Kevin Humphreys (Dublin South East, Labour) | Oireachtas source

-----of 0.5% which generates £5 billion a year, and that does not include trade derivatives. It says it is against it, but it still operates it in the market. The US securities regulator also operates it and it generates approximately $1 billion. It operates it on a rate of 0.00257%. It increased it from 0.0017% in 2010 to its current level. The same arguments we hear against the FTT were given at the time.

The witnesses have access to the information and we get brief presentations. I do not have the resources to go into such great detail. The Swedish model is usually given as an example of what was done in the 1980s but the Swedish model is not what is being proposed. The Swedish model allowed people to bypass the FTT by trading through brokers outside the country. It is not stated that the Swedish model was changed subsequently to one we are proposing and it generates approximately €1 billion in revenue for the Swedish economy without much avoidance.

That is the reason I was concerned about the figures given because they did not give the entire picture. Can the witnesses give me more detail on what they have given in their presentation because it appears to be only a partial presentation? In terms of supporting the Minister, the role of this committee in the next year is to seriously examine the FTT but we do not appear to be getting the full picture from presentations. Is there a mechanism whereby the witnesses can facilitate this committee in trying to get a fuller picture? I referred earlier to research driven and evidence based information. I am somewhat concerned that we are not getting the entire picture today.