1. Log In
Register Now
Home
Business Day
Video
E-Mails Raise Questions About Mortgage Deals
102
Credit Suisse Swings to a Profit
K.K.R. Shows a Strong Quarter
1
Eisinger: Time to Revive Financial Transaction Tax
2. 90
The New York Times
DealBook
Search DealBook Go
Mergers & Acquisitions
Investment Banking
Private Equity
Hedge Funds
I.P.O./Offerings
Venture Capital
Legal/Regulatory
Advertise on NYTimes.com
Legal/Regulatory | The Trade February 6, 2013, 12:14 pm90 Comments
Time to Revive the Financial Transaction Tax
By JESSE EISINGER, ProPublica
J. Scott Applewhite/Associated Press
Chip Somodevilla/Getty ImagesRepresentative Peter DeFazio, Democrat of
Oregon, top, and Senator Tom Harkin, an Iowa Democrat, above, say they will reintroduce a bill calling for a
financial transaction tax.
The unwritten rule of Washington debates about taxing and spending is to never consider anything new. But
wouldn’t it be wonderful if the pressure of the next few months’ debate changed that?
Last month, 11 European countries, including France and Germany, moved forward on introducing a minuscule
taxon trades in stocks, bonds and derivatives. The tax goes by many names. It’s often called a Tobin tax, after
the economist James Tobin. In Europe it goes by the more pedestrian financial transaction tax. In Britain, it
goes by the wonderful Robin Hood tax, and is supported in an often clever campaign.
On this side of the Atlantic, there is a ghostly silence on a transaction tax in respectable political quarters. But
that might change. This month, Senator Tom Harkin, Democrat of Iowa, and Representative Peter DeFazio,
Democrat of Oregon, plan to reintroduce their bill calling for just such a tax.
3. The Trade
View all posts
Article Tools
Facebook
Save
Twitter
E-mail
Google+
Print
Share
Permalink
A transaction tax could raise a huge amount of money and cause less pain than many alternatives. It could offset
the need for cuts to the social safety net or tax increases that damage consumer demand. How huge a sum? Mr.
Harkin and Mr. DeFazio got an estimate from the bipartisan Joint Committee on Taxation, which scores tax
plans. It’s a hearty one: $352 billion over 10 years.
The money would come from a tiny levy. The bill calls for a three-basis-point charge on most trades. A basis
point is one-hundredth of a percentage point. So it amounts to 3 cents on every $100 traded.
And the bill contains some exemptions intended to make the tax more politically palatable. The first sales of
stocks (initial public offerings) and bonds are exempted, so that the markets’ capital-raising function isn’t
harmed. Initial investments and withdrawals from tax-protected accounts, like retirement or education funds,
also have a measure of protection.
Critics of such a tax cavil that it will harm our capital markets and won’t raise that much money. They argue
that such a tax cannot be enforced; that it will depress trading, leading to lower asset prices; and that it will
ultimately be passed on to retail investors.
These are anemic arguments, and are completely destroyed in anexcellent piece of myth-busting by a group in
Britain called Stamp Out Poverty.
Lots of taxes are hard to collect, but this doesn’t seem like one of them. Sales taxes have decent compliance,
and they are often collected by small businesses conducting commerce in cash. Trading, on the other hand, is
conducted by large businesses on computers. This tax would be collected by the exchanges. If there’s no
exchange involved, the buyer owes it. It would be paid on any trade carried out in the United States or by any
American entity or individual (a corporation’s offshore subsidiaries can’t get around it).
If there is truly a concern, then the tax could be modified so that if it hadn’t been paid, neither the transaction
nor any legal action arising from it would be enforceable in the United States judicial system. Voilà! Plenty of
compliance.
But those who argue against the tax are blind to a sea change in the way society sees the financial sector. They
should be asked to make an affirmative case for more frenzied capital markets activity, rather than just assume
that tamping it down is malign.
Yes, trading costs have come down and trading has skyrocketed in the last decade and a half. What have we
gotten for it? Bubbles, crashes, volatile asset prices and an outsize financial sector that extracts rents from the
rest of the economy. Rising volumes and tighter spreads haven’t delivered good economic growth, broad-based
wage growth or good jobs.
4. Nor have they even helped the stock market. Where is the boom in newly public companies? The Standard &
Poor’s 500-stock index is only just now getting back to its peak before the financial crisis. The Nasdaq isn’t
close to the peak achieved in the year 2000. Stock market valuations are depressed.
So let trading costs rise again, if the Tobin tax would really lead to that. (Other factors, like brutal competition,
might still keep them just as low.) Much of the trading that occurs in the market is socially useless. It might
narrow slightly the spread between the prices at which securities and derivatives are bought and sold, but the
minute there’s a crisis, the traders flee. They provide the kind of liquidity that is available only when it is not
needed.
The average American, who has limited exposure to the stock market, has little to fear from the tax and much to
gain. And if some of the high-frequency trading flees offshore? Good riddance.
Alternatively, let’s suppose that a transaction tax succeeds beyond expectations in bringing down excessive
trading and doesn’t raise as much as projected. Fine. The American capital markets will become less volatile
and more connected to fundamentals. Pension fund and mutual fund managers will have an incentive to hold
stocks longer and adjust their investing expectations. There is a scourge of short-term thinking in American
business; a transaction tax leans against this malign influence.
But what if the tide of technology and investor attention-deficit disorder continues apace, and trading does not
decline as much as the securities industry and its paid academic shills claim? That’s fine, too. We’ll take the
revenue.
The politics of a transaction tax are fascinating. Mr. Harkin doesn’t have the juice to get it done on his own,
several Senate staff members and Washington observers explained to me. The transaction tax would need to be
embraced by some senators on the relevant committees, like finance or banking. The Senate Finance Committee
is a problem because Charles Schumer of New York, the heavyweight Democrat who serves on it, often acts as
if his main constituency is Wall Street.
There have been hints of a possible anti-Wall Street/Big Bank coalition between Midwestern and Western
Democrats and Republicans. The Ohio Democrat Sherrod Brown and the Louisiana Republican David Vitter
don’t agree on much, but they co-sponsored a bill calling for more bank capital. Charles E. Grassley, the Iowa
Republican famous for skewering vested interests, serves on the Senate Finance Committee. Of course,
Republicans have taken blood oaths never to support higher revenue.
If some kind of increase in taxes is inevitable, one that takes aim at high-frequency traders probably hits few
Iowans and average Americans in general, while doing much good.
Jesse Eisinger is a reporter for ProPublica, an independent, nonprofit newsroom that produces investigative
journalism in the public interest. Email: jesse@propublica.org. Twitter: @Eisingerj
A version of this article appeared in print on 02/07/2013, on page B5 of the NewYork edition with the headline: The 0.03% Solution to Washington’s
Budget Problems.
Tags
Banking and Financial Institutions, DeFazio, Peter A, Federal Taxes (US), Harkin, Tom, Taxation, Tobin,
James
Related Articles
From DealBook
Swiss Bank Pleads Guilty to Tax Law Violations
5. Not All Companies Would Welcome a Lower Tax Rate
Previous Article R.B.S. Settlement a Burden for Britain
Next Article Liberty’s Bid for Virgin Media Pushes the Envelope on Debt
90 Comments
Share your thoughts.
All
Reader Picks
Newest
Write a Comment
1.
Ace Tracy
New York
For the comments screaming about a new tax, they should realize that Wall Street firms have been
pushing through transaction fees of their own. The fee is priced a cents per trade, so the big, big trades
from pensions, hedge funds, etc. pay as a % a very low transaction fee. Yet the small investor who
probably buys $5000 to $10,000 in a trade pays a much much higher %.
So look at your own brokerage statement and figure out the % you are really paying in transaction fees.
And this is going straight into the bonus checks of already overpaid CEOs.
INCREASE THE SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS TAX RATE
The low, low rates that day traders, program trades, hedge funds, and derivative traders pay on their short
term gains (often held for minutes or days) is what is fueling the rampant leveraged speculation in the
world financial markets.
Short term capital gains tax rate is based on the marginal income tax rate, often just 28%. Before the
Reagan tax cuts this rate was up to 70%+. Though it made sense to drop the income tax rate, it made no
sense to drop the S/T gains tax rate by 2/3. The result has been a boom/bust market. To remedy this,
Congress should set s/t gains tax rate at 80% for a day trade graduated down to 50% for 1-year trade.
Only this change will bring back INVESTORS, and stop the speculation.
Feb. 7, 2013 at 6:49 p.m.
2.
Gary Reber
Murrieta, CA
While essentially a tax on Wall Street buy-and-sell trade "gambling" transactions, a transaction tax could
raise a huge amount of money.
6. Of course, the better solution is to address the CONCENTRATED OWNERSHIP issue of income
inequality and use the word OWNERSHIP as that is what ties one to the property rights to derive income
from the non-human factor of production––productive capital––in the form of prime corporate stock
dividends. Such financial structures are not well understood.
A National Right To Capital Ownership Bill that restores the American dream should be advocated by
Reich, which addresses the reality of Americans facing job opportunity deterioration and devaluation due
to tectonic shifts in the technologies of production.
There is a solution, which will result in double-digit economic growth and simultaneously broaden
private, individual ownership so that EVERY American's income significantly grows, providing the
means to support themselves and their families with an affluent lifestyle. The Just Third Way Master Plan
for America's future is published athttp://foreconomicjustice.org/?p=5797.
Support the Capital Homestead Act athttp://www.cesj.org/homestead/index.htm
andhttp://www.cesj.org/homestead/summary-cha.htm
Feb. 7, 2013 at 6:06 p.m.
3.
rob
Washington
There's a huge overlooked fact in this discussion.
Since we have huge securies exchanges, there's a lot of extra demand for the dollar.
Its the reserve currency that must be bought to move money around.
What happens to that demand when these exchanges move offshore to avoid the tax?
How does that effect your standard of living and other things, like government treasury rates?
This tax is a self inflicted harm to anyone, but especially us.
Feb. 7, 2013 at 5:54 p.m.
Recommended2
4.
Drew
LA
Don't listen to this illogical garbage. Why would we want to model our system on the bankrupt EU?
Bloomberg has a great article on the likely affect of a Tobin tax.
Eurobond 50th Anniversary Shows Tobin Tax Risks
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-04/eurobond-50th-anniversary-shows...
Feb. 7, 2013 at 5:28 p.m.
7. Recommended2
1.
Ace Tracy
New York
Just to correct your perception of Europe, Germany is NOT bankrupt, nor any of the countries with
major exchanges.
The USA economy would love to have Germany's low, low unemployment rate.
Not saying it is perfect in the EU, but it certainly has many positives this country could learn from.
Feb. 7, 2013 at 6:25 p.m.
Recommended1
5.
ChicagoFuturesTrader
Chicago IL
Sorry, but you lost me at: "Much of the trading that occurs in the market is socially useless."
Tell me, how do you determine which trades are socially beneficial and which ones are useless? How did
you gain that special insight to determine which economic activities should be allowed and which
shouldn't? Isn't it possible that the "useless" trades that you disparage actually generate helpful
information for people in the economy outside of the financial markets?
Feb. 7, 2013 at 5:07 p.m.
Recommended5
6.
rob
Washington D.C.
There are so many reasons that this tax is a lot worse than it sounds to the less mathematically inclined. .
(2 isn't a large number. . What about 2^10?)
But here's the easiest one: securities exchanges are electronic and can move to anywhere in the world
literally overnight.
Feb. 7, 2013 at 4:27 p.m.
Recommended4
8. 7.
J
Chicago
When you say a financial transaction tax could raise a huge amount of money and cause less pain than
many of the alternatives, you highlight precisely why this is such a terrible idea. While it is simplistic and
an easy sell to the general public, it ignores that the painful alternatives involve reducing government
spending so that the “entitlement” programs (many of which are not an “entitlement” but due to people
who have paid their taxes) can survive long term based on even- handed and fair applications, that the tax
code needs repair and the securities market structure requires thoughtful fixes to make capital raising and
trading safer and more effective. It is much easier to continue to paint every trader with the same brush
and ignore the work that needs to be done. Capital markets actually matter. I have no doubt that a
transaction tax would cause a huge contraction in the economy and that long-term it would hurt
consumers in part because it will affect the trillions that individuals hold in their retirement funds and
mutual funds. If a transaction tax passes, I’ll be the first to put my retirement funds in a standard bank
account. Aside from the tax itself, when the liquidity contraction hits, watch the markets swing, baby.
Why would you pave a path that will facilitate government officials continuing to ignore the roads that
require fixing in order for our nation to travel safely into the future? I expect our legislators like your
article very much.
Feb. 7, 2013 at 4:19 p.m.
Recommended4
8.
Abe Froman
Austin TX
For those who believe in this tax, I have some advice: next time you're in a really long line behind
hundreds of people, try cutting to the front of the line. And when the people object, tell them "if you let
me cut in line, it saves me an hour but it only costs each of you a few seconds, because there are so many
of you . . so it makes sense that you let me cut".
See how that works out for you. Sure its a ridiculous idea, but it just might work because It's the same
concept as this tax . . harm doesn't matter as long as you spread out among a lot of people.
Feb. 7, 2013 at 12:45 p.m.
Recommended3
1.
Daniel
Brooklyn, NY
That's not even close to an accurate analogy. The vast majority of people who trade in the markets
will never even notice a tax of three basis points. Even when three basis points is a considerable
amount of money because a trade is very large, it will not substantially effect the incentives or
9. outcomes for the parties.
The only people who will be hurt by this tax are high frequency traders who trade thousands of
times for the very slimmest of margins. For those traders, a three basis point tax will completely
swamp their profit on many trades, and render them substantially less profitable.
There is an honest debate to be had on whether that is a good outcome. Some would argue that
HFTs improve market liquidity and efficiency in pricing. Others argue that HFTs distort pricing
and add dangerous volatility to the markets. Having that debate is helpful. Shrill whining about
"fairness" is not.
Feb. 7, 2013 at 5:05 p.m.
Recommended2
9.
Venture
nj
we need to get the great capital allocations to give money to grow business...instead of crazy stock
manipulation and gaming various markets for rewards. GROW BUSINESSES! Instead we have the FED
printing money so Goldman can corner, Oil, Corn, and other markets.
Feb. 7, 2013 at 12:44 p.m.
10.
James Barrett
Chicago
clueless idea that will not have a chance to raise anywhere close to what Harkin thinks. He'll have to look
for another way to find money to subsidize his stupid ethanol .
Feb. 7, 2013 at 12:44 p.m.
Recommended3
11.
Jim S.
Cleveland
A lot of people made a lot of money for a lot of years paying brokerage fees of several percent (i.e. a
couple of hundred basis points). Why would three basis points stop things today?
Feb. 7, 2013 at 12:44 p.m.
10. 12.
TD
CA
The financial transaction tax is not a tax on Wall Street – It’s a tax on Main Street.
-- The Secretary General of the European Federation for Retirement Provision says the FTT is not a tax
on Wall Street, but rather a tax on retirement savings and other “innocent bystanders.”
-- James Tobin’s co-author, Berkeley Professor Barry Eichengreen, says the Tobin tax is the “wrong tool”
to raise revenues.
-- A study by the World Bank concluded that “… neither the tax revenues nor the efficiency gains hoped
for… are likely to materialize.”
-- The IMF showed that the best way to hold banks responsible is to tax them directly because the FTT
tax burden would “fall largely on final consumers,” not the financial sector.
-- Most empirical evidence shows that “higher transactions costs are actually associated with more, rather
than less, volatility.”
To learn why a diverse group of people from many different backgrounds opposes the FTT, please read
“Straight talk about the FTT” at: www.financialtransactiontaxes.com . (Includes over 40 references with
research from experts around the world.)
Feb. 7, 2013 at 12:44 p.m.
Recommended2
1.
Ace Tracy
New York
Yet these same people have no problem promoting hedge funds that charge huge, huge fees: like
2% plus 20% of profits. Many mutual funds have fees up to 5% plus annual expense rations of 2%
and annuities are off the charts with initial 7% fees.
What has hurt pensions and the world economy has not been taxes, but rampant leveraged
speculation.
Feb. 7, 2013 at 6:29 p.m.
13.
JB
Naperville
11. Really? Another proposed tax that impacts anyone owning a IRA, 401K, 403b, pension et al plans?
Hardly novel wanting to tax someone today.
Let's try something really unique -- across the board cuts in spending -- not reduced growth of budgets
but actually cuts in spending.
I am sure the writer voted for PBO. BTW, how is the president doing with job growth? Still blaming
Bush?
Oh, PBO is too busy deflecting economic issues with social issues with the compliant journalists, who
effectively, are no more than Mad Ave advertisers.
Son, I have a suggestion for you: follow the WH speech writers to Hollywood. Oh, btw, let me tax you on
the margin at 90% for the drivel you will produce.
Feb. 7, 2013 at 12:42 p.m.
Recommended2
14.
Chris
New York, NY
Massaya,
Reread what I wrote. I am, "entitled to keep what I earn." Did I sleep through some Socialist revolution?
Who the heck wants to pay more taxes? You know, I'd say the same for you, assuming you have earnings.
I wouldn't want them taken away from you either. You earned it. You should keep as much of it as you
can.
Taxes are great so long as someone else pays them! You've a neat philosophy. If taxes are so worthwhile,
vital, etc., then please feel free to add a zero to whatever check you write to the IRS come April 15.
Feb. 7, 2013 at 12:40 p.m.
Recommended1
15.
A one percenter
USA
Target frequent traders by making it graduated - .05% if you hold it less than an hour, .04% if you hold it
less than a day, .03% if you hold it less than a week, .02% if you hold it less than a month and .01% if
you hold it less then three months.
Capital markets are socially valuable only in so far as they channel capital towards real investments in
real businesses with long term strategies that generate growth and jobs etc. Short term, rapid fire trading
doesn't really further that end.
12. Short term traders provide "liquidity" but the value of such liquidity is questionable and generally only
valuable to other short term traders looking to get in and out of positions. That said, long term investors
like to know they can get out of their positions eventually, but such a tax would not destroy liquidity all
together...
Feb. 7, 2013 at 12:39 p.m.
Recommended1
16.
Leaningleft
Fort Lee
To the barricades! Off with their heads!
OR
Stop spending! Stop spending!
Feb. 7, 2013 at 12:37 p.m.
Recommended1
17.
MikeSeattle
Seattle,WA
Retail investors will pay this, and the big banks will be exempt, just as the case is with the UK "stamp
tax", or look to Sweden where market volume collapsed to virtually nil. Such a tax would simiply lead to
market distortion, and the grandiose projections of revenue would fall dramatically short.
They're trying to punish the equity markets (which give us things like startup companies, such as Apple,
that employ people) for the sins of large-scale debt/derivatives in the housing market. We'll all pay the
price if this transaction tax becomes reality.
If the real goal is to curb trading in strange derivatives, then the recipe is simple: ban those derivatives. Or
even all derivatives. I doubt it would hurt equities at all.
The upshot of this tax has far less to do with "punishing Wall Street" that it would first appear -- it's a
power grab.
Feb. 7, 2013 at 2:24 a.m.
Recommended2
18.
S.S.
13. S.E. Asia
As a friendly Asian competitor I am thinking people who write about an economy-destructive tax should
first get their mathematic calculations right.
USA is supposed to be the largest financial centre in the world. Surely not foolish enough to fall for a
highly discredited tax experiment that would reduce it to small fry, the small relation to burgeoning Asia?
This is well understood as a net revenue negative tax, the sums just do not add up and even worse, the
exponential damage across all supporting industries would result in hundreds of thousands of lost jobs,
small investment damage and more off-shoring.
Very bad idea. No sane government would touch this with a 100ft barge pole.
Feb. 6, 2013 at 11:45 p.m.
Recommended5
1.
Brad
Chicago
What is this, some kind of fake Goldman Sachs troll? Although reading it was pretty funny!
Feb. 7, 2013 at 12:34 p.m.
19.
atron
Chelsea
This is such a no-brainer. Unfortunately today's politicians have no brains.
Feb. 6, 2013 at 10:45 p.m.
Recommended6
20.
OSS Architect
San Franciso
Well .03% may not be much, but at least the large multi-national US companies that park trillions of
dollars offshore to avoid US corporate taxes, may someday be paying something to the government,
finally....
Since the UK already imposes a tax on transactions, and all the major European markets may shortly have
one (on derivatives as well as stocks), the US markets become the preferred place to do trades leverging
these offshore assets. - if Wall Street can continue to beat back Harkin/DeFazio with their friends in
Congress.
14. Talk about a "Win-Win" for a select few.
Crank up that soundtrack on taxing widows and orphans!
Feb. 6, 2013 at 10:45 p.m.
Recommended5
21.
An Ordinary American
Prague
It's interesting that Mr. Eisinger mentions only in passing this tidbit: "The Senate Finance Committee is a
problem because Charles Schumer of New York, the heavyweight Democrat who serves on it, often acts
as if his main constituency is Wall Street."
In fact, that is not just a "problem". It's a BIG "problem". And I do wish the Times would use its influence
on the op-ed pages to take Mr. Schumer on.
Feb. 6, 2013 at 10:45 p.m.
Recommended12
22.
Einstein
America
Could the author please clarify.
No one wants a tax on ALL financial transactions. Don't scare people!
A 1% tax on WALL STREET transactions is all that's needed and would be extremely beneficial for our
economy.
Feb. 6, 2013 at 10:20 p.m.
Recommended1
23.
Henry
New York
No- cut this ridiculous entitlement spending and pork. Obviously once a 3 cent per $100 dollar tax is
implemented we'd been on the slippery slope to higher rates. As Vergil stated: Facilis descensus
averno(the path to hell is paved with good intentions)
Feb. 6, 2013 at 10:16 p.m.
15. Recommended3
24.
O'Brien
Airstrip One
Dear God,
Hi, It's me, O'Brien. Let this talk of the "transaction tax" be the first step toward taxing consumption
instead of earnings, and overall wealth instead of earnings.
O'Brien
Feb. 6, 2013 at 10:16 p.m.
Recommended2
25.
mk
Buffalo
Corrections:
1. EU FTT tax is one country idea being forced on the rest using administrative loopholes in EU treaty
despite being opposed by a number of countries.
2. Capital gains and income from capital are taxed and this is call for double taxation.
3. Capital is producing income and appreciates and therefore is treated differently than ordinary
transactions because free flow of capital, risk taking was engine of accelerated growth.
4. FTT will restrict free flow of capital and turn capital into budget removing portion of it from free
economy.
5. Loopholes and exemptions will benefit big banks and market makers and the cost of transaction will be
solely paid by retail investor.
6. All people are affected by capital markets including those not directly participating
7. IPO market and US capital markets suffered from overregulation and high barrier of entry imposed by
new laws introduced recently and this will be no different with FTT
8. FTT will help create black market and physical goods exchange or will repatriate capital to Asia.
9. Are there any other economic ideas beside taxation and more regulation of economy?
Feb. 6, 2013 at 10:16 p.m.
Recommended4
1.
Mouse
NYC
'...because free flow of capital, risk taking was engine of accelerated growth...'
16. And that growth was where exactly? Besides in the pockets of the 001%?
Feb. 7, 2013 at 12:34 p.m.
Read More Comments
Ads by Google what's this?
Get FATCA compliant
Understand final FATCA regs with us on 27-28 Feb, London. Book now.
www.withholdingtaxcongress.com/uk/
Previous Article R.B.S. Settlement a Burden for Britain
Next Article Liberty’s Bid for Virgin Media Pushes the Envelope on Debt
The Wire
Feb 7, 12:56 pm law.com
Senate Committee Approves Three Circuit Nominees
Feb 7, 12:51 pm nytimes.com
Fed Official Sees Tension in Some Credit Markets
Feb 7, 12:40 pm WSJ.com
Dreamliner Woes Pose Risk for Parts Makers
Feb 7, 11:46 am Reuters
BlackBerry to stop selling handsets in Japan - Nikkei
Feb 7, 11:20 am PE HUB
KKR Returned $9B to Investors in '12, Fundraising for NAXI Extended Until 2H
News by Sector
Energy
Industrials
Cyclical Goods & Services
Autos
Media
Non-Cycl. Goods & Services
Food & Beverage
Technology
Financials
Real Estate
17. Basic Materials
Health Care
Telecom
Utilities
More New York Times News by Sector
Global
Energy
Media
Tech
Health Care
Fed Official Sees Tension in Some Credit Markets
A Federal Reserve governor, Jeremy Stein, said in a speech that some credit markets are showing signs of
overheating as investors take larger risks in response to low interest rates.
U.S. Officials Fault F.A.A. for Missing 787 Battery Risk
The head of the National Transportation Safety Board said aviation officials accepted test results that failed to
properly assess the risks of smoke or fire from the batteries on Boeing’s new 787 jets.
DealBook: Ireland Reaches New Deal to Restructure Debt Tied to Banks
The government passed emergency legislation to liquidate Anglo Irish Bank, one of the country’s largest, as
part of a plan to restructure debt payments.
Green Blog: The Nuclear Power and Natural Gas Equation
Given the abundance of cheap natural gas, aging nuclear plants with expensive safety problems may find it
harder to survive.
Green Blog: A Climate Proposal: Bundling Consumer Buying Power
To promote sustainable practices, a new nonprofit corporation proposes to help people team up when buying
standard services.
Green Blog: RGGI Proposes Tighter Emissions Cap
The 2014 regional limit for carbon dioxide emissions would be 45 percent lower, the Regional Greenhouse Gas
Initiative says.
Media Decoder Blog: Led by Celebrity Titles, Magazine Newsstand Sales Slide
People, US Weekly, Cosmopolitan and Glamour all suffered double-digit decreases in the second half of 2012.
Media Decoder Blog: Warner Music Group Buys EMI Assets for $765 Million
Warner will now own Parlophone, the historic label that is home to Coldplay, Blur and Kylie Minogue.
Media Decoder Blog: New Novel Takes Readers Downstairs at Longbourn
18. Jo Baker's tale of the servants in "Pride and Prejudice'' drew frenetic bidding among publishing houses when it
was offered last week.
Growing Numbers of Start-Ups Are Worth a Billion Dollars
An unexpectedly large number of high-technology start-ups are valued at $1 billion or more.
Around World, Gun Rules, and Results, Vary Wildly
After a tragedy like the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, it's a statistic that is always trotted
out. Compared to just about anywhere else with a stable, developed government — and many countries without
even that — the more than 11,000 gun-related killings each year in the United States are simply off the charts.
Reports: Exit Locked at Burned Bangladesh Factory
An official says Bangladesh's government has ordered an investigation into allegations that the sole emergency
exit was locked at a garment factory where a weekend fire killed seven female workers.
Living With Cancer: Waking in the Dark
Before cancer, I slept through the night. Now, I wake in the dark because of the pull of stitches, the pain of
drains or the need to empty some bulb or bag attached to my body.
Well: Think Like a Doctor: A Confused and Terrified Patient
Can you figure out why a 55-year-old man who is recovering from a devastating injury in a rehabilitation
facility suddenly becomes confused, frightened and paranoid? Solve the mystery with Dr. Lisa Sanders.
Psychiatric Hospitals Alter Rules on Patient Smoking
After decades in which smoking by people with mental illness was supported and even encouraged, a move in
Louisiana reflects a broader effort to reverse course.
DealBook E-Mails and Alerts
Sign up for the DealBook Newsletter, delivered every morning and afternoon, and receive breaking news alerts
throughout the day.
Subscribe
Advertise on NYTimes.com
Data delayed at least 15 minutes 02/07/2013 2:15 PM ET
19. Markets
Top Movers
U.S.
Americas
Europe
Asia
Bonds
CBRE Group Inc
+8.9%$1.95
O'Reilly Automotiv... Inc
+8.2%$7.56
Akamai Technolog... Inc
–15.6%$6.50
Teradata Corp
–9.7%$6.43
Get Quotes
@DealBook on Twitter
What we're saying (and reading) on Twitter.
WILL ALDEN
Remember when Herbalife compared itself to the Girl Scouts? Not cool, Bill Ackman says.
http://t.co/WWeB18Eo about an hour ago
QUENTIN WEBB
Merger machismo: looks like Liberty Global and Virgin Media were codenamed "Lynx" and "Viper"
http://t.co/tKkY3qE4 about an hour ago
DEALBOOK
Ackman to Herbalife: You're Not the Girl Scouts http://t.co/q3iTq7az about an hour ago
SALLIE KRAWCHECK
UBS paying banker bonuses partly in bonds, to reduce risk appetite http://t.co/3ov7x413 via
Headlines
Feb 6, 6:45 pm
The unsexiest media company alive: Time Warner
Feb 6, 10:06 am
Liberty pushes envelope for post-crisis M&A debt
Feb 5, 3:02 pm
Dell's $24 bln LBO involves a club of one
Columnists
20. The Rules
Lucian A. Bebchuk
Standard Deduction
Victor Fleischer
@vicfleischer
China 中国 Insider
Bill Bishop
@niubi
White Collar Watch
Peter J. Henning
@peterjhenning
Deal Professor
Steven M. Davidoff
@StevenDavidoff
In Debt
Stephen J. Lubben
The Trade
21. Jesse Eisinger of ProPublica
@eisingerj
DealBook Column
Andrew Ross Sorkin
@andrewrsorkin
Complete Coverage: DealBook Columnists »
Ads by Google what's this?
£20k Brazil Investment
For a Limited Period Only! Earn up to 191% ROI in 3-5 years
www.landcorpnews.com
Complete Coverage
THE TRADE DEAL PROFESSOR DEALBOOK COLUMN
Jesse Eisinger | The 0.03% Solution Steven M. Davidoff | Corporate Andrew Ross Sorkin | Nominee for
Follow DealBook Anywhere
Mobile Site
When your need to know is right now.
DealBook E-Mail Newsletter
22. Sign up for the latest financial news delivered every morning and afternoon.
Facebook Twitter YouTube RSS
Copyright 2013 The New York Times Company
Privacy
Terms of Service