DOCSLIB.ORG

Inequality in the Capability to Achieve Financial Independence and Security, Enjoy Dignified and Fair Work, and Recognition of Unpaid Work and Care

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Inequality in the Capability to Achieve Financial Independence and Security, Enjoy Dignified and Fair Work, and Recognition of Unpaid Work and Care CASE STUDY No 2 Domain 4: Financial security and dignified work: Inequality in the capability to achieve financial independence and security, enjoy dignified and fair work, and recognition of unpaid work and care Main Driver Category 4.7: Lack of progressivity of tax system and tax avoidance and evasion Candidate Policy: Taxing financial transactions Professor Ben Fine School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) London July, 2019 Introduction: financialisation and finance sector taxation Over the last decade, the notion of financialisation has exploded across the social sciences, albeit with the notable exception of mainstream economics. A general definition (provided by Epstein, 2005, p. 3) explains financialisation as “the increasing role of financial motives, markets, actors and institutions in the operation of the domestic and international economies”. In short, it refers to the fact that finance has occupied an increasing, even dominant, presence and influence over our economic and social lives, from the global markets down to the everyday activities of households. In the wake of the Global Financial Crisis, it is increasingly acknowledged that the expansion of finance and of financial assets has got out of hand. Financialisation has involved the phenomenal expansion of financial assets relative to real activity (by three times over the last thirty years), as well as the proliferation of types of assets traded (from derivatives through to futures markets). Speculative investments have expanded enormously at the expense of real investment. (Foreign currency trading exceeds $5 trillion dollars per day, more than fifty times what is needed for foreign trade). Financialisation has also involved shareholder value, or financial worth, being prioritised over other economic and social values. While wages for workers are squeezed, exaggerated rewards are available to the elite who work with or within the financial sectors, as well as to those with advantageous access to financial markets. Accompanying this concentration of financial advantage, more aspects of our economic and social life have been put at the risk of volatility from financial instability (as with the food and energy crises that preceded the financial crisis). In a financialised world, even the markets for basic needs such as food, energy, housing and health, especially where they are subject to privatisation and user charges, become subject to speculative volatility, intensifying stressful vulnerabilities in the wake of price spikes for those on low incomes. There is now growing attention to the fact that returns to asset ownership tend to increase inequality. However, there is still much less attention on how, over the last thirty years, the form taken by those assets has increasingly been financial. In this context the possibility of raising tax revenue from financial transactions and financial markets is particularly relevant. Financial transaction taxes are also a useful policy option in that they can be used to help regulate financial markets’ volatility, if designed specifically to discourage the most speculative transactions. Introduction: financial transaction taxes A financial transaction t a x is a t a x on any financial transaction that is not directly for goods and services. It is necessary to be mindful of which financial product being proposed for a tax levy. If it is on credit card use, for example, this could act for consumer products just like a sales tax, which is generally perceived to be regressive. The poor will pay proportionately more for their basic needs, to the extent that they are bought on credit. So, it will matter who is undertaking the transaction, and for what purpose – whether it be a wealthy individual or a pension fund, for example, with the latter then having less to distribute to what might be its worker beneficiaries. And, it should be borne in mind that the state makes its own operations in financial markets, selling government bonds to savers for example or to raise financing for expenditure on essential services. These would be discouraged to the extent that they were taxed. In short, it would be necessary to have a more or less sophisticated tax system depending upon what financial transaction was being undertaken and by whom, with the main challenge being how to effectively target excessive speculation. The most prominent form of financial transaction tax (FTT) has been the Tobin Tax, designed to be levied on foreign currency transactions as these appear to be of the most speculative kind and to be discouraged as such as a source of instability. The Tobin Tax, or currency transaction tax, has raised a numbers of issues that have been intensely debated, such as: on what transactions should it be levied, does it need to be internationally agreed, can it be avoided and evaded, at what level should it be set, and would it genuinely reduce instability and speculation. Unsurprisingly, a number of countries, and prominent organisations and individuals, have come out in favour of the Tobin Tax from time to time (with substantial popular support in polls), although there have also been prominent free (financial) market opponents. Its impact has primarily not been one of practical application but of mobilising support to intervene in financial markets. There are a whole variety of other types of financial transaction taxes including: Securities transactions taxes (STTs): taxes on trades in all, or certain types of, securities (equity, debt and their derivatives), with taxes generally based on the market value of the shares being exchanged. Brazil, China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Italy, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Taiwan and the UK, for example, all tax purchase and/or sale of company shares. India is an example that also taxes equity futures and options. Bank transaction taxes (BTTs): taxes on deposits and/or withdrawals from bank accounts, usually a percentage of the deposit or withdrawal. (These have been most prevalent in Latin America and Asia, and often introduced in the wake of financial crisis). While BTTs are easy to implement and often offer up a large tax base, the tax burden may not primarily fall on financial institutions but is likely to fall on their customers. As such, BTTs are often described as a (potentially regressive) form of consumption t a x. Both security transactions taxes and currency transaction taxes are the taxes that governments and CS Os have most frequently been promulgating in order to raise revenue from the financial sector and possibly also to help regulate financial markets’ volatility. Review of evidence: how these policies impact inequalities and under what conditions With electronic banking, FTTs are relatively easy to implement. Currently, more than forty countries have operated an FTT at one time or another raising over $40 billion. The following table provides some examples. Country Type of FTT Features Brazil FTT on equity issued A bank debit tax (known as CPMF) was introduced in 1997 at an initial rate of abroad, loans, forex 0.2%, with the rate increasing to 0.38% in 2002. Revenues were earmarked to fund and capital inflows to healthcare, poverty and social assistance programmes. The CPM F collected nearly stocks and bonds US$20bn per year. It was discontinued in 2008 after the Supreme Court ruled that markets earmarking was unconstitutional. Brazil now has a variety of other FTTs, including a tax on equity issued abroad, loans and capital inflows to stock and bond markets. It is also one of the few countries with a tax on currency transactions (with a higher rate on short-term forex). However, many currency transactions, such as those for exports, are tax-exempt. Rates of Brazil’s FTTs have varied, with changes made in 2008/9 in response to the global financial crisis. France FTT on stocks With discussions on-going about a European-wide FTT, France unilaterally passed its own legislation in February 2012. Its FTT applies to trades in shares, or similar securities, issued by companies whose registered office is in France and whose stock market capitalisation exceeds 1 billion euros. The rate at implementation was 0.2%, but with an increase in 2017 the rate now stands at 0.3%. The tax only applies to transactions that result in effective ownership and excludes purchases and sales carried out within the same day, meaning high frequency trades are excluded. This exemption of intra-day transactions has greatly limited its yield. Though the legislation includes a separate provision to tax some high-frequency trades (at 0.01%) it has been easy to avoid and has produced almost no return in practice. Sweden FTT on equity In effect from 1984 to 1991, Sweden’s FTT is often cited as proof that FTTs don’t securities work. However, it appears its problems were related mainly to design flaws. The equities tax was only levied on trades conducted through registered Swedish brokers, making it easily avoidable by using non-Swedish brokers. (Much of the trading of Swedish stocks moved to British brokers). A tax on fixed-income trading activities resulted in a shift to other financial instruments not subject to the tax, such as corporate loans and swaps. UK FTT on stocks UK stamp duty, charged at a rate of 0.5%, falls on the purchase of shares in UK- registered companies wherever they are traded in the world. The payment is connected to the legal transfer of ownership and therefore is difficult to avoid. It raises a modest amount of revenue (less than 1% of total tax revenues). Administrative costs of the tax are very low. As in France, there are notable issues with the significant value of transactions that are not taxed because they do not require a change of ownership in the underlying share (high frequency trading activities and intermediaries trading a variety of derivatives instruments).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 29Th April 2012 NEWS RELEASE CARDINAL O
    29th April 2012 NEWS RELEASE CARDINAL O’BRIEN BRANDS CAMERON’S OPPOSITION TO THE ROBIN HOOD TAX ‘SHAMEFUL’ The UK’s most senior Catholic, Cardinal Keith O’Brien, has branded David Cameron and his government’s opposition to a tiny tax on banks and the financial sector to help combat poverty as ‘shameful’. In a letter to the Prime Minister the Cardinal outlined his support for the Robin Hood Tax campaign, which calls for the UK Government to put in place a 0.05% tax on financial transactions such as bonds, stocks and derivatives. If implemented, it could raise £20 billion annually in the UK to be spent on poverty alleviation at home and overseas, and support communities affected by climate change. The Cardinal highlighted that thousands of SCIAF supporters across Scotland have signed up to the campaign, adding their voices to a widespread movement across Scotland, the UK and internationally, amid growing political support for such a tax. Cardinal O’Brien said: “At this difficult economic time more needs to be done to help the poor, both at home and abroad, as they are the ones hit the hardest by the fall-out of the global financial crisis. The banks and financial sector, which caused the problem, have a clear responsibility to pay their fair share. It is shameful that David Cameron is currently protecting his wealthy friends in the City by his opposition to this simple, fair and sustainable financial transactions tax.” In his letter to David Cameron (full text below) Cardinal O’Brien said: “The economy must be judged by what it achieves for the common good.
    [Show full text]
  • COLLECTING TAXES TECHNICAL NOTE Leadership in Public Financial Management II (LPFM II)
    LPFMII-15-007 COLLECTING TAXES TECHNICAL NOTE Leadership in Public Financial Management II (LPFM II) Date: June 2018 i DISCLAIMER This document is made possible by the support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). Its contents are the sole responsibility of the author or authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States government. This publication was produced by Nathan Associates Inc. for the United States Agency for International Development CONTENTS Contents Acronyms 2 Introduction 1 Indicator Definitions and Sources 1 Tax Performance 1 Tax Administration 6 Country Notes 10 Acronyms ADB Asian Development Bank CIT Corporate Income Tax CTD Collecting Taxes Database FAD Fiscal Affairs Department of the International Monetary Fund GDP Gross Domestic Product GFS Government Financial Statistics GNI Gross National Income GST Goods and Services Tax IAMTAX Integrated Assessment Model for Tax ICRG International Country Risk Guide (of the PRS Group) ICTD International Centre for Tax and Development IMF International Monetary Fund IT Information Technology LPFM II Leadership in Public Financial Management II LTU Large Taxpayer Unit ODA Official Development Assistance OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development OLS Ordinary least squares (estimation technique) PFM Public financial management PIT Personal Income Tax RA-FIT Revenue Administration’s Fiscal Information Tool TADAT Tax Administration Diagnostic Assessment Tool USAID United States Agency
    [Show full text]
  • Robin Hood in a Time of Austerity · LRB 18 February 2016
    8/30/2016 James Meek · Robin Hood in a Time of Austerity · LRB 18 February 2016 Back to article page Robin Hood in a Time of Austerity James Meek 00:00 81:58 Myth is a story that can be retold by anyone, with infinite variation, and still be recognisable as itself. The outline of surviving myth is re­recognised in the lives of each generation. It’s an instrument by which people simplify, rationalise and retell social complexities. It’s a means to haul the abstract, the global and the relative into the realm of the concrete, the local and the absolute. It’s a way to lay claim to faith in certain values. If those who attempt to interpret the world do so only through the prism of professional thinkers, and ignore the persistence of myth in everyday thought and speech, the interpretations will be deficient. This is the importance of the Robin Hood myth. It’s the first and often the only political­ economic fable we learn. It’s not a children’s story, although it is childlike. It contains the three essential ingredients of grown­up narrative – love, death and money – without being a love story, a tragedy or a comedy. It doesn’t tell of the founding of a people. It’s not a fairy story or a religious myth; it has no monsters, gods or wizards in it, only human beings. It’s not a parable. In place of a moral, it has a plan of action. What does Robin Hood do? We all know.
    [Show full text]
  • ECONOMIC COUNCILS in the DIFFERENT COUNTRIES of the WORLD I
    Section of Economic Relations REVIEW OF THE ECONOMIC COUNCILS IN THE DIFFERENT COUNTRIES OF THE WORLD i Prepared for the Economic Committee | by Dr. Elli LINDNER League of Nations GENEVA 1932 [Communicated to the Council Official No. : C. 626. M. 308. 1932. II.B and the Members of the League.] [E. 795.] Series of League of Nations Publications II. ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL 1932. II.B. 10. CONTENTS. P age I. Introductory N ote by the Secretariat: 1. Resolution of the Twelfth A s s e m b ly .................................................. 5 2. E nquiry b y the Economic C o m m itte e ............................................. 6 3 . Principal Types of Economic C o u n cils............................................. 7 4. Co-operation of Economic Councils in the Work of the League of N a tio n s.................................................................................................. 7 II. P r e f a c e .............................................................................................................................. 9 III. Monographs concerning the Organisation and W orking of the E conomic Councils in Different Countries of the W orld : A. Africa: Union of South A f r i c a ...................................................................... 11 B. America: 1. A r g e n tin e ........................................................................................ 12 2. B r a z i l .................................................................................................. 13 3. C h i l e ......................
    [Show full text]
  • Financial Regulation and the G20
    G20 MONITOR Financial Regulation and the G20 Mike Callaghan Hugh Jorgensen Stephen PPickfordickford Richard Gray Ross Buckley Steven Bardy Graham Hodges N o.4 - JULY 2013 The Lowy Institute for International Policy is an independent policy think tank. Its mandate ranges across all the dimensions of international policy debate in Australia — economic, political and strategic — and it is not limited to a particular geographic region. Its two core tasks are to: produce distinctive research and fresh policy options for Australia’s international policy and to contribute to the wider international debate. promote discussion of Australia’s role in the world by providing an accessible and high quality forum for discussion of Australian international relations through debates, seminars, lectures, dialogues and conferences. Funding to establish the G20 Studies Centre at the Lowy Institute for International Policy has been provided by the Australian Government. The views expressed in the contributions to this Monitor are entirely the authors’ own and not those of the Lowy Institute for International Policy or of the G20 Studies Centre. 2 Contents Overview: Refining the role of the G20 in strengthening financial regulation ......................... 4 By Mike Callaghan A stocktake of global financial reform five years after the collapse of Lehman Brothers ........ 8 By Hugh Jorgensen The G20 and financial sector reforms ...................................................................................... 16 By Stephen Pickford Financial regulation: strengthening the coordination role of the G20 ..................................... 21 By Richard Gray Financial regulation and the G20: is there a gap in the governance structure? ....................... 27 By Mike Callaghan Are the G20’s financial regulatory reforms adequate? ............................................................ 35 By Ross Buckley Whither the G20 and the FSB? The 2014 agenda...................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Cuban Foreign Investment and Taxation in Cuba
    CUBAN FOREIGN INVESTMENT LEGISLATION Decree Law 50 of 1982 (“Decree Law 50”) was Cuba’s first foreign investment act authorizing the formation of international joint-ventures with foreign investors. In general, Decree Law 50 authorized the creation of joint venture companies and the execution of other international economic association contracts, both permitted under the present Foreign Investment Act, but did not authorize the creation of full foreign ownership companies. When the new Foreign Investment Act was adopted in 1995, existing foreign investment vehicles created under the authority of Decree Law 50 were brought under the application of the new Act, although the latter provides an express grandfathering provision in respect of all benefits granted to such foreign investment vehicles under the earlier legislation. Foreign Investment Act of 1995 At present, the primary legal framework governing foreign investments in Cuba is set out in the Foreign Investment Act (Law 77 of 1995 on Foreign Investment). Detailed rules applicable to the operations of foreign investment vehicles are contained in generally applicable legislation dealing with matters such as tax, banking, environment, construction, labour, insurance and others, as well as in the Cuban Commercial Code and the Civil Code. The Foreign Investment Act provides basic investment protection and other general rules relevant to foreign investors and sets out the principal legal structures for the implementation of investment projects in Cuba. In general, the Foreign Investment Act classifies foreign investments as direct investments or indirect investments. In the case of a direct investment, the foreign investor participates in the equity structure of the entity developing the project in question and actively participates in the management of operations.
    [Show full text]
  • People's Republic of China
    国 家 税 务 总 局 STATE ADMINISTRATION OF TAXATION THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA People’s Republic of China Status of List of Reservations and Notifications at the Time of Signature For jurisdictions providing a provisional list: This document contains a provisional list of expected reservations and notifications to be made by the People’s Republic of China pursuant to Articles 28(7) and 29(4) of the Convention. Article 2 – Interpretation of Terms Notification - Agreements Covered by the Convention Pursuant to Article 2(1)(a)(ii) of the Convention,the People’s Republic of China wishes the following agreements to be covered by the Convention: Other Original/ Date of Date of No Title Contracting Amending Entry into Signature Jurisdiction Instrument Force 1 Agreement between the Government Japan Original 06-09-1983 26-06-1984 of the People's Republic of China and the Government of Japan for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with respect to Taxes on Income 2 Agreement between the Government U.S.A. Original 30-04-1984 21-11-1986 of the People's Republic of China and Amending 10-05-1986 21-11-1986 the Government of the United States Instrument (a) of America for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with respect to Taxes on Income 3 ACCORD ENTRE LE GOUVERNEMENT France Original 26-11-2013 28-12-2014 DE LA REPUBLIQUE POPULAIRE DE CHINE ET LE GOUVERNEMENT DE LA REPUBLIQUE FRANCAISE EN VUE D’EVITER LES DOUBLES IMPOSITIONS ET DE PREVENIR L’EVASION ET LA FRAUDE FISCALES EN MATIERE D’IMPOTS SUR LE REVENU 4 Agreement between the Government U.K.
    [Show full text]
  • Financial Transactions Are So Mobile That an FTT in One Country Is Unenforceable and Will Simply Result in Trading Moving Overseas
    FACTS & MYTHS ABOUT A FINANCIAL TRANSACTION TAX Updated May 2013 What is a financial transaction tax (FTT)? The FTT (also known as a financial speculation tax , Wall Street trading tax, or Robin Hood tax) is a tiny fee – at rates of a fraction of a percent – on Wall Street trading of financial instruments such as stocks, bonds, derivatives, futures, options, and credit default swaps. What are the key facts about the FTT? • An FTT would raise at least tens of billions of dollars per year in badly needed revenue. This is a substantial amount, skimming the fat off of a sector of the economy that can afford to pay it. Some other revenue-raising options being discussed (such as a value-added tax) would fall much more on the middle class. • An FTT would reduce dangerous financial market speculation. Since it would hit high-volume, high-speed trading the hardest, the FTT would serve to discourage short-term speculation in financial markets as well as the proliferation of ever more complex derivatives. • An FTT would encourage longer-term productive investment. By reducing the volume and profitability of short-term trading that serves no productive purpose, the FTT would encourage Wall Street to find new ways to make money from longer-term productive investments. • An FTT would put Wall Street to work for Main Street. Reckless Wall Street gambling cost Americans trillions in bailouts, lost jobs and wealth, and cost states billions in lost revenue. The FTT would help put Wall Street to work rebuilding Main Street with revenue to create potentially hundreds of thousands of jobs and support critical public services and infrastructure.
    [Show full text]
  • GETTING STARTED a Robin Hood Tax on the Banks Has the Power to Raise Hundreds of Billions Every Year Globally
    ROBIN HOOD TAX: GETTING STARTED A Robin Hood Tax on the banks has the power to raise hundreds of billions every year globally. Money that could protect public services in the UK, help the poorest people at home and abroad and tackle climate change. ROBIN HOOD TAX AND WHAT WE WANT TO SEE: INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT: A BANK TAX THAT WOULD MAKE ROBIN WHY IT MATTERS. 3 PROUD. The effects of the banking crisis on developing countries We know that the Government could introduce didn’t get a huge amount of coverage in the UK. greater taxation on the financial sector to the tune Understandably enough, the focus was on the impact of £20bn a year. here, as the actions of a small minority wreaked havoc on the UK economy. But, unsurprisingly, a fire fuelled in wealthy countries also burnt millions of poor people – and MONEY FROM A ROBIN HOOD TAX GOING 3 TO THOSE WHO NEED IT. continues to do so. We suggest this money should be split: 50% to There are the inevitable pitfalls of globalisation, for starters. Spending falls in the UK. People buy fewer UK | 25% to Climate Change | 25% to International clothes. Shops order fewer clothes. Orders fall in factories Development. in poor countries. People are laid off and can’t find alternative work. And suddenly the global economic crisis THE UK BEING AN INTERNATIONAL 3 LEADER hits the market stall holder who used to sell lunches to the people in factories. And so on and so on. So we can help push for Europe-wide taxes on the The crisis also had a profound effect on poor countries financial sector.
    [Show full text]
  • STATEMENTS of SUPPORT for a FINANCIAL TRANSACTION TAX (FTT) Updated July 2013
    STATEMENTS OF SUPPORT FOR A FINANCIAL TRANSACTION TAX (FTT) Updated July 2013 Religious and Opinion Leaders Kofi Annan, former Secretary-General of the United Nations I support innovative financing solutions, such as a fair maritime bunker fuel tax, a levy on airline tickets, or the Financial 1 Transaction Tax. Boston Globe editorial board As Obama and other policymakers contemplate far-reaching changes to entitlements such as Medicare and Social Security, a financial transaction tax — which would simultaneously raise money and deter another crisis — has to be part 2 of the discussion. Al Gore, former U.S. Vice President We need policy changes, we need a tax on carbon and we need a tax on global transactions.3 Bob Herbert, former columnist at The New York Times While the fees would be a trivial expense for what the general public tends to think of as ordinary traders – people investing in stocks, bonds or other assets for some reasonable period of time – they would amount to a much heavier lift 4 for speculators, the folks who bring a manic quality to the markets, who treat it like a casino. Van Jones, author and President of Rebuild the Dream The Wall Street Tax… is common sense… Congress is about to face a telling choice. Will they vote to tax Wall Street gamblers in the 1%, or cut the Social Security checks of senior citizens in the 99%?5 Nicholas Kristof, columnist at The New York Times Impose a financial transactions tax. This would be a modest tax on financial trades, modeled on the suggestions of James Tobin, an American economist who won a Nobel Prize.
    [Show full text]
  • FINANCIAL TRANSACTION TAXES in THEORY and PRACTICE Leonard E
    FINANCIAL TRANSACTION TAXES IN THEORY AND PRACTICE Leonard E. Burman, William G. Gale, Sarah Gault, Bryan Kim, Jim Nunns, and Steve Rosenthal June 2015 DISCUSSION DRAFT - COMMENTS WELCOME CONTENTS Acknowledgments 1 Section 1: Introduction 2 Section 2: Background 5 FTT Defined 5 History of FTTs in the United States 5 Experience in Other Countries 6 Proposed FTTs 10 Other Taxes on the Financial Sector 12 Section 3: Design Issues 14 Section 4: The Financial Sector and Market Failure 19 Size of the Financial Sector 19 Systemic Risk 21 High-Frequency Trading and Flash Trading 22 Noise Trading 23 Section 5: Effects of an FTT 24 Trading Volume and Speculation 24 Liquidity 26 Price Discovery 27 Asset Price Volatility 28 Asset Prices and the Cost of Capital 29 Cascading and Intersectoral Distortions 30 Administrative and Compliance Costs 32 Section 6: New Revenue and Distributional Estimates 33 Modeling Issues 33 Revenue Effects 34 Distributional Effects 36 Section 7: Conclusion 39 Appendix A 40 References 43 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Burman, Gault, Nunns, and Rosenthal: Urban Institute; Gale and Kim: Brookings Institution. Please send comments to [email protected] or [email protected]. We thank Donald Marron and Thornton Matheson for helpful comments and discussions, Elaine Eldridge and Elizabeth Forney for editorial assistance, Lydia Austin and Joanna Teitelbaum for preparing the document for publication, and the Laura and John Arnold Foundation for funding this work. The findings and conclusions contained within are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect positions or policies of the Tax Policy Center, the Urban Institute, the Brookings Institution, or their funders.
    [Show full text]
  • Is the Financial Transaction Tax (FTT) a Good Idea?
    Is the Financial Transaction Tax (FTT) a Good Idea? Nobel Prize Winner, James Tobin, proposed a tax on foreign exchange (forex) transactions in order to throw ‘sand into the wheels’ of finance. He believed that there was excessive, socially unuseful, trading and that too many bright young people were becoming forex traders. Advocation of taxing a wider range of financial transactions, a Financial Transactions Tax (FTT), has grown as financial transactions have proliferated over the years and Lord Adair Turner, Chairman of the Financial Services Authority (FSA), has echoed Tobin in alleging much of the trading in financial markets to be socially useless. In 2011, the EU proposed the imposition of an FTT in the EU. The City of London is strongly opposed and the Prime Minister, David Cameron, has vowed to protect the City from vindictive EU regulation and the FTT in the interests of the UK economy. Is he right to do so? The City and the wider financial sector, clearly does contribute considerable tax revenue to the UK and yet the government is committed to ‘rebalancing’ the economy to reduce dependence on the City in the wake of the Global Finance crisis. Further, 52% of City buildings are now owned by overseas interests, many in the EU. More importantly, the share of the City financial markets controlled by UK banks and other financial institutions is much smaller than that of European institutions and those for the US and Asian countries. The City is pre-eminently an international financial centre, and the largest one in Europe. The European Union countries thus have a vested interest in it competitiveness and a right to assure it is properly regulated to underpin financial stability, and the City benefits from UK’s membership of the EU.
    [Show full text]