[yonkshi]

It appears they are using an algorithmic process to perform the heartbeat trading, and they are patentable[0] as long as they are not illegal. Tax loopholes are not illegal but very unethical, I think the policy makers share equal if not more blame for this.

[0] https://www.quora.com/Is-it-possible-to-patent-an-algorithm

[6502nerdface]

It is possible to patent a “business method,” no algorithm required [1].

Also, TFA addresses the ethics question in this case, and I don’t think it’s so obviously unethical:

> A lot of middle-class people love investing in ETFs and not paying taxes until they sell their shares, and politicians and regulators seem pretty happy to let them do it. It is also quite reasonable: People who buy ETFs pay taxes on their gains when they sell the ETFs and actually realize the gains, which feels like the right time to pay taxes, whereas people who buy mutual funds have to pay capital gains taxes at random times that have nothing to do with their own investment decisions or cash flows. From that perspective, the heartbeat trades are not an evil tax dodge but just a sensible mechanical use of the rules to achieve the logical result that everyone wants.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_method_patent

[fjsolwmv]

It's no more unethical or loophole to suppress taxes when an etf reallocates holding than it is unethical or loophole to suppress taxes when a corporation sells a widget and then buys another one. There is no realized gain to the shareholders

[andrepd]

The "policy-makers" are the people exploiting the loopholes. They are the same people.