Comments on: Why the bank tax is necessary A slice of lime in the soda Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:05:02 +0000 hourly 1 By: semio Fri, 15 Jan 2010 17:24:25 +0000 The banks have already or are in the process of repaying TARP. Why aren’t the auto companies, Fannie and Freddie, AIG also subject to the tax?

The tax will lead to shrinking balance sheets, which means less lending. Is that what the administration seeks? The author notes this in passing, but the absence of lending is a mjor risk to the economy.

By: strat_80 Fri, 15 Jan 2010 15:31:39 +0000 Hey Kid,
Do you really think the banks would have said no if there was tax disclosed up front – duh
Get real – the banks were finished. The rule of financing is that the last money in, when no one else is there offering money, gets to call the shots and typically all other claimants get a massive haircut or zero. This is called bankruptcy or else !!

This happens daily in funding situations. When a desperate company has only one new financier willing to write a check – guess what ? All others get wiped out. The terms are non-negotiable and the firm can chose to go under or stay alive.

Very simple. Get real. we own the banks and we tell them to jump and they should simple ask HOW HIGH !!!

By: KidDynamite Thu, 14 Jan 2010 16:47:53 +0000 thanks for pointing out that this was required under EESA. one of my main beefs with taxes after the fact is that they were just that – AFTER the fact, and should have been a part of the initial terms of the TARP. it seems that they WERE!