Talk:Financial transaction tax

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Financial transaction tax article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Economics Unassessed

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Boyd Reimer (talk) 13:05, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Should we split this article into two articles: National, and International?

The two headings could be these:

Financial transaction tax (national concepts)

Financial transaction tax (international concepts)

I am of two minds about this question:

On the one hand, I would say "Yes, we should split this article into two."....because it is a better way to carry out analysis. Analysis is the process of breaking things down into smaller pieces in order to think more clearly about them.

But on the other hand, if we break this into two articles, then how would we compare the two? How would we then compare the successes and failures of each? Consider the people who are working on both of these projects in the world. Could they benefit from knowing about each other's successes and failures? I would say yes, in some ways (but not in all ways).

This (above) explains the dilemma on the question of whether or not we should split this article into two articles.

One possible solution to this dilemma would be to create a third article entitled, "The comparison between national and international financial transaction taxes."

Or perhaps we could have that "comparison" as a section heading in both of these two articles:

Financial transaction tax (national concepts)

Financial transaction tax (international concepts)

I look forward to hearing thoughts from other editors. Boyd Reimer (talk) 19:34, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If it was me, Id keep it as one page at least until it grows beyond about 60K. Most of the information will be redundant for both types of tax. You might find it hard to find sources that describe international transaction taxes in the general case, I dont think Ive even encountered a formal explanation of the national / international distinction – perhaps writers on the subject dont feel a need as there are no implemented examples? Reading between the lines after hearing a few presentations on Tobin, id guess an international transaction tax has to meet at least one of two criteria. 1) The revenue accrues to an international body, such as the UN. 2) Its uniformly applied by several nations so financial markets dont just shift operations to another tax jurisdiction.

I dont think the buyer and seller being of different nationalities counts, as this is common in capital control taxes like the ones Brazil has just implemented, but that would be a national tax as Brazil gets the revenue and the tax is unique to Brazil (the purpose being not so much to raise revenue as to slow capital inflow that was causing currency appreciation)

If I come across a good source to define the difference I'll add it to the article. Just some ideas, I think you should organise it however you like. FeydHuxtable (talk) 20:37, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - Boyd Reimer (talk) 14:11, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Robin Hood Tax vs Tobin Tax

About the Robin Hood Tax, the article says: "It is similar to the Tobin tax" wich is not completely true. In fact, the Robin Hood Tax is inspired in the Tobin Tax, but it's more general. Tobin Tax only covers "spot conversions of one currency into another". Robin Hood Tax should cover every bank transaction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carloscapote (talk • contribs) 16:20, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

revenue

A section on "revenue" was recently added. It needs clarification and better sourcing.

Currently it's: Institute for Policy Studies states revenue of $177. billion dollars/year in the US. with the reference [1]

There's a few problems with that. A blog isn't generally a good source, and how it's stated is unclear. Both of these could possibly be solved by following it back to it's source. The blog links to the Institute for Policy Studies study, and that study actually sources its numbers to a Center for Economic and Policy Research paper here. There the number $176.9 billion was used, but with a fair amount of elaboration. CRETOG8(t/c) 03:06, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Content moved from Bank tax

Text and/or other creative content from Bank tax was copied or moved into Financial_transaction_tax#Brazilian_.22bank_transaction_tax.22_.281993_-_2007.29. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Boyd Reimer (talk) 15:25, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]