Toll-free: (877) 631-6311 | Local: (602) 626-3100 |
Office Closed
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
The Most Important Thing in the World

The Most Important Thing in the World


Something I’m sure will be suggested at some point is a financial transactions tax, a tiny tax placed on every single financial transaction: stocks, bonds, and derivatives.

For example, if General Electric (GE) were $20 per share and you bought 1,000 shares, that would be $20,000 worth of stock. If there were a financial transactions tax of 5 basis points, you would pay $10 in tax on that trade. The commission is probably around $10 if you use a discount broker, so it would double your transaction costs.

$10 doesn’t seem like a lot.

A financial transactions tax (otherwise known as an FTT or a Tobin tax) is so attractive to left-leaning politicians because they look at this giant pot of money, the trillions of dollars of annual trading activity, and if you take a tiny percentage of that, 1 basis point or 5 basis points, you can raise a lot of money to… well, certainly not to pay down the deficit; nobody wants to do that.

Some people also view this as a way to “punish” the banks, though in practice, it doesn’t really work out that way, which we will discuss later.

The Good Old Days

Back in 2006, I used to make locked markets in trades as large as 1,000,000 shares of the SPDR S&P 500 ETF (SPY). I would give customers a choice of whether they wanted to buy or sell 1,000,000 SPY (at the time, about $125,000,000) at the same price, essentially letting them trade for free. I could do that because my cost to hedge, either in futures or in the basket of stock or even the ETF, was minimal.

We were awash in liquidity.

Like what you're reading?

Get this free newsletter in your inbox every Thursday! Read our privacy policy here.

Most of that liquidity has disappeared. The Volcker Rule has made it outright illegal to trade proprietarily, and Basel III capital rules make it prohibitively expensive to carry positions, so nobody is incentivized to make markets in anything.

Liquidity is terrible. I hear this from my institutional subscribers all the time. You, the retail investor, probably don’t notice a difference, because it costs you the same to trade 100 shares of GE now as it did 10 years ago: about a penny.

But if you are trying to move 500,000 shares of GE, good luck. And we are talking about GE here, not 1-800-Flowers.com.

People love, love, love to blame high frequency trading for this. Michael Lewis wrote a book about it. It sold pretty well. The criticism is that the algorithms provide liquidity when you don’t need it and consume liquidity when you do. That may be true, but sometimes I wonder why all the HFT guys don’t all go on strike one day, not turning on the computers, and see what happens then. I think they will be sorely missed.

The banks used to provide liquidity, 10 years ago, but not anymore. Nonbank liquidity providers (smaller dealers, hedge funds) are starting to spring up, slowly, making the market more fragmented than ever. It is a mess.

What It Means

The definition of liquidity is the ability to sell something at a price you think is reasonable, in a time frame you think is reasonable. Again, most people never experience this first-hand because since decimalization 13 years ago, stocks are still a penny wide and commissions are less than 10 bucks.

It wasn’t always that way, though. You used to have to pay an eighth, a quarter, a half, or even a whole point to trade a stock, plus a $75 commission.

Back then, people traded a lot less.

But don’t we want people to trade less? Isn’t all this day trading and computer trading socially useless?

It’s not for me to decide what’s socially useful or not. But the combined effect of day traders and computer traders and speculators participating in the markets every day is that it makes the market liquid for what you might call a “real” investor, like a mutual fund or a pension fund.

Like what you're reading?

Get this free newsletter in your inbox every Thursday! Read our privacy policy here.

If you pass an FTT, liquidity will evaporate. The day traders and the computer traders and the speculators will just disappear.

Holding periods will stretch out, for sure, by necessity. But you won’t like it.

If you still can’t really get your head around what this means, imagine you are trying to sell your house. You expect it to take a month or two, and you think you will get $250,000. But imagine that HUD and/or the Treasury passes a patchwork of regulations that vastly increases the administrative burden on banks and real estate brokers, and it will take you two years to sell your house, and you will get only $225,000 for it.

That’s a lack of liquidity.

Deadweight Loss

This translates directly into economic losses. The more efficient the economy is, the lower transactions costs are, the more quickly the economy can grow. I can’t think of a more effective economy killer than a financial transactions tax.

But screw Wall Street, right?

Like I said before, it doesn’t work that way. If mutual fund A buys 500,000 shares of GE from bank B, the $5,000 tax doesn’t get paid by the bank or the mutual fund. It is passed along to the fund shareholders—retail investors. The reduced execution quality is directly reflected in the performance of the fund. Fun!

We sure punished Wall Street.

A large portion of the population—very large—see no connection to the socially “useless” trading that goes on and their ability to do simple things like take out a loan or a mortgage or invest in a mutual fund. That trading is slowly disappearing. When it disappears completely, they will be unhappy with the results.

But who will they blame?

Like what you're reading?

Get this free newsletter in your inbox every Thursday! Read our privacy policy here.

Funny.


Discussion

We welcome your comments. Please comply with our Community Rules.

0 comments

alfred smith
Oct. 15, 2015, 11:41 p.m.

Ps.  Send a postal address so I can compensate you with coffee for your fringe thoughts.
Sales@camp4coffee.com

alfred smith
Oct. 15, 2015, 11:38 p.m.

Hello 10th man,
I agree with your argument.  But can you extend the protection from overburden to others?
I run a coffee shop.  I build the tax in to my prices to avoid dealing with pennies, nickels and dimes.
So that means I cough up 8.5% of each cup sold. At year end I cough up another 30% on income.
Service industries pay zero.
But the system needs funds to continue operation.  Perhaps a “Fair Tax” of some sort is in order. 
Otherwise, I get tired of my burden and I stop working so hard.  This would not be good for GDP.

I am not alone.  If you punish entrepreneurship you will get less of it.  Thoughts?

Irb Laster
Oct. 15, 2015, 3:51 p.m.

Very insightful. Lately I’ve heard that liquidity is drying up. Thank you for explaining the mechanics and broad implications of it. Some of your other letters have been similarly enlightening. I’ve subbed to two Mauldin things and I think I’d like to sub to your dirtnap or the mauldlin VIP the next time (next year?) to get the whole works.

The 10th Man

Fundamental investing and technical analysis are vulnerable to human behaviour—but human behaviour itself is utterly predictable and governments' actions even more so.

Read Latest Edition Now

What you always wanted to know about investing, but that you didn’t know to ask

Get Jared Dillian's The 10th Man

Free in your inbox every Thursday

Privacy Policy

Get in Touch

PO Box 192495,
Dallas, Texas 75219

Toll-free: (877) 631-6311
Local: (602) 626-3100

Copyright © 2021 Mauldin Economics, LLC. All rights reserved.
×
The 10th Man

Wait! Don't leave without...

Jared Dillian's The 10th Man

Instinct and financial experience combined by a former Wall Street trader and served in one of the industry's most original, entertaining, contrarian voices. Get this free newsletter in your inbox every Thursday!