ABA disagrees global tax appropriate for Australia
(4 October 2011 – Australia) The Australian Bankers’ Association (ABA) said a global tax on financial transactions is not appropriate for Australia because the country’s banks did not fail during the global financial crisis (GFC).
ABA chief executive Steven Münchenberg, said that it is just a tax on the rest of the world to pay for the European Union's debt problems.
"Nations that are in favour of this type of tax are those where banks had real problems. These countries want to tax their banks because they had to use taxpayer money to bail out the banks during the GFC, unlike Australia, Canada and other countries."
"Taxpayer money was not used to bail out Australian banks. In fact, Australian taxpayers have already earned A$3 billion from banks for the support given by the Federal Government for the wholesale funding guarantee and will pay more than $5 billion over its full life."
"This is a 'magic pudding tax' - it somehow raises billions of dollars without anyone supposedly paying much. The reality is that someone does have to pay, either through higher banking costs or through lower returns to superannuation funds and ‘mum and dad’ shareholders."
In the ABA’s statement last week it said the tax proposal would undermine legitimate attempts to hedge risk and has the potential to disrupt this important insurance, which many companies put in place. This is even more important in these uncertain economic times.
"Nations that are in favour of this type of tax are those where banks had real problems. These countries want to tax their banks because they had to use taxpayer money to bail out the banks during the GFC, unlike Australia, Canada and other countries."
"Taxpayer money was not used to bail out Australian banks. In fact, Australian taxpayers have already earned A$3 billion from banks for the support given by the Federal Government for the wholesale funding guarantee and will pay more than $5 billion over its full life."
"This is a 'magic pudding tax' - it somehow raises billions of dollars without anyone supposedly paying much. The reality is that someone does have to pay, either through higher banking costs or through lower returns to superannuation funds and ‘mum and dad’ shareholders."
In the ABA’s statement last week it said the tax proposal would undermine legitimate attempts to hedge risk and has the potential to disrupt this important insurance, which many companies put in place. This is even more important in these uncertain economic times.
Subscribe