Breaking: Australian Parliament Passes Product Intervention | Page 7 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Real professional trader passes fake "prop firm" challenge 3 replies

Metatrader Optimizer freezing on random passes 1 reply

1 passes done during optimization results discarded insignificant. 10 replies

US intervention for the dollar 14 replies

Attachments: Breaking: Australian Parliament Passes Product Intervention
Exit Attachments

Breaking: Australian Parliament Passes Product Intervention

  • #121
  • Oct 24, 2020 3:24am Oct 24, 2020 3:24am
Quoting Drolph
{quote} Well, you could have that much easier by using simple math, but ok. 1 Lot equals 100.000 units of the base currency - in case of GPBUSD it would be GBP for example. But your practical example demonstrates the problem pretty good. So here is the question: Which way do you take more risks to trade your desired lotsize considering the whole amount of money you have to deposit at a given broker. 100k with an australian entity or 10k with the Seychellen one? In both ways the broker could theoretically run away with your money or go bust. In both...
your reply makes sense, but then begs the following questions
1) when will international pressure force offshore to up their regulation game to streamline it with global efforts.
- EU first implemented this leverage nonsense, hence many european clients flocked to ASIC, and received tons of complains from EU regulators. Now, they(ASIC) has caved and streamline it to "international" standards

2) what will be the local governing body's reaction be, example. Italy recently got tgt with ISPs in italy to block the domain of raw trading (Ic markets)
now italian clients have to access Ic markets via a special link / VPN as tho one is from china. lol
  • #122
  • Oct 24, 2020 4:15am Oct 24, 2020 4:15am
Quoting Bicarus
{quote} your reply makes sense, but then begs the following questions 1) when will international pressure force offshore to up their regulation game to streamline it with global efforts. - EU first implemented this leverage nonsense, hence many european clients flocked to ASIC, and received tons of complains from EU regulators. Now, they(ASIC) has caved and streamline it to "international" standards 2) what will be the local governing body's reaction be, example. Italy recently got tgt with ISPs in italy to block the domain of raw trading (Ic markets)...
Your assumptions go too far into a hypothetical direction based on my personal taste.

1) ESMA was not the first big regulation introducing this nonsense. The party already startet with the NFA years ago. And while ASIC is now joining the train, ESMA officially left the road of limitations again! This does not went public of course.
Unfortunately that does not help much, since many national regulations in Europe adapted the ESMA guideline. So for european brokers the situation did not improve much. But that is a specific european problem and cannot be mirrored globally.

You seem to forget the "pressure" of potential tax revenue. Money is power. And unlike Australia with its complex economic interrelations small offshore locations won't care that much what other jurisdictions say when they can make a lot of money now.

2) Local governings change! The italian example is tough, no doubt. But it is the only case in europe for some time at least and far from beeing an "universal" model.
  • #123
  • Edited 5:07am Oct 24, 2020 4:40am | Edited 5:07am
Quoting Drolph
{quote} Your assumptions go too far into a hypothetical direction based on my personal taste. 1) ESMA was not the first big regulation introducing this nonsense. The party already startet with the NFA years ago. And while ASIC is now joining the train, ESMA officially left the road of limitations again! This does not went public of course. Unfortunately that does not help much, since many national regulations in Europe adapted the ESMA guideline. So for european brokers the situation did not improve much. But that is a specific european problem...
it isnt assumptions, when in doubt always assume a posture of the worst case scenerio.

1) USA regulation has nothing to do with protecting clients but more of dodd frank act

back in 2014 it was the year that leverage should be decreased was first brougth up. It has since made its way into its yearly meeting as a topic to touch
https://www.iosco.org/publications/?...public_reports

Singapore/Japan/Korea jumped on board in 2014
Indonesia/Thailand and rest of asia jumped on board in 2015
Europe joined in 2017
Australia in 2020
.
.
i wouldnt be surprised that NZ will be next given its close proximity to AU.

that said, as more members of the IOSCO adopts the recommendations, it is hard for offshore countries not to given that they too are members of IOSCO.
Case and point, malta and vanuatu are now cracking down on crypto trading.

2) regarding italy, who's to say it isnt a test bed for the rest to follow to become a "universal" model?
when Singapore was consulting on leverage restrictions > they cited IOSCO's recommendations
when ESMA was consulting on leverage restrictions > they quoted Singapore's move
when Australia was consulting on leverage restrictions > they quoted ESMA's move
.
.
.
  • #124
  • Oct 24, 2020 9:29am Oct 24, 2020 9:29am
Quoting RickM
{quote} I trialled IC Markets a 1:25 demo account last night with a $10K balance to see how large my trade size could be and was very disappointed. All I could use was about 2 full lots and that was it. Since I normally put through in excess of 250 full lots a week, certainly I will need to trade an account of at least $100k if I kept my account based in Aussie.
What you want to do is take out a loan, say mortgage your house or something.
  • #125
  • Oct 25, 2020 4:17pm Oct 25, 2020 4:17pm
Quoting RickM
{quote}
I trialled IC Markets a 1:25 demo account last night with a $10K balance to see how large my trade size could be and was very disappointed.
All I could use was about 2 full lots and that was it. Since I normally put through in excess of 250 full lots a week, certainly I will need to trade an account of at least $100k if I kept my account based in Aussie.

Hi Rick, yes this is my conclusion as well after my short trial on demo.

ASIC will successfully force traders to deposit MORE to continue business as usual with what they are currently working on.
  • #126
  • Oct 25, 2020 6:30pm Oct 25, 2020 6:30pm
ICMarkets offers CFDs over futures at the moment.
Now would be a good time for them to take the next step and also become a futures broker (similar to amp global).
Based in Australia with focus on retail traders ie. low cost.
  • #127
  • Edited 7:23pm Oct 25, 2020 6:44pm | Edited 7:23pm
36 mins ago

Deputy chair of ASIC resigns following expenses scandal.


Daniel Crennan QC said it is in the best interests of ASIC for him to resign.

The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) flagged irregularities with payments made to Mr Crennan and ASIC chair James Shipton.


You couldn't make this stuff up.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-...enses/12799174

and

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-...aside/12807278

AND

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-...dcraft/9057190

Financial Services Minister Kelly O'Dwyer said Mr Shipton brings more than 20 years' experience to the corporate regulator after roles at Goldman Sachs as a managing director and head of government and regulatory affairs for Asia Pacific.
  • #128
  • Oct 25, 2020 7:53pm Oct 25, 2020 7:53pm
Quoting TimeTells
36 mins ago Deputy chair of ASIC resigns following expenses scandal. Daniel Crennan QC said it is in the best interests of ASIC for him to resign. The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) flagged irregularities with payments made to Mr Crennan and ASIC chair James Shipton. You couldn't make this stuff up. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-...enses/12799174 and https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-...aside/12807278 AND https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-...dcraft/9057190...
This could go much deeper, corruption is rife with laws and regulations being bypassed across society.
My comments are not to be taken as trading advice, not a financial advisor
  • #129
  • Oct 25, 2020 9:16pm Oct 25, 2020 9:16pm
Quoting cogs
{quote} This could go much deeper, corruption is rife with laws and regulations being bypassed across society.

Hi cogs, good to see you pal.


All I can say is we are living through interesting times for sure.
  • #130
  • Oct 26, 2020 3:44am Oct 26, 2020 3:44am
Quoting RickM
{quote} I trialled IC Markets a 1:25 demo account last night with a $10K balance to see how large my trade size could be and was very disappointed. All I could use was about 2 full lots and that was it. Since I normally put through in excess of 250 full lots a week, certainly I will need to trade an account of at least $100k if I kept my account based in Aussie.

Based on your volume and years of experience in the market I'm pretty sure you would qualify for a Professional account Rick and have access to higher leverage. On EU regulated brokers you would for sure (read any EU/UK broker or EU/UK branches of AUS brokers). It remains to be seen if ASIC will also make professional accounts available.
  • #131
  • Oct 26, 2020 8:23am Oct 26, 2020 8:23am
Quoting TimeTells
{quote} Hi Rick, yes this is my conclusion as well after my short trial on demo. ASIC will successfully force traders to deposit MORE to continue business as usual with what they are currently working on.
Probably, what ASIC should do is the opposite - allow brokers to more easily lend to their clients. Provide a line of credit. I know some do it now, but its not straightforward. Make it automatic.
  • #132
  • Edited 5:18pm Oct 26, 2020 5:00pm | Edited 5:18pm
Quoting LloydOz
{quote}
Probably, what ASIC should do is the opposite - allow brokers to more easily lend to their clients. Provide a line of credit. I know some do it now, but its not straightforward. Make it automatic.
Hi Lloyd,

I’m still peeling back the layers of this “onion” - it’s a large peel and a large onion - and I’m still in progress lol.

To me the ASIC move is more likely to support brokers rather than traders.

Brokers need their equity higher maybe.

While then.

The other concern group for a brokers’ equity (outside of their business owner, of course) - would have to come from their Liquidity Providers.

The LP’s my broker uses are international - not Australian.

This would then make sense to me, why ASIC followed the international (ESMA) requirements almost to the penny.

So maybe, if it is not the trader, nor the broker, that is ultimately being covered by this impending local ruling
- then it is the LP.

And if it is the LP who has the greatest concern. Then maybe they are expecting defaults (firstly by the retail trader, then by the brokers).

We are not in this club (~ George Carlin lol) so we do not know all the why’s of this move. Other than it is ultimately a global leverage action - not a local one.


(Maybe even a global complaint from overseas brokers that their non-Australian traders are now seeking to deposit in Aussie broker accounts to gain what was the original leverages being offered to retail - at the time when for some strange reason lol - the FX industry - which facilitated the currency conversions of business and travellers exchanging their currency for another - decided to OPEN IT UP to retail speculators trading on the varying rate that happens during the trading day).
  • #133
  • Oct 27, 2020 4:42am Oct 27, 2020 4:42am
Quoting TimeTells
36 mins ago Deputy chair of ASIC resigns following expenses scandal. Daniel Crennan QC said it is in the best interests of ASIC for him to resign. The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) flagged irregularities with payments made to Mr Crennan and ASIC chair James Shipton. You couldn't make this stuff up. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-...enses/12799174 and https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-...aside/12807278 AND https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-...dcraft/9057190...

Someone should tell cathy to get her house in order before setting out on her high horse.
  • #134
  • Oct 27, 2020 5:06am Oct 27, 2020 5:06am
Who here thinks this global trend is the result of lobbying by exchanges that want over-the-counter fx trading to disappear?

(On the other hand, in the crypto space, what's apparently happening is the opposite: decentralization.)

I'm wondering if eventually, Swiss brokers like Dukas and Swissquote will follow suit?
Amor Fati--F. Nietzsche
  • #135
  • Oct 27, 2020 5:11am Oct 27, 2020 5:11am
Quoting doji
Who here thinks this global trend is the result of lobbying by exchanges that want over-the-counter fx trading to disappear? (On the other hand, in the crypto space, what's apparently happening is the opposite: decentralization.) I'm wondering if eventually, Swiss brokers like Dukas and Swissquote will follow suit?
Again. Money is power.

As long as enough people with a large enough sum of money want to use higher leverages, there will be opportunities here.

But what do I know.
  • #136
  • Oct 27, 2020 6:32am Oct 27, 2020 6:32am
Quoting Bicarus
{quote}
Someone should tell cathy to get her house in order before setting out on her high horse.



And ALL recent legislation landmark changes (incl FX) should immediately be scrapped or put on hold pending a full inquiry as to who recommended & instigated these upcoming changes within ASIC.

This inquiry should also publically include all the listings of submissions & statements regarding the FX proposals from the very people the planned changes were planned to "help"
ie traders with some skin in the game.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...mbSsUG5vc-4bkv
  • #137
  • Oct 27, 2020 2:05pm Oct 27, 2020 2:05pm
This is all part of the "Global Reset" taking place next year. Australia is becoming a prick of a country run by nasty pieces of work who don't like you succeeding. This is a global trend I gather... I'm going to contact an overseas broker to see if I can trade forex by avoiding Australia altogether. That's the best my thought process can offer at this time.
All the best guys.
  • #138
  • Oct 27, 2020 3:37pm Oct 27, 2020 3:37pm
What can anyone reading all this think when the very watchdog of Australian FX needs to be watched.

In a week where leverage change regulations for Australian FX were officially announced we bizarrely find out (that the)

#1 Chair AND the #2 Chair of the very organisation overseeing FX (ASIC) either stood themselves down or resigned due to an investigation into financial impropriety (if I read the articles & ANOA’s implications correctly).

Is it not reasonable then to suggest a no-confidence vote in ASICs decision making capability (affecting FX traders in Australia) be raised for what could be seen at this point as “credibility = zero”.



Quotes from the Govt Senate Committee.

Liberal senator and acting chairman of the Committee, James Paterson, said that ASIC's leadership model was a "total mess" and it needed to put its "house in order".

Opposition financial services spokesman Stephen Jones said Mr Shipton had kept matters secret from his leadership team and tried to minimise his tax through KPMG services paid for by ASIC.

"Clearly the relationship between the chair and acting chair is cooked," Mr Jones said.

"The government has to clean it up quickly because waiting til the end of the year is a joke."

The former inspector-general of intelligence, Vivienne Thom, is conducting an independent review of ASIC's remuneration and procurement processes.
  • #139
  • Oct 27, 2020 3:47pm Oct 27, 2020 3:47pm
My suggestion to ASIC if they even care about current participants in FX is.

- all current solvent FX traders be allowed to continue with their current leverage that was negotiated with their Broker (at the leverage rules of the time) of which such leverage to them & their broker is proven workable "by their current solvency".

- any NEW traders wishing to join a Broker in trading FX be subject to any NEW leverage regulations imposed by ASIC.



Isn't it that simple, ASIC, I ask, for all current traders that have complied already to their leverage requirements & Broker expectations.
  • #140
  • Edited 7:50pm Oct 27, 2020 7:17pm | Edited 7:50pm
Quoting TimeTells
My suggestion to ASIC if they even care about current participants in FX is. - all current solvent FX traders be allowed to continue with their current leverage that was negotiated with their Broker (at the leverage rules of the time) of which such leverage to them & their broker is proven workable "by their current solvency". - any NEW traders wishing to join a Broker in trading FX be subject to any NEW leverage regulations imposed by ASIC. Isn't it that simple, ASIC, I ask, for all current traders that have complied already to their leverage requirements...
Unfortunately I think suggestion time may be over.
0 traders viewing now