May 16, 2007
I'm tentatively scheduled to appear on CNBC's "Closing Bell" tomorrow, May 17th, at about 4 pm Eastern time. I'll be talking about
(what else) the taxation of private equity funds.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/38673/18539628
Links to weblogs that reference CNBC - Closing Bell:
1. Posted by Gordon Smith on May 16, 2007 @ 20:38 | Permalink
Cool!
2. Posted by Michael Guttentag on May 17, 2007 @ 14:48 | Permalink
It is exciting to see someone’s scholarship have such an immediate impact on public policy issues. Now for the critique: I think you represented your position well, but were perhaps a bit too polite. It may not be a great sign when Maria Bartiromo keeps saying: “Victor?” Still, I doubt I would have done as well. Huge congratulations!
3. Posted by Vic on May 17, 2007 @ 15:28 | Permalink
But isn't it rude to interrupt people?
TV may not be my most effective medium of communication, but it was fun. Thanks for watching!
4. Posted by Gordon Smith on May 17, 2007 @ 16:07 | Permalink
The video was just posted on the website linked in the original post. In my unbiased and highly informed judgment, Vic creamed Bob.
At one point, Bob tried to portray the reform proposal as "singling out private equity," but Vic stayed on message: PE is currently singled out for special treatment.
That argument seemed to knock Bob off balance, and he tried a new strategy: PE should be encouraged through favorable tax treatment because PE is good for America. Vic counters that he doesn't want to stop PE, but doesn't see the justification for special treatment.
What about labor, Bob cries? Chrysler, Chrysler, Chrysler! Vic responds that if you care about distributional justice, fix the tax system!
Something for everyone.
Oh, and I didn't think Vic was too passive. He cut Bob off once, and Maria had to call on Bob, too. She was just managing the discussion.
5. Posted by Vic on May 17, 2007 @ 17:58 | Permalink
Thanks for the kind words, Gordon! I just watched the clip - not as bad as I thought, tho lots of room for improvement.
I am still confused by the clip they showed of the guy from Blackrock - was he seriously saying that small PE firms and hedge funds need a tax subsidy to compete with the bug guys? Seems like an odd way to spend our tax dollars. I can maybe make a case for venture capital, although for administrative reasons I think a subsidy at the portfolio company level would make more sense.
6. Posted by Darian Ibrahim on May 17, 2007 @ 18:29 | Permalink
Gordon says:
"At one point, Bob tried to portray the reform proposal as "singling out private equity," but Vic stayed on message: PE is currently singled out for special treatment."
That's exactly right. It's hard to argue that private equity would be unfairly treated by removal of a preference only it receives.
Well done, Vic!
