RSS
U.S. President Barack Obama today (Thursday) unveiled the widely anticipated "Financial Crisis Responsibility Fee," which effectively amounts to a tax on banks to pay back money the government lost on the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP).
The fee would apply to financial firms - both domestic firms and U.S. subsidiaries of foreign companies - with more than $50 billion in consolidated assets, and equate to 15 basis points, or 0.15% of a company's covered liabilities each year. Deposits assessed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC) would not count toward those liabilities.
The tax, which must be approved by Congress, would go into effect on June 30, 2010, and earn about $90 billion over 10 years, but could go on longer. The White House said collecting $117 billion would take about 12 years.
The fee would apply to financial firms - both domestic firms and U.S. subsidiaries of foreign companies - with more than $50 billion in consolidated assets, and equate to 15 basis points, or 0.15% of a company's covered liabilities each year. Deposits assessed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC) would not count toward those liabilities.
The tax, which must be approved by Congress, would go into effect on June 30, 2010, and earn about $90 billion over 10 years, but could go on longer. The White House said collecting $117 billion would take about 12 years.
| Now, You Don't Have To Pay Lots Of Money To Make Lots Of Money | |
| "Join me for my daily 'private briefings' with our top editors." - Bill Patalon, Executive Editor |
|
| Click here to learn more | |
"My commitment is to recover every single dime the American people are owed," Obama said in a speech that was colored with populist rhetoric. "And my determination to achieve this goal is only heightened when I see reports of massive profits and obscene bonuses at the very firms who owe their continued existence to the American people - who have not been made whole, and who continue to face real hardship in this recession."
Obama pointed to the irresponsible lending and money management that nearly caused "a second great depression" as justification for the tax, calling the TARP program "a distasteful but necessary thing to do."
"We're already hearing a hew and cry from Wall Street suggesting that this proposed fee is not only unwelcome but unfair, that by some twisted logic it is more appropriate for the American people to bear the cost of the bailout rather than the industry that benefited from it, even though these executives are out there giving themselves huge bonuses," he said.
The president noted that small, community banks will not be affected by the tax, as 60% of the revenue will come from the 10 largest financial firms. However, critics contend the fees would be applied to banks that repaid their bailout money, or never sought it in the first place.
What's more is that the added tax could only have a negative effect on the economy.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce sent a letter to administration officials saying the tax would have unintended consequences that "may cost the government more than it hopes to raise."
"While the Chamber agrees that TARP funds should be recouped and excessive risk curbed, we are extremely concerned about a proposed bank tax because it may restrict the liquidity needed by small businesses to fuel job creation and economic growth," said the chamber's letter.
There's also the possibility that banks will sidestep the tax entirely, or find a loophole.
"Any new tax is always more complicated than the designers anticipated," Ed Kleinbard, the former staff director of Congress' non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation who is now a law professor at the University of Southern California, told Bloomberg. "When the numbers involved are this large, it's very difficult to design on the fly."
Kleinbard pointed out that Britain and France are already struggling to enforce their respective "super-taxes," which amount to 50% of any discretionary bonuses greater than $40,000 (25,000 pounds or 27,000 euros).
"There's always a substantial risk of unintended consequences and the risk of simple ineffectiveness," Kleinbard said.
News & Related Story Links:
Obama pointed to the irresponsible lending and money management that nearly caused "a second great depression" as justification for the tax, calling the TARP program "a distasteful but necessary thing to do."
"We're already hearing a hew and cry from Wall Street suggesting that this proposed fee is not only unwelcome but unfair, that by some twisted logic it is more appropriate for the American people to bear the cost of the bailout rather than the industry that benefited from it, even though these executives are out there giving themselves huge bonuses," he said.
The president noted that small, community banks will not be affected by the tax, as 60% of the revenue will come from the 10 largest financial firms. However, critics contend the fees would be applied to banks that repaid their bailout money, or never sought it in the first place.
What's more is that the added tax could only have a negative effect on the economy.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce sent a letter to administration officials saying the tax would have unintended consequences that "may cost the government more than it hopes to raise."
"While the Chamber agrees that TARP funds should be recouped and excessive risk curbed, we are extremely concerned about a proposed bank tax because it may restrict the liquidity needed by small businesses to fuel job creation and economic growth," said the chamber's letter.
There's also the possibility that banks will sidestep the tax entirely, or find a loophole.
"Any new tax is always more complicated than the designers anticipated," Ed Kleinbard, the former staff director of Congress' non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation who is now a law professor at the University of Southern California, told Bloomberg. "When the numbers involved are this large, it's very difficult to design on the fly."
Kleinbard pointed out that Britain and France are already struggling to enforce their respective "super-taxes," which amount to 50% of any discretionary bonuses greater than $40,000 (25,000 pounds or 27,000 euros).
"There's always a substantial risk of unintended consequences and the risk of simple ineffectiveness," Kleinbard said.
News & Related Story Links:
- WhiteHouse.gov:
President Obama Proposes Financial Crisis Responsibility Fee to Recoup Every Last Penny for American Taxpayers
- Money Morning:
Banking's Bigwigs Called to Carpet as Obama Prepares New Bank Tax
- Money Morning:
Obama Bank Tax No Reason to Flee Financials
- Bloomberg:
Obama Plans to Raise $120 Billion From Banking Fees
More on this topic
(What's this?)
TARP Loans to be Repaid as Stress Test Questions Linger
(Wealth Daily, 6/9/09)
Government TARP Investing – Paying off
(Investment U, 6/9/09)
Puerto Rico's Bailout
(The Value at Risk, 5/6/09)
Stuart Varney: Obama refuses to accept return of TARP money; wants to control banks
(The Swamp Report, 4/4/09)
Tags: Banking, Central Banks, Deficit, Obama Administration, TARP, Taxes
Yes, but considering our recent plunge into "corporate socialism" and our history of "corporate welfare," populism sure feels good!
SK
Obama would be less of a hypocrite if he paid back the campaign donations and lobbying money he received from Franklin Raines and Fannie Mae and insisted that all members of Congress and the administration return to public coffers those funds received from corporations which took TARP and were bailed out by the American taxpayer. Until he does so, he can't look at the banks' behaviour in this without someone asking about HIS OWN.
DOING GREAT SERVICE MAKING PEOPLE RICH.
When I was an executive at two conglomerates for over 19 years, The ones responsible for disasters in company businesses were not rewarded by bonuses. The were lucky to keep their jobs. The were not put into positions where they could repeat their mistakes.
This should now apply to the government and members of congress – or else we can expect it to happen again, possibly much worse. Unfortunately, congress is now run by lobbyists and their sources of funds.
Why didn't you buy a Ford Hybrid and help our economy. Apparently not to many people saw the chart of how indirectly we pay more in the long run when we purchase foreign(cheaper) at the moment(more cost to us later) products. I hate to be so blunt but Americans are years behind in getting the picture of why we are in this financial mess. Keep buying foreign products and ruin us altogether.
All the talk of bonuses,tarp,and the prople getting their money back is good new print. But face it the only way to get thing going is jobs. The goverment needs to get the money to people wanting to start small factories . That can say made in the USA
Good info!
Allan you are correct. Unfortunately, american manufacturers created their own demise in perpetual quest of enhansed quaterly returns. Did you ever try to get an american automobile manufacturer to stand behind their warrantees for the junk they were building; then blame it all on their "union" work force! Now no one has a job that can pay for the purchase of a new car. The chickens have finally come home to roost and still most Americans still don't get it. TERM LIMITS NOW. It's the only solution!!!!!!!
Seems fair to tax the banks who benefited by the bailout. What i would also like to see is for the govt. to tax the banks at 100% on all of the obscene bonuses paid out by those bailed- out banks. Simply put, for every $1 of obscene bonus, the govt. would also receive $1. Also, none of these outrageous payouts should be allowed as a deductible item for tax purposes.
"A 'double ditto' for Joe K.'s reply
Ditto for Joe K.'s reply.
I'd like to see a new deal style jobs program for infracture and energy at union wage or issue every American with an income under $88,000 a check $ 1 million dollars to spend as they see fit.