US citizens won't be able to have forex accounts overseas | Page 10 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Overseas brokers for US citizens: legal or illegal? 22 replies

Any brokers offering high leverage accounts to US citizens? 22 replies

Broker offering penny accounts to US citizens? 1 reply

I am not able to create virtual accounts anymore 7 replies

CFTC NEW Document - Overseas Accounts OK? 58 replies

Attachments: US citizens won't be able to have forex accounts overseas
Exit Attachments

US citizens won't be able to have forex accounts overseas

  • #181
  • Aug 27, 2010 5:43pm Aug 27, 2010 5:43pm
???? This ties into whatever system you've devloped. I dont see how it's relavent to the conversation.
Quoting pipmutt
I don't mean dollar amount, just %, you don't need to mention account size or anything.

Sorry, might have misunderstood the meaning of 'personal', did you mean personal to one's strategy or personal as in confidential?
Annoying Precision
  • #182
  • Aug 27, 2010 5:45pm Aug 27, 2010 5:45pm
Anyways, the night is calling . Everyone have an enjoyable and productive weekend.
Annoying Precision
  • #183
  • Aug 27, 2010 6:01pm Aug 27, 2010 6:01pm
Quoting The Fool
We can talk about...
You bring up some good points about the leverage, but think you went off-base above.

Not one dime of retail money, or any retail brokers, had/has/or will have anything to do with the financial collapse. Remember, the weapons of mass destruction we created at AIG, Leman, Goldman... etc. The rating agencies, like Moodys, were employed to help sell the products. And our Gov provided the fertilizer to make sure it blossomed.

Keeping that in mind; BTW, none of the leveraged crap above has been dealt with -- it is still in the system, ask yourself why on earth would the retail market even be mentioned in the Bill?
  • #184
  • Aug 27, 2010 6:04pm Aug 27, 2010 6:04pm
Quoting erikte279

???? This ties into whatever system you've devloped. I dont see how it's relavent to the conversation.
lol, yeah I know you don't, neither you nor Forexia, that's kinda the point I'm making!

It's very relevant, it's going to give you the amount of leverage you actually use in practical terms.

My argument is that no-one ever needs, or uses, 100:1, in fact I doubt many serious traders use anything above the proposed 10:1

Ok, you don't want to answer that's fine, it would pretty much destroy your argument.

Quoting erikte279
Anyways, the night is calling . Everyone have an enjoyable and productive weekend.
Yep, you have a good weekend as well!
  • #185
  • Aug 27, 2010 6:06pm Aug 27, 2010 6:06pm
Quoting billflet
Spam Alert!
lol, he sneaked in a bit quietly!
  • #186
  • Aug 27, 2010 6:15pm Aug 27, 2010 6:15pm
Quoting Slack

Not one dime of retail money, or any retail brokers, had/has/or will have anything to do with the financial collapse.
You can say regulation of spot fx is a straw man and I wouldn't disagree. But even if these brokers are just guppies in the pool with sharks then they are going to have to swim and eat just like the sharks do. If somebody poisons the shark pool the guppies will probably be the first to go belly up.

Everybody has to work around some kind of shit in life. If you think regulation and taxation are the tools of Satan vote for the libertarians. If that doesn't work move to the tropical tax shelter du jour. Just be careful what you wish for, though: the grass is always greener until you get there on the other side & find there are snakes in the tall grass there, too.
"If The Fool persists in his Folly he will become wise." - William Blake
  • #187
  • Edited 7:13pm Aug 27, 2010 7:02pm | Edited 7:13pm
Quoting pipmutt
lol, yeah I know you don't, neither you nor Forexia, that's kinda the point I'm making!

It's very relevant, it's going to give you the amount of leverage you actually use in practical terms.

My argument is that no-one ever needs, or uses, 100:1, in fact I doubt many serious traders use anything above the proposed 10:1
See this is the problem with you, everybody has to trade like you with leverage below 10 otherwise they are not "serious" trader or must not be successful. Unless they open up their trading system or trade journals to show you they are making money, you don't believe them.

People have been showing you several posts now how high leverage can benefit trading and you dismiss them all but you are still yet to show us ONE of your examples proving that high leverage does not allow you to make profit and you will lose always with high leverage and you should only trade with 10:1 leverage like you claim. Just ONE example and still nothing.

You are not really bringing in anything new to this argument and you are just arguing for the sake of arguing just for fun.
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
  • #188
  • Aug 27, 2010 7:06pm Aug 27, 2010 7:06pm
Quoting erikte279
Anyways, the night is calling . Everyone have an enjoyable and productive weekend.
Have a good weekend, erik!!
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
  • #189
  • Aug 27, 2010 7:27pm Aug 27, 2010 7:27pm
Repost. Hope this is more clear.

Quoting The Fool
The money has to come from somewhere - if a broker offers 100:1 leverage he has to maintain capital reserves to cover that. Lower leverage allowance means the brokers can operate more safely with lower capital reserves. An answer to the question you pose above is: that's right, brokers go out of business and traders get burned - but one of the reasons that may be more likely to happen is because the broker is operating under the hgih leverage casino business model, which is risky.
OK then in that case the brokers who cannot afford to offer the high leverage shouldn't really offer it. Just like traders who don't know how to use high leverage shouldn't use it. Do you think a blanket reduction of leverage rates for all brokers without taking into consideration of their capacity and capital reserves is really the best solution? Would it be better to to create a rule that allow brokers to offer leverate rates that match their capital reserve levels, with the brokers with higher capital reserve to offer high leverage level and lower capital reserve to offer lower leverage level? That way, profitability would be maintained by the brokers without taking on unwarranted risk. What do you think?

Quoting The Fool
You may have noticed, we just went through a near catastrophic meltdown of the global financial system over the last few years. All of these high-risk investment activities were and still are at the heart of that. Regulation is a good thing and without it we'll just have more of the same.
True but what precipitated the meltdown of the financial system was the recession which was not something that is within people's control where trading IS something you can control via trading plans, risk management and etc. So it is a little different. True the overlending contributed further to the meltdown and regulation is needed but only good effective regulations.

In this case, aside from the fact that usage of leverage levels is a personal choice, on top of that, the capping of leverage levels is not even an effective solution to address many of the issues that it's supposedly trying to resolve. So to me, I feel traders and brokers are losing something that's available to them for nothing. For the same issues, there are far more or equally effective solutions without sacrificing leverage rates.
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
  • #190
  • Aug 27, 2010 7:27pm Aug 27, 2010 7:27pm
Quoting The Fool
You can say regulation of spot fx is a straw man and I wouldn't disagree. But even if these brokers are just guppies in the pool with sharks then they are going to have to swim and eat just like the sharks do. If somebody poisons the shark pool the guppies will probably be the first to go belly up.

Everybody has to work around some kind of shit in life. If you think regulation and taxation are the tools of Satan vote for the libertarians. If that doesn't work move to the tropical tax shelter du jour. Just be careful what you wish for, though:...
Platitudes aside:

“The more corrupt the state, the more it legislates.” --Tacitus

When will America wake up?
  • #191
  • Aug 27, 2010 7:31pm Aug 27, 2010 7:31pm
Quoting Slack
Platitudes aside:

“The more corrupt the state, the more it legislates.” --Tacitus

When will America wake up?
When we see one day an Afghanistanian living in Afghanistan has more rights and freedom than us.

But like I said, aside from the overregulation, it's not even effective.
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
  • #192
  • Aug 27, 2010 7:32pm Aug 27, 2010 7:32pm
Do you think a blanket reduction of leverage rates for all brokers to offer high leverage without taking into consideration of their capacity and capital reserves is really the best solution? Would it be better to to create a rule that allow brokers to offer leverate rates that match their capital reserve levels, with the brokers with higher capital reserve to offer high leverage level and lower capital reserve to offer lower leverage level? That way, profitability would be maintained by the brokers without taking on unwarranted risk. What do you think?

A good but impractical idea. The problem with regulation is, the more complicated, the less effective it is. Just look at the US tax code for a great example. Complicated regulation ends up getting swiss cheesed with loopholes you can drive a corporate truck through.


Effective regulation in this regard would be: sorry OTC trading of all stripes, you're done. Everything into the exchanges and as transparent as possible. Some minimum capitalization for those who remain to play that way is a good idea, but let the market decide who sticks around. The market has been doing this anyway for the spot brokers and it has probably little to do with regulation.


In this case, aside from the fact that usage of leverage levels is a personal choice,

The leverage cap proposal is not about the trader, its about the broker. Its about the implications of an unregulated OTC casino industry on the financial health of the economy as a whole, its about systemic risk. The retail trader is a non-entity. I know this is hard for Joe Mini-Lot to take, but its true.
"If The Fool persists in his Folly he will become wise." - William Blake
  • #193
  • Aug 27, 2010 7:36pm Aug 27, 2010 7:36pm
Quoting Forexia

See this is the problem with you, everybody has to trade like you with leverage below 10 otherwise they are not "serious" trader or must not be successful.
Where did I say that, I think perhaps you've misunderstood something I've said.


Quoting Forexia

People have been showing you several posts now how high leverage can benefit trading and you dismiss them all
I haven't seen any posts about how high leverage can benefit trading, the only valid argument for retaining 100:1 seems to be safety of funds.


Quoting Forexia

but you are still yet to show us ONE of your examples proving that high leverage does not allow you to make profit and you will lose always with high leverage and you should only trade with 10:1 leverage like you claim. Just ONE example and still nothing.
lol, I've never said you should only trade with 10:1 leverage, where do you dream this stuff up!

I tried to point you in the right direction a few posts back. Instead of getting frustrated sit down and work out one of your trades and you should be able to answer your own questions, it's really not rocket science!

If you can't do that then I'm happy to help you, just describe one of your typical trades, no need for dollar amounts or account balances, percentages are all that's needed.

Or don't, it really makes no difference to me either way.
  • #194
  • Aug 27, 2010 7:42pm Aug 27, 2010 7:42pm
Great discussion, Fool.

Gov' should not regulate conduct, just transparency. Open the books; let's see how many customers you have. what's the avg leverage/bal/DD... etc. Then, let each participant perform due diligence; let the marketplace act as its own clearinghouse and drop the losers.
  • #195
  • Aug 27, 2010 7:44pm Aug 27, 2010 7:44pm
Quoting Forexia
When we see one day an Afghanistanian living in Afghanistan has more rights and freedom than us.
I get really tired of so-called libertarians bitching and moaning about the guvmint trampling on their rights and freedom. A discussion of rights and freedom without some related thought about a citizen's responsibilities is almost impossible to find.

What do you owe your country? A typical libertarian would be hard-pressed to admit anything at all. You can all go to Afghanistan for all I care, and if you hate the government here, you hate the nation by association, so you don't deserve to be here anyway. Good luck with the Taliban - their regulation of OTC markets would probably be more brutal than mine.
"If The Fool persists in his Folly he will become wise." - William Blake
  • #196
  • Aug 27, 2010 7:50pm Aug 27, 2010 7:50pm
Quoting The Fool
Effective regulation in this regard would be: sorry OTC trading of all stripes, you're done. Everything into the exchanges and as transparent as possible.
Perhaps that's their ultimate goal. Futures brökers have lost market share to these shops, maybe this is payback time. Micro futures, reduction in leverage....


Quoting The Fool

Good luck with the Taliban - their regulation of OTC markets would probably be more brutal than mine.
  • #197
  • Aug 27, 2010 8:43pm Aug 27, 2010 8:43pm
Quoting The Fool

A good but impractical idea. The problem with regulation is, the more complicated, the less effective it is. Just look at the US tax code for a great example. Complicated regulation ends up getting swiss cheesed with loopholes you can drive a corporate truck through.
You know, with the new proposed rule, regulated Forex deaders would have to report to the CFTC are already subject to a $20 million minimum net capital standard established in the CRA for registering plus an additional volume-based minimum capital threshold based on the amount the broker owes as counterparty to retail forex transactions. Plus the dealers would have to meet requirements for, among other things, registration, disclosure, recordkeeping, financial reporting, minimum capital, and other operational standards. I am not sure what would you mean specifically by "capital reserve". But from all these financial information that CFTC is going to be collecting from the dealers, it shouldn't be difficult for CFTC to come up with standards that specify at which level of capital amount, the brokers can offer which level of leverage if their true purpose of reducing leverage rates in the first place was really for ensuring the safety of brokers' operation.

That would be what I call more effective regulation and policing. Whether this would create excessive loopholes is something CFTC would have to ensure that it doesn't. That's what they are paid to do with our tax $$'s. Every single piece of legislation has loopholes because it needs to be comprehensive, all-encompassing and yet flexible but are we going to pass laws that applies to everybody blindly?

Quoting The Fool
Some minimum capitalization for those who remain to play that way is a good idea, but let the market decide who sticks around. The market has been doing this anyway for the spot brokers and it has probably little to do with regulation.
Well, the way I see it, letting the market decide who goes and who stays is most ideal but might be doing too little for CFTC. But with the government dictating leverage rates across all brokers is too much policing. So that's why I propose let the government set up standard to decide which capital levels of brokers get to offer which leverage rates.
Quoting The Fool
Effective regulation in this regard would be: sorry OTC trading of all stripes, you're done. Everything into the exchanges and as transparent as possible.
Quoting Slack
Great discussion, Fool.

Gov' should not regulate conduct, just transparency. Open the books; let's see how many customers you have. what's the avg leverage/bal/DD... etc.
I agree. I am not sure if anyone has read this from my previous posts where I mentioned this, we won't even need to go as extensive as establishing an "exchange" with everybody's name published for Spot Forex. Spot Forex can remain OTC but what we can do is establish an "Order Matching" system like Island in Daytrading Stock. Spot Forex is traded all around the world anyway, wouldn't it be good if we can establish an worldwide "Island" Orderbook system where everybody (traders, firms) can tap into and order will be matched first-come, first-serve basis according to order criterias. That way all trading parties can still remain anonymous and yet everybody can see the orderflow, market depth and everything would be more transparent. That would be something nice if CFTC can establish or sponsor.
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
  • #198
  • Aug 27, 2010 9:01pm Aug 27, 2010 9:01pm
Quoting The Fool
What do you owe your country? A typical libertarian would be hard-pressed to admit anything at all. You can all go to Afghanistan for all I care, and if you hate the government here, you hate the nation by association, so you don't deserve to be here anyway. Good luck with the Taliban - their regulation of OTC markets would probably be more brutal than mine.
I am sorry this is upsetting to you but it is true. Afghanistan might be far-fetched to us TODAY but IF we never say anything when the government imposes one law after another taking away something from us one bit at a time, eventually and before you know it, Afghanistan IS where we end up. It is not impossible nor is it unforseeable.

Every single piece of rights, freedome or whatever that we still have left today is because somebody, somewhere at sometime stood up and said something when the government was thinking about taking it away. And they said it loudly enough, the government backed off. People even paid their lives for them. If you never say anything when the government does something, then the government assumes that it is OK and gone is your one more liberty.

Quoting The Fool
I get really tired of so-called libertarians bitching and moaning about the guvmint trampling on their rights and freedom. A discussion of rights and freedom without some related thought about a citizen's responsibilities is almost impossible to find.
We do have responsibilites true and we do our part. We vote, serve in the army, pay taxes, serve jury duty and we send feedback to the government when they ask us to when they want to find out about our opinion on rules that they are trying to pass. And I am happy to do more for the government when I am able to. But that still doens't mean that the government can trample on my rights and freedom.
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
  • #199
  • Aug 27, 2010 9:28pm Aug 27, 2010 9:28pm
Well then in your own words explain to me in detail what I dont understand. You keep saying in "practical" terms. Are you kidding with me?



Quoting pipmutt
lol, yeah I know you don't, neither you nor Forexia, that's kinda the point I'm making!

It's very relevant, it's going to give you the amount of leverage you actually use in practical terms.

My argument is that no-one ever needs, or uses, 100:1, in fact I doubt many serious traders use anything above the proposed 10:1

Ok, you don't want to answer that's fine, it would pretty much destroy your argument.



Yep, you have a good weekend as well!
Annoying Precision
  • #200
  • Aug 27, 2010 10:21pm Aug 27, 2010 10:21pm
Quoting Forexia
I am sorry


we do our part.
Alright. Ima let it slide this time. I have called off the black helicopters. For now. Just watch yourself.
"If The Fool persists in his Folly he will become wise." - William Blake
1 trader viewing now