Under-fire Goldman Sachs reveals 90% jump in profits | Business | The Guardian .
I have the words "tax, tax, tax" ringing in my ears.
An additional tax on banks.
A restriction on tax relief on bankers' bonuses
And more.
The think "reform"
"Break up"
"Never again"
Because all have to be on the agenda
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
“I have the words “tax, tax, tax” ringing in my ears.”
Well there’s a surprise!
Richard, c’mon, take a deep breath and chill out. It has been a long day.
“An additional tax on banks”
There is reform discussed in Congress this week that discusses it. Get yourself C-SPAN.
“A financial transaction tax”
Geithner has said NO. After he is gone in November, it will still be NO. What is about the word “NO” you don’t understand? We are not interested in your high school science project.
“A restriction on tax relief on bankers’ bonuses”
Will not happen in the US. Try this on your island and see what happens to what happens to Wall street’s presence in London.
The think “reform”
C-SPAN again, and try to not fall aslweep.
“Break up”
FFS, Richard, why do you think “break up” when you hear Goldman Sachs? It is a pure investment bank, it does not even have a retail brokerage business. What do you want to break up?
“Never Again”
How many times does one need to remind you that (a) GS never needed government capital, (b) when forced to take it, produced the best return that taxpayers get get for their money. If given the choice I would rather have all my taxes and some more go into GS.
What is it you do not get?
@Ted G
I don’t get that these institutions add value
I do get they cause harm
Simple
Richard, Ted makes decent arguments against your comments, yet you can’t be bothered to answer them?
GS add value to their shareholders (although I personally wouldn’t own their stock because I think their remuneration levels are too high), and that is the aim of the game. And GS pay a huge amount of tax too, as do their employees. And that is on top of the huge return they made for the US on the “forced” borrowing of govt capital.
@Greg
Ted made rhetorical observations
I let them on
They’re not worth commenting on
I have
Fortunately your government does see GS’ value. Isn’t somehow intriguing to you that in the middle of a close election campaign, a left-wing government trailing in the polls refuses to commit to appease its left-wing constituencies stop receiving advisory services from a politically highly sensitive foreign investment bank, and instead admits that it will continue paying top Dollar for its services.
This is better than any form of advertising for Goldman. It speaks volumes about how vital they have become to the economic running of the island.
What about… “Richard, why do you think “break up” when you hear Goldman Sachs? It is a pure investment bank, it does not even have a retail brokerage business. What do you want to break up?”
I’m sure this is not a rehtorical question?
@ Ted G and Greg
How much of this profit is the direct result of the tax deductibility of interest payments on debt? Do you think the tax relief on debt is more or less than the actual amount of tax paid? C’mon gentlemen, how about a little transparency please?
Daid, GS is an investment bank not a commercial bank (Richard has a problem understanding this, but he’ll get there one day). It does not take deposits and/or make loans. Its business model is around arranging securities offerings, and trading in these securities and other forms of financial assets for clients and sometimes for its own accounts. The issue of tax relief on interest is of very abstract relevance to GS.
@ Ted G
Deposit and equity liabilities are not relevant to my argument. However the debt levels used to fund securities trades is highly relevant, as is the use of repurchase agreements, or “repo” trades, to hide the true debt levels. If the issue of tax relief on interest is only of abstract interest to GS, presumably they wouldn’t object to its withdrawal, or would they?