I\’m almost tempted to support an FTT

In a move that has astounded British MEPs, Jose Manuel Barroso, president of the EC, announced that the levy could halve European Union members\’ contributions.

Mr Barroso has proposed that countries keep a third of the proceeds of the levy themselves and give two-thirds of it to Brussels. Europe\’s budget would become \”self funding\”, Mr Barroso said, and would cut national contributions by a total of €54bn.

Yes, of course, it\’s still a stupid tax etc.

However, let\’s agree that national contributions get shelved and the FTT becomes own resources of the EU.

The important point here would be that the EU has made the decision itself: we\’ll only have the FTT revenues and not come back for any more.

The actual revenues from an FTT are going to be a pittance as compared with the estimates. So let\’s do it and hold them to it.

They get whatever few billions an FTT would raise and that\’s it, no more. Thus they get driven into bankruptcy as we all see the stupidity of their own decisions.

Bit tough on everyone else, true, but almost, almost, worth it, to see them hoist with their own petard.

5 thoughts on “I\’m almost tempted to support an FTT”

  1. Note that these figures share the revenues from the FTT equally across the EU, even though over half the transactions that will be taxed occur in the UK (and the UK therefore will suffer most of the GDP and tax revenue downside).

  2. Cue the European Financing (Transitional Arrangements) Agreement, Clause 182 para 4.

    Translated into comprehensible English it reads:
    “The EU will accept the funds arising from a FTT with pleasure but you won’t claw their living hands from the existing financial arrangements, no way.”

  3. A 0.1% tax on a transaction of £17.84 …
    I have more than once tried to point out the massive number of transactions (millions each year) that would incur a tax charge of less than 10p. Murphy (unsurprisingly) accused me of ignorance saying the cost of levying this charge would be negligible. Anyone who looks at data on the AIM market (provided free the the London Stock Exchange but disregarded by Barroso and Murphy as beneath them) can see that the admin costs as horrendous. They do not affect the immediate fall in EU GDP as this would merely transfer wealth from investors to previously unemployed clerks, computer programmers, Swedish lumberjacks, paper manufacturers, inkmakers etc but the follow-on costs from a reduced return on capital, increased waste (because it is a total waste) of energy, global warming and so forth are ignored by Barroso and his supporters.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *