Seeking Alpha

The TBTFs join to fight proposed bank tax

  • Half a million doesn't buy much anymore. House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R, Mich.) - a sizable recipient of Wall Street donations - has the large financial institutions displeased with his proposal to levy a tax on them. He says they deserve to pay up for the lower borrowing costs they receive because of their perceived government backstop, a notion the banks dispute.
  • The proposal is part of larger tax reform expected to get serious discussion after the mid-term elections, and a Camp spokeswoman says the overall plan will make banks "some of the biggest winners."
  • In discussions to hold a fundraiser for the NRC, Goldman Sachs (GS +0.9%) reportedly opted out over its concerns. Smaller bankers join in with their much larger brethren: "We're going to beat this like a rented mule," says Cam Fine, who heads the Independent Community Bankers Association. "This is a united effort."
  • Camp's tax would apply to financial firms with assets greater than $500B, levying a 0.035% tax on total assets each year. Among those affected (in addition to Goldman) are AIG, BAC, C, GE Capital, JPM MET, MS, PRU, and WFC. The largest could pay more than $2B per year under the plan.
Comments (19)
  • Stephen Rosenman
    , contributor
    Comments (618) | Send Message
     
    Tax would apply to firms with assets greater than $500 BILLION.
    18 Mar, 11:29 AM Reply Like
  • FleetUSA3226
    , contributor
    Comments (696) | Send Message
     
    Actually I think this is a good move and easily understood by lo-fo voters. Let the Dems bail out the banks on this one.
    18 Mar, 11:43 AM Reply Like
  • JamesChessing21
    , contributor
    Comments (111) | Send Message
     
    Over th years Banks have paid 100s of Billions of taxes...NO MORE TAXES ...its not good for consumers as banks will just charge more to their customers...NO MORE NEW TAXES...CUT TAXES TO GROW ECONOMY:::OBAMA IS AN IDIOT !!!
    18 Mar, 04:48 PM Reply Like
  • Wise Timmy
    , contributor
    Comments (265) | Send Message
     
    Well maybe we could have an ATM Machine Obama care surcharge added to every ATM withdrawl. Lets start at 5%.
    18 Mar, 06:19 PM Reply Like
  • IndioBravo
    , contributor
    Comments (95) | Send Message
     
    Read the note again. Pay attention, several times, to the name of the Congressman. Is his name "Obama?"
    20 Mar, 06:43 AM Reply Like
  • Brucejfern
    , contributor
    Comments (1244) | Send Message
     
    I am all for taking banks back to the old depression-era law that limited their exposures to all other financial services. The banks always find new ways to put the system at risk and I would prefer putting the leash back on them so they are more strictly limited in the ways they can bring down the world's financial system going forward.
    18 Mar, 11:54 AM Reply Like
  • Noquiche
    , contributor
    Comments (196) | Send Message
     
    In essence I agree with you, however. The banks only have trading houses because they were asked to absorb them due to the crisis. The lending practices that actually led to the meltdown was caused by many factors, not the least of which was meddling by Congress which led to the lowering of lending standards and the birth of subprime lending. Not excusing anyone's behavior here but I don't think G-S would have averted any crisis since the traders in MBS that got in trouble (LB, AIG, ML, WMU, Countrywide, etal) were not banks at the time.
    18 Mar, 02:02 PM Reply Like
  • minwyhe
    , contributor
    Comments (103) | Send Message
     
    We should be doing more to rein in the big banks and their feeding at the trough of the government. What did I just read that the BofA CEO is being paid $13 mil after feeding on the government largesse. Did he get this pay, which probably is only a portion of his total compensation, because he used the government money not the banks? Banks are paying out so little of their huge bolus of cash in interest which is really hurting senior citizens income and yet they want to stymie any effort to tax them that is total BS.
    18 Mar, 12:05 PM Reply Like
  • chopchop0
    , contributor
    Comments (3138) | Send Message
     
    They should bring back Glass-Steagall while they're at
    18 Mar, 12:08 PM Reply Like
  • ebturner26
    , contributor
    Comments (4) | Send Message
     
    Before they consider any new taxes I suggest that the Banks should pay current and back interest owed to all the savings account holders for our gifts to them thru the FDIC's zero interest policy.
    18 Mar, 12:56 PM Reply Like
  • Noquiche
    , contributor
    Comments (196) | Send Message
     
    a: FDIC does not set interest rates

     

    b: Perhaps all the homeowners, car loan recipients, small businesses, etc should pay us back for all the money they saved due to lower interest rates.

     

    c. JPM return on assets .75%, BAC return on assets .53%, WFC return on assets 1.51%. It doesn't appear that these large banks are benefiting greatly from the Feds policy due to their large asset base.
    18 Mar, 01:50 PM Reply Like
  • markitos
    , contributor
    Comments (162) | Send Message
     
    I have a better idea. How about air consumption tax and since we are on the topic of taxation lets introduce a flatulence tax as well. Both would be consumption/production based. That will not just increase tax revenue but spur electronic device manufacturing (which we will tax of course) to control air intake and "exhaust" :) While these taxes are not progressive at least they will be "D"emocratic. As to "greedy" banks, didn't congress and Carter/Clinton administration come up with Fair Credit and Consumer Reinvestment Acts, no docs and no credit landing, etc. to make landing more fair. We do live in interesting times where hard work and initiative are punished :) Good luck to us all.
    18 Mar, 03:31 PM Reply Like
  • pencilskirtartist
    , contributor
    Comments (35) | Send Message
     
    Don't the banks pass on the tax and adjust fees elsewhere. I suppose the collection and accounting headaches create more costs for them but every business person I've ever talked with bumps the tax expense into their prices or fees. A good example is to look at the your utility bill breakdown. The long list of governmental entities and their fees are minimal but the utility passes them on to you. Be interesting if businesses listed all the fees they pay on invoices so consumers see the effect of all the hidden costs of doing business. The congressman who proposes a one page tax form for individuals and corporations in 12 pt type and 1 inch white margins would sure generate some interesting shouts of joy and gnashing of teeth.
    18 Mar, 02:00 PM Reply Like
  • James DeMasi
    , contributor
    Comments (68) | Send Message
     
    A public perception tax? What is wrong with this country? The government is relentless in trying to find new ways to waste everyone's money under the guise of fairness and goodness. How is it that everything the government does that's supposed to be good for us involves new taxes? Taxes aren't good. Taxes on sugary drinks, new taxes for the healthcare laws, more taxes for education. We spend more on healthcare and education than anywhere in the world and we're not the best in either. Fixing the problems at this point has nothing to do with the amount of money spent, and everything to do with how that money is used. Our government is out of control.
    18 Mar, 02:12 PM Reply Like
  • Wise Timmy
    , contributor
    Comments (265) | Send Message
     
    When is the smart folk in Washington going to realize we need a tax on government contractors. After all, they are charging the government too much and making too much profit off the government... Yeah, that's the ticket!

     

    Wait, why stop there! How about a tax on government workers! We could take it out of their pension plans! They are going to get Social security anyway... Oh wait another tax could be...
    18 Mar, 02:24 PM Reply Like
  • James DeMasi
    , contributor
    Comments (68) | Send Message
     
    Here's the government approach to problem solving. Women make 77 cents on the dollar compared to men. Why not tax men 23% more of their income? Problem solved. That's a bit extreme but the point is that the thought process in Washington seems to be to tax everything down to the lowest common denominator. Instead of granting each of us the individual freedom to strive for our best, the government prefers that we all embrace mediocrity and let them call the shots via our tax dollars. They're doing a good job of it too.
    18 Mar, 02:37 PM Reply Like
  • Hello Again 83
    , contributor
    Comments (432) | Send Message
     
    What is the tax going to accomplish? Take from the haves and give to the have nots? That is not the purpose of a bank.
    18 Mar, 08:49 PM Reply Like
  • Noquiche
    , contributor
    Comments (196) | Send Message
     
    I guarantee that if you look at the list of campaign contributors to Mr. Camp you will find one or many mid-size banks that are paying him to reduce the competitiveness of the larger banks so they can gain market share.
    19 Mar, 09:43 AM Reply Like
  • IndioBravo
    , contributor
    Comments (95) | Send Message
     
    I just drop several tears thinking of those poor, little, charity organizations we call "banks". Oh dear!
    20 Mar, 06:49 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector

Next headline on your portfolio:

|