Yep, the end of retail fx is here. Regulators want us to buy stocks..
Breaking: Australian Parliament Passes Product Intervention
Sad 
lol
Looking for some answers/insights from the folks here in this thread on the following -
1) Apart from Tickmill (Seychelles) and Tickmill (UK & Cyprus - professional account) , can anybody suggest reputable off shore brokers that provide 1:300-1:500 leverage and low costs (spreads/commissions) ?
2) ASIC mentioned that October 1st is the last day to send in comments (or along those lines). Any opinions on actually when the 1:20 will be implemented i.e. come in force for Aussie brokers ?
3) Would Australian residents be prevented from setting up accounts with off shore brokers ? i.e. all Australian residents can only trade fx with ASIC regulated brokers.
Considering that those in Europe have been moving to Aussie brokers, I doubt they would make it mandatory for Australian residents to only trade with ASIC regulated brokers.
.......Thoughts ?
lolLooking for some answers/insights from the folks here in this thread on the following -
1) Apart from Tickmill (Seychelles) and Tickmill (UK & Cyprus - professional account) , can anybody suggest reputable off shore brokers that provide 1:300-1:500 leverage and low costs (spreads/commissions) ?
2) ASIC mentioned that October 1st is the last day to send in comments (or along those lines). Any opinions on actually when the 1:20 will be implemented i.e. come in force for Aussie brokers ?
3) Would Australian residents be prevented from setting up accounts with off shore brokers ? i.e. all Australian residents can only trade fx with ASIC regulated brokers.
Considering that those in Europe have been moving to Aussie brokers, I doubt they would make it mandatory for Australian residents to only trade with ASIC regulated brokers.
.......Thoughts ?
- #73
- Edited Aug 25, 2019 5:24am Aug 24, 2019 10:21am | Edited Aug 25, 2019 5:24am
- Joined Dec 2005 | Status: Trader | 2,857 Posts
- #75
- Edited 3:13am Aug 25, 2019 1:21am | Edited 3:13am
Being in 
, the key takeaway I'm getting is that AU brokers will not be allowed to advertise their high leverage products next to their regulated products.
I'm currently with IC Markets so will be interested to see what they do with their Seychelles office that was set up to take on all of their OS clients, before ASIC backed down on their rushed enforcement after industry outcry the timelines were impossible to meet.
My guess is it will be transitioned to an independent entity instead of a subsidiary, probably with a similar though not identical business name.
ICS Markets anyone..?
ASIC Report (p.39):
‘Regulatory arbitrage’ refers to persons attempting to benefit from differences in regulation between jurisdictions. For example, an entity may establish a subsidiary in a jurisdiction that it perceives has more lenient regulatory requirements and then direct its clients to transact through that subsidiary.
We will continue to closely monitor for ‘regulatory arbitrage’, and other potential avoidance practice by issuers which undermine or attempt to work around the intended purpose of our proposed intervention. If significant consumer detriment persists we will consider further intervention.
So how many complaints will ASIC receive from an independent entity under FSA regulation: Zero. Thus, ASIC awareness of consumer detriment: Nil.
It's worth remembering that ASIC officials don't actually give a crap about protecting anyone. Only that they can meet their KPI's to pass oversight from the Minister for Finance's office and Senate committees.
If they damage the retail broking sector and actually cause traders to take increased risks in the process, not a problem..
, the key takeaway I'm getting is that AU brokers will not be allowed to advertise their high leverage products next to their regulated products.I'm currently with IC Markets so will be interested to see what they do with their Seychelles office that was set up to take on all of their OS clients, before ASIC backed down on their rushed enforcement after industry outcry the timelines were impossible to meet.
My guess is it will be transitioned to an independent entity instead of a subsidiary, probably with a similar though not identical business name.
ICS Markets anyone..?
ASIC Report (p.39):
‘Regulatory arbitrage’ refers to persons attempting to benefit from differences in regulation between jurisdictions. For example, an entity may establish a subsidiary in a jurisdiction that it perceives has more lenient regulatory requirements and then direct its clients to transact through that subsidiary.
We will continue to closely monitor for ‘regulatory arbitrage’, and other potential avoidance practice by issuers which undermine or attempt to work around the intended purpose of our proposed intervention. If significant consumer detriment persists we will consider further intervention.
So how many complaints will ASIC receive from an independent entity under FSA regulation: Zero. Thus, ASIC awareness of consumer detriment: Nil.
It's worth remembering that ASIC officials don't actually give a crap about protecting anyone. Only that they can meet their KPI's to pass oversight from the Minister for Finance's office and Senate committees.
If they damage the retail broking sector and actually cause traders to take increased risks in the process, not a problem..
- #76
- Edited 4:54am Aug 25, 2019 4:24am | Edited 4:54am
{quote} I am confident ASIC has made their decision, and it wont be changing. The speed with which they produced this paper so soon after the close of the "consultation" period ended tells me the decision has already been made; and likely made well before the end of the "consultation" period. Plus, ASIC is an IOSCO member ,......when you are a club member you do what the other...
attached is a letter cc-ed to me and sent to ASIC. signed by a couple of prop firms ceos in Australia speaking as a group on behalf of the profitable clients according to asic's statistics, have attached the gist, remaining part of letter is marked p&c.. least they are giving suggestions, kuddos.
