Fiasco de la taxe Tobin

[José]

Sweden's experience in implementing Tobin taxes in the form of general financial transaction taxes

In July' date=' 2006, analyst Marion G. Wrobel examined the actual international experiences of various countries in implementing financial transaction taxes.[43'] Wrobel's paper highlighted the Swedish experience with financial transaction taxes. In January 1984, Sweden introduced a 0.5% tax on the purchase or sale of an equity security. Thus a round trip (purchase and sale) transaction resulted in a 1% tax. In July 1986 the rate was doubled. In January 1989, a considerably lower tax of 0.002% on fixed-income securities was introduced for a security with a maturity of 90 days or less. On a bond with a maturity of five years or more, the tax was 0.003%.

The revenues from taxes were disappointing; for example, revenues from the tax on fixed-income securities were initially expected to amount to 1,500 million Swedish kroner per year. They did not amount to more than 80 million Swedish kroner in any year and the average was closer to 50 million.[44] In addition, as taxable trading volumes fell, so did revenues from capital gains taxes, entirely offsetting revenues from the equity transactions tax that had grown to 4,000 million Swedish kroner by 1988.[45]

On the day that the tax was announced, share prices fell by 2.2%. But there was leakage of information prior to the announcement, which might explain the 5.35% price decline in the 30 days prior to the announcement. When the tax was doubled, prices again fell by another 1%. These declines were in line with the capitalized value of future tax payments resulting from expected trades. It was further felt that the taxes on fixed-income securities only served to increase the cost of government borrowing, providing another argument against the tax.

Even though the tax on fixed-income securities was much lower than that on equities, the impact on market trading was much more dramatic. During the first week of the tax, the volume of bond trading fell by 85%, even though the tax rate on five-year bonds was only 0.003%. The volume of futures trading fell by 98% and the options trading market disappeared. On 15 April 1990, the tax on fixed-income securities was abolished. In January 1991 the rates on the remaining taxes were cut in half and by the end of the year they were abolished completely. Once the taxes were eliminated, trading volumes returned and grew substantially in the 1990s.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobin_tax#Sweden.27s_experience_in_implementing_Tobin_taxes_in_the_form_of_general_financial_transaction_taxes

(On observera avec amusement que ce même pasage a été supprimé du Wikipedia français - il faut fouiller dans les caches Google et les modifications wiki.)

[h16]

Je vais en faire un article pour CP, tiens.

[Nick de Cusa]

Tèj un tit coup d'oeil à ça, alors.

http://openeuropeblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/right-said-fred.html

[h16]

http://www.contrepoints.org/2011/08/18/41290-taxe-tobin-la-desastreuse-experience-suedoise

Twittez, retwittez.

[Pax In Terris]

http://www.contrepoints.org/2011/08/18/41290-taxe-tobin-la-desastreuse-experience-suedoise

Twittez, retwittez.

Ce texte de Contrpoints présente deux pettits problèmes :

1) il n'y a pas d'indication quant à l'auteur

2) il y a une petite faute de grammaire: il est écrit :

En effet, bien que cette dernière taxe était établie à un taux bien plus faible

Or, en bonne grammaire, une proposition commençant par «bien que» est au subjonctif : il eût fallu écrire :

En effet, bien que cette dernière taxe fût établie à un taux bien plus faible

[h16]

Ce texte de Contrpoints présente deux pettits problèmes :

1) il n'y a pas d'indication quant à l'auteur

2) il y a une petite faute de grammaire: il est écrit :

Or, en bonne grammaire, une proposition commençant par «bien que» est au subjonctif : il eût fallu écrire :

Oui.

[José]

Contrairement à l'intuition de James Tobin, une hausse du coût des échanges sur les marchés financiers accroît la volatilité au lieu de la réduire. Harald Hau le montre dans un travail de recherche sur la Bourse de Paris. Le même genre d'effet contre-intuitif se produit sur l'interdiction des opérations à découvert sur les marchés financiers, qui elle aussi accroît l'instabilité au lieu de la réduire :

Minimum price variation rules (tick size rules) in the French stock market prior to 1999 provide a natural experiment on the role of transaction costs for financial price volatility. For stock prices above French francs (FF) 500, the minimal tick size for quotes increases from FF 0.1 to FF 1. This tick size increase generates a 20 percent higher median effective spread and therefore artificially inflates transaction costs. Based on 5 minute intraday return intervals, we calculate 6,774 daily realized volatility measures for all CAC 40 stocks in the price range from FF 400 to FF 600 and measure the volatility impact of the transaction cost increase at FF 500. We find that the median daily realized standard deviation of returns is approximately 27 percent higher in the high cost regime. Panel regressions confirm this result at a high level of statistical significance. In the light of this evidence a security transaction tax should increase asset return volatility.

http://www.inquire-europe.org/project/finished%20projects/hau.pdf

[h16]

oh, zut, encore une planification centralisée qui foire dans un feu d'artifice mémorable

C'est inattendu.

[neuneu2k]

Ca n'a rien de contre intuitif, baisse de liquidité -> baisse du volume de transactions -> baisse de la circulation d'information -> baisse de l'anticipation, augmentation de la volatilité.

[Invité jabial]

Dis "qui va foirer". Les gouvernements ne lisent pas liborg, et s'ils le lisaient, ils riraient.

Ils devraient faire des stats sur le nombre de fois où on a eu raison.