tax transactions because it could raise vast sums of money at a time when Washington is strapped for cash.</p><p><blockquote>立法者肯定会被诱惑对交易征税，因为在华盛顿现金短缺的时候，这可能会筹集巨额资金。</blockquote></p><p> A 0.1% tax on stock, bond and derivative transactions could raise $777 billion for the federal government over a decade, according to a 2018 estimate by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.</p><p><blockquote>根据无党派国会预算办公室2018年的估计，对股票、债券和衍生品交易征收0.1%的税可以在十年内为联邦政府筹集7770亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> \"We have tremendous income inequality in our society and a giant deficit. A financial transaction tax would be an incredibly efficient and progressive way to raise revenue,\" Aaron Klein, a former Treasury Department official in the Obama administration, told CNN Business.</p><p><blockquote>奥巴马政府前财政部官员亚伦·克莱因(Aaron Klein)告诉CNN Business：“我们的社会存在巨大的收入不平等和巨额赤字。金融交易税将是一种非常有效和渐进的增加收入的方式。”</blockquote></p><p> The top 1% of American households would pay 40% of the total amount of the tax, while the bottom 60% would pay just over 11%, according to the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center.</p><p><blockquote>根据Urban-Brookings税收政策中心的数据，收入最高的1%的美国家庭将支付总额的40%，而收入最低的60%的家庭将支付略高于11%的税收。</blockquote></p><p> That makes sense because the wealthiest 10% of US households owned 87% of all stocks and mutual funds, according to 2020 data from the Federal Reserve.</p><p><blockquote>这是有道理的，因为根据美联储2020年的数据，美国最富有的10%家庭拥有87%的股票和共同基金。</blockquote></p><p> \"The concentration of wealth in the stock market is mindboggling,\" said Klein, who is now a senior fellow of economic studies at the Brookings Institution.</p><p><blockquote>“财富集中在股市令人难以置信，”现任布鲁金斯学会经济研究高级研究员的克莱因说。</blockquote></p><p> Even though some argue an FTT would be a disaster, the United States already has a tax, albeit a very tiny one. Roughly 2 cents per $1,000 traded goes toward funding the budget of the Securities and Exchange Commission.Due to surging trading volume during the pandemic, the tax rate to fund the SEC is being lowered to just half a cent per $1,000 starting Thursday.</p><p><blockquote>尽管有些人认为FTT将是一场灾难，但美国已经有了一项税收，尽管规模很小。每1,000美元的交易中大约有2美分用于资助美国证券交易委员会的预算。由于疫情期间交易量激增，从周四开始，为SEC提供资金的税率将降至每1,000美元仅半美分。</blockquote></p><p> \"There is a fee today and the world hasn't ended,\" said Dennis Kelleher, CEO of Better Markets, a group that lobbies for tougher oversight of Wall Street. \"The proposed fee is so puny that no reasonable retail investor would ever notice it.\"</p><p><blockquote>“今天有费用，世界还没有终结，”Better Markets首席执行官丹尼斯·凯莱赫(Dennis Kelleher)表示，该组织游说对华尔街进行更严格的监管。“拟议的费用如此之低，以至于任何理性的散户投资者都不会注意到它。”</blockquote></p><p> <b>'Unintended consequences'</b></p><p><blockquote><b>“意想不到的后果”</b></blockquote></p><p> The financial industry is arguing the exact opposite.</p><p><blockquote>金融业的观点恰恰相反。</blockquote></p><p> They say even a 0.1% levy on transactions will cause market players to pass the costs on to consumers and make it harder to buy and sell securities by decreasing liquidity, which measures how easy it is to buy and sell securities. Some Wall Street firms could even try to move their operations outside the country to avoid the tax. The New York Stock Exchange recently threatened to flee New York,possibly for Texas, in response to transaction taxes mulled by Albany.</p><p><blockquote>他们表示，即使对交易征收0.1%的税，也会导致市场参与者将成本转嫁给消费者，并通过减少流动性（衡量买卖证券的难易程度）来增加买卖证券的难度。一些华尔街公司甚至可能试图将业务转移到国外以避税。纽约证券交易所最近威胁要逃离纽约，可能前往德克萨斯州，以回应奥尔巴尼考虑的交易税。</blockquote></p><p> \"This approach has a long history of unintended consequences that will penalize workers, pensioners and American families,\" a spokesperson for the Coalition to Prevent the Taxing of Retirement Savings told CNN Business.</p><p><blockquote>防止退休储蓄征税联盟的一位发言人告诉美国有线电视新闻网商业频道：“这种做法长期以来一直会产生意想不到的后果，这将惩罚工人、养老金领取者和美国家庭。”</blockquote></p><p> That coalition includes the NYSE,Nasdaq (NDAQ) and UBS (UBS). Citadel Securities andVirtu Financial(VIRT), two high-speed trading firms that would be hurt by a financial transaction tax, are also members.</p><p><blockquote>该联盟包括纽约证券交易所、纳斯达克(NDAQ)和瑞银(UBS)。Citadel Securities和Virtu Financial(VIRT)这两家将受到金融交易税损害的高速交易公司也是会员。</blockquote></p><p> \"An FTT will increase trading costs for investors — including individuals — undermine the competitiveness of our capital markets and harm the US economy just as we work to recover from this pandemic,\" the spokesperson said.</p><p><blockquote>该发言人表示：“FTT将增加包括个人在内的投资者的交易成本，削弱我们资本市场的竞争力，并在我们努力从这场大流行中复苏之际损害美国经济。”</blockquote></p><p> <b>Some countries tried and failed</b></p><p><blockquote><b>一些国家尝试过，但失败了</b></blockquote></p><p></p><p> James Angel, a Georgetown University professor who specializes in market structure and regulation,authored a Chamber of Commerce-funded paper in 2019 that found a financial transaction tax would hurt Main Street by driving up the cost of trading by more than the amount of the tax.</p><p><blockquote>专门研究市场结构和监管的乔治敦大学教授詹姆斯·安吉尔(James Angel)在2019年撰写了一篇由商会资助的论文，该论文发现金融交易税会使交易成本上升超过税额，从而损害大街。</blockquote></p><p> \"There is no such thing as a tiny tax that raises big revenue,\" Angel said in an interview.</p><p><blockquote>安吉尔在接受采访时表示：“没有所谓的小额税收可以增加巨额收入。”</blockquote></p><p> He pointed to how some other countries, most notably Sweden in the 1980s, abandoned such taxes after trading volume vanished and revenue underwhelmed. (Of course, the United States, with its deep financial markets, massive economy and the world's reserve currency, is not Sweden.)</p><p><blockquote>他指出，其他一些国家，尤其是20世纪80年代的瑞典，在交易量消失、收入低迷后，如何放弃此类税收。（当然，拥有深厚金融市场、庞大经济和世界储备货币的美国不是瑞典。）</blockquote></p><p> \"It really messes up the market,\" Angel said.</p><p><blockquote>“这确实扰乱了市场，”安吉尔说。</blockquote></p><p> If US trading volumes fell sharply, the FTT wouldn't raise nearly as much as the $777 billion the CBO estimates.</p><p><blockquote>如果美国交易量大幅下降，FTT筹集的资金将不会达到CBO估计的7770亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> Greg Valliere, chief US policy strategist at AGF Investments, said the chances of a financial transaction tax are \"very slim\" because moderate Democrats would be unlikely to back it.</p><p><blockquote>AGF Investments首席美国政策策略师Greg Valliere表示，征收金融交易税的可能性“非常小”，因为温和的民主党人不太可能支持它。</blockquote></p><p> \"It would be a disaster. It's a pandora's box that should not be opened,\" Valliere said.</p><p><blockquote>“这将是一场灾难。这是一个潘多拉的盒子，不应该被打开，”瓦利埃说。</blockquote></p><p> Of course, it's possible that FTT proposals in Congress get scaled back, including by lowering the rate or excluding smaller blocks of trades.</p><p><blockquote>当然，国会的FTT提案可能会被缩减，包括降低利率或排除较小的交易。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Leveling the playing field</b></p><p><blockquote><b>公平竞争环境</b></blockquote></p><p> During last week's congressional hearing on GameStop and Robinhood, Citadel Securities founder Ken Griffin warned a tax would boomerang.</p><p><blockquote>在上周关于游戏驿站和Robinhood的国会听证会上，Citadel Securities创始人Ken Griffin警告称，征税将适得其反。</blockquote></p><p> \"We firmly believe a financial transaction tax would injure Americans trying to save for retirement,\" Griffin said.</p><p><blockquote>格里芬说：“我们坚信金融交易税会伤害试图为退休储蓄的美国人。”</blockquote></p><p> Klein, the Brookings Institution fellow, called Griffin's comments a \"self-serving lie\" because high-frequency trading firms like his would be among those hurt.</p><p><blockquote>布鲁金斯学会研究员克莱因称格里芬的言论是“自私的谎言”，因为像他这样的高频交易公司也会受到伤害。</blockquote></p><p> The GameStop trading frenzy drew attention onto how Robinhood was able to bring zero-commission trading to the masses.</p><p><blockquote>游戏驿站交易狂潮引起了人们对Robinhood如何将零佣金交易带给大众的关注。</blockquote></p><p> Through a controversial practice known as payment for order flow, Robinhood and other brokers get paid to route retail trades through market makers like Citadel Securities.</p><p><blockquote>通过一种被称为订单流支付的有争议的做法，Robinhood和其他经纪商通过Citadel Securities等做市商进行零售交易获得报酬。</blockquote></p><p> Payment for order flow has made it cheap and easy to trade. However, critics say it's really Wall Street that is getting the better end of the deal by skimming pennies off each trade and racing ahead of retail orders to make a profit.</p><p><blockquote>订单流的支付使得交易变得便宜和容易。然而，批评人士表示，华尔街确实通过从每笔交易中榨取几分钱并抢先零售订单来获利，从而获得了更好的结果。</blockquote></p><p> \"We believe the markets today are rigged to favor high-frequency traders,\" said Kelleher, the Better Markets CEO. \"The industry has taken visible upfront commission fees and disguised it into invisible payment for order flow.\"</p><p><blockquote>Better Markets首席执行官凯莱赫表示：“我们认为，当今的市场受到操纵，有利于高频交易者。”“行业将看得见的前期佣金费用，伪装成订单流的隐形支付。”</blockquote></p><p> In other words, it's not really free to trade.</p><p><blockquote>换句话说，它并不是真正的自由交易。</blockquote></p><p> Kelleher thinks Congress should focus on taxing orders, not transactions, because a staggering amount of all stock trade orders(some estimates say 99%) are canceled because of high-frequency trading strategies. Critics say those orders are evidence that high-speed traders are manipulating the market by creating the appearance of demand where there is none.</p><p><blockquote>凯莱赫认为国会应该专注于对订单征税，而不是对交易征税，因为所有股票交易订单中有惊人数量（有人估计为99%）因高频交易策略而被取消。批评人士表示，这些订单证明高速交易者正在操纵市场，在没有需求的情况下制造需求的表象。</blockquote></p><p> \"A financial fee on orders could be the death knell for predatory high frequency trading,\" he said. \"Everyone will be better off — except for the predators.\"</p><p><blockquote>“订单的财务费用可能是掠夺性高频交易的丧钟，”他说。“每个人都会过得更好——除了掠食者。”</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/22/investing/gamestop-financial-transaction-tax/index.html\">CNN Business</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯","GME":"游戏驿站",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/22/investing/gamestop-financial-transaction-tax/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1129494437","content_text":"New York (CNN Business)-Uncle Sam is in search for a pot of gold that could ease the pain of trillion-dollar deficits. And some believe Wall Street might just have the answer.\nFor more than a decade, progressives have tried and failed to impose a financial transaction tax.But there is new momentum for such a levy as the national debt skyrockets during the pandemic and in the wake of the GameStop trading frenzy that shined a bright light market structure concerns.\nThe White House told CNN Business on Sunday that a financial transaction tax on GameStop-like trading deserves additional study and can be part of a greater evaluation of such a tax for revenue and market stability. The leading proposal amounts to a $1 tax on every $1,000 of transactions.\nBut there is a deep divide over the wisdom of a financial transaction tax. Progressives see it as a smart way to simultaneously curb predatory trading while funding ambitious programs aimed at easing America's inequality problem.Opponents, on the other hand, paint a financial transaction tax (FTT) as a nightmare. Wall Street, which would take a hit, is already warning such a levy would backfire on Main Street by raising trading costs and depressing market liquidity.\n\"The odds are still against a financial transaction tax being enacted, but for the first time in a decade this proposal should be considered as a viable policy option rather than just another talking point,\" said Isaac Boltansky, director of policy research at Compass Point Research & Trading.\nLast week, House Financial Services Chairwoman Maxine Waters said she's \"very interested\" and \"certainly looking at\" a financial transaction tax.\n'Mindboggling' concentration of wealth\nLawmakers will surely be tempted to tax transactions because it could raise vast sums of money at a time when Washington is strapped for cash.\nA 0.1% tax on stock, bond and derivative transactions could raise $777 billion for the federal government over a decade, according to a 2018 estimate by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.\n\"We have tremendous income inequality in our society and a giant deficit. A financial transaction tax would be an incredibly efficient and progressive way to raise revenue,\" Aaron Klein, a former Treasury Department official in the Obama administration, told CNN Business.\nThe top 1% of American households would pay 40% of the total amount of the tax, while the bottom 60% would pay just over 11%, according to the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center.\nThat makes sense because the wealthiest 10% of US households owned 87% of all stocks and mutual funds, according to 2020 data from the Federal Reserve.\n\"The concentration of wealth in the stock market is mindboggling,\" said Klein, who is now a senior fellow of economic studies at the Brookings Institution.\nEven though some argue an FTT would be a disaster, the United States already has a tax, albeit a very tiny one. Roughly 2 cents per $1,000 traded goes toward funding the budget of the Securities and Exchange Commission.Due to surging trading volume during the pandemic, the tax rate to fund the SEC is being lowered to just half a cent per $1,000 starting Thursday.\n\"There is a fee today and the world hasn't ended,\" said Dennis Kelleher, CEO of Better Markets, a group that lobbies for tougher oversight of Wall Street. \"The proposed fee is so puny that no reasonable retail investor would ever notice it.\"\n'Unintended consequences'\nThe financial industry is arguing the exact opposite.\nThey say even a 0.1% levy on transactions will cause market players to pass the costs on to consumers and make it harder to buy and sell securities by decreasing liquidity, which measures how easy it is to buy and sell securities. Some Wall Street firms could even try to move their operations outside the country to avoid the tax. The New York Stock Exchange recently threatened to flee New York,possibly for Texas, in response to transaction taxes mulled by Albany.\n\"This approach has a long history of unintended consequences that will penalize workers, pensioners and American families,\" a spokesperson for the Coalition to Prevent the Taxing of Retirement Savings told CNN Business.\nThat coalition includes the NYSE,Nasdaq (NDAQ) and UBS (UBS). Citadel Securities andVirtu Financial(VIRT), two high-speed trading firms that would be hurt by a financial transaction tax, are also members.\n\"An FTT will increase trading costs for investors — including individuals — undermine the competitiveness of our capital markets and harm the US economy just as we work to recover from this pandemic,\" the spokesperson said.\nSome countries tried and failed\nJames Angel, a Georgetown University professor who specializes in market structure and regulation,authored a Chamber of Commerce-funded paper in 2019 that found a financial transaction tax would hurt Main Street by driving up the cost of trading by more than the amount of the tax.\n\"There is no such thing as a tiny tax that raises big revenue,\" Angel said in an interview.\nHe pointed to how some other countries, most notably Sweden in the 1980s, abandoned such taxes after trading volume vanished and revenue underwhelmed. (Of course, the United States, with its deep financial markets, massive economy and the world's reserve currency, is not Sweden.)\n\"It really messes up the market,\" Angel said.\nIf US trading volumes fell sharply, the FTT wouldn't raise nearly as much as the $777 billion the CBO estimates.\nGreg Valliere, chief US policy strategist at AGF Investments, said the chances of a financial transaction tax are \"very slim\" because moderate Democrats would be unlikely to back it.\n\"It would be a disaster. It's a pandora's box that should not be opened,\" Valliere said.\nOf course, it's possible that FTT proposals in Congress get scaled back, including by lowering the rate or excluding smaller blocks of trades.\nLeveling the playing field\nDuring last week's congressional hearing on GameStop and Robinhood, Citadel Securities founder Ken Griffin warned a tax would boomerang.\n\"We firmly believe a financial transaction tax would injure Americans trying to save for retirement,\" Griffin said.\nKlein, the Brookings Institution fellow, called Griffin's comments a \"self-serving lie\" because high-frequency trading firms like his would be among those hurt.\nThe GameStop trading frenzy drew attention onto how Robinhood was able to bring zero-commission trading to the masses.\nThrough a controversial practice known as payment for order flow, Robinhood and other brokers get paid to route retail trades through market makers like Citadel Securities.\nPayment for order flow has made it cheap and easy to trade. However, critics say it's really Wall Street that is getting the better end of the deal by skimming pennies off each trade and racing ahead of retail orders to make a profit.\n\"We believe the markets today are rigged to favor high-frequency traders,\" said Kelleher, the Better Markets CEO. \"The industry has taken visible upfront commission fees and disguised it into invisible payment for order flow.\"\nIn other words, it's not really free to trade.\nKelleher thinks Congress should focus on taxing orders, not transactions, because a staggering amount of all stock trade orders(some estimates say 99%) are canceled because of high-frequency trading strategies. Critics say those orders are evidence that high-speed traders are manipulating the market by creating the appearance of demand where there is none.\n\"A financial fee on orders could be the death knell for predatory high frequency trading,\" he said. \"Everyone will be better off — except for the predators.\"","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".IXIC":0.9,"GME":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".SPX":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":932,"commentLimit":10,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"symbols":[],"verified":2,"subType":0,"readableState":1,"langContent":"EN","currentLanguage":"EN","warmUpFlag":false,"orderFlag":false,"shareable":true,"causeOfNotShareable":"","featuresForAnalytics":[],"commentAndTweetFlag":false,"andRepostAutoSelectedFlag":false,"upFlag":false,"length":6,"xxTargetLangEnum":"ORIG"},"commentList":[],"isCommentEnd":true,"isTiger":false,"isWeiXinMini":false,"url":"/m/post/369587409"}
精彩评论