Argument: Bank tax is not too great of a burden on banks

Issue Report: 2010 US bank tax


Peter Eavis. “Obama’s gentle bank tax.” Wall Street Journal. January 14, 2010: “Will Obama’s bank tax be that taxing for the banks? […] Let’s say the administration wants to raise about $100 billion over 10 years by taxing market debt. Paying out $10 billion a year is no sweat for an industry that, according to Goldman Sachs, made $250 billion in earnings before taxes and loan-loss provisions last year. And it won’t drive up their funding costs by much. Goldman estimates $5.5 trillion of nondeposit liabilities at large banks. To get to $100 billion in 10 years on that sum would mean the banks paying a manageable 0.2 percentage point extra a year.”

Ezra Klein. “Obama’s bank-friendly bank tax.” Washington Post. January 15, 2010: “Obama’s decision to sell this as a vicious attack on the banks seems like reverse-Tom Sawyerism: It’s an effort to make everyone believe that this tax is really bad and tough, when it isn’t. If anything, it’s protecting the banks from a much more punitive tax that isn’t limited to money they already have to repay.”