Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I searched for keywords of this in this forum but didnt see -- if this has already been posted please subsume.
WASHINGTON — President Obama laid down his proposal for a new tax on the nation’s largest financial institutions on Thursday, saying he wanted “to recover every single dime the American people are owed” for bailing out the economy.
***
[The proposal] could ultimately raise up to $117 billion to cover projected bailout losses.
***
...“What I say to these executives is this: Instead of sending a phalanx of lobbyists to fight this proposal or employing an army of lawyers and accountants to help evade the fee, I suggest you might want to consider simply meeting your responsibilities” — including by rolling back bonuses.
The proposed tax would apply to bank, thrift and insurance companies with more than $50 billion in assets and would start after June 30. It would not apply to certain holdings, like customers’ insured savings, but to assets in risk-taking operations. The levy would raise an estimated $90 billion over 10 years, according to the White House.
The Treasury now projects that the losses from the $700 billion [TARP] program, which was created in October 2008, could reach $117 billion, about a third of the loss that it projected last summer — an improved forecast that reflected the renewed strength on Wall Street.
I thought that the banks (or most of them) had already paid back their bailouts funds plus interest. Not so with the automakers. Why not go after the automakers rather than try and recoup bailout losses from the now-profitable banks?
I searched for keywords of this in this forum but didnt see -- if this has already been posted please subsume.
WASHINGTON — President Obama laid down his proposal for a new tax on the nation’s largest financial institutions on Thursday, saying he wanted “to recover every single dime the American people are owed” for bailing out the economy.
***
[The proposal] could ultimately raise up to $117 billion to cover projected bailout losses.
***
...“What I say to these executives is this: Instead of sending a phalanx of lobbyists to fight this proposal or employing an army of lawyers and accountants to help evade the fee, I suggest you might want to consider simply meeting your responsibilities” — including by rolling back bonuses.
The proposed tax would apply to bank, thrift and insurance companies with more than $50 billion in assets and would start after June 30. It would not apply to certain holdings, like customers’ insured savings, but to assets in risk-taking operations. The levy would raise an estimated $90 billion over 10 years, according to the White House.
The Treasury now projects that the losses from the $700 billion [TARP] program, which was created in October 2008, could reach $117 billion, about a third of the loss that it projected last summer — an improved forecast that reflected the renewed strength on Wall Street.
Who is gonna pay for that in the end...we the customer! So the people who never did anything wrong have to pay more in fees...Thanks Obama for nothing and ruin this country!
Recovery of the monies is good. I understand they were too big to fail etc - but I would feel better if we could get them to pay the same sky-high interest rates they charge us for credit cards. Afterall, they were a huge risk and the interest rate should account for that. Plus, the tax payer was the only game in town.
Not if you don't keep your money in the big banks. Move your money to a local bank or credit union.
NOPE, because the proposal from the administration is a tax on all banks, small and large and not just the ones that recieved the tarp
btw, While most of the big banks have started paying back their TARP with PROFIT to the government
so if most of the banks have already paid back or have started to pay back (with the only two big banks not to so far being Wells-Fargo and Citi( at 24 and 45 billion respectivly))(even BOA has paid back 60% of its TARP(which WAS 45 billion, they have paid 25 back already)
so if most of the banks have paid back with interest, then what would a tax on all banks be for......things that make you go hmmmmm
NOPE, because the proposal from the administration is a tax on all banks, small and large and not just the ones that recieved the tarp
That's not what the story says. The story says that small community banks would be exempt.
Quote:
Republicans were uncharacteristically silent, their instinctive opposition to tax increases apparently checked by their fear of defending big bankers. And the financial industry lobby seemed splintered, with small community banks happily exempted.
I have a difficult time taking your analysis seriously when you get basic facts wrong. Or is the New York Times story wrong?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
