The reason that we all came to this thread and stayed was to fix a problem, that problem was 1, US tyranny 2, the ability to continue to use the trading systems that we choose. Advocating brokers that compromise these goals (of a sort) would only tend to confuse the issue. There is nothing wrong with US brokers, IBFX would be my broker of choice if I wasn’t forced to go off shore back in 2009.
For those that may not know the whole story, it briefly goes like this. In April of 2008, I started one of our new mathematical programs on an IBFX mini account to see how well it would do. It was designed to not lose trades using a simple matrix or grid but modified, (don’t confuse the old style grid systems with the GoldenGrid system, not the same).
If you remember 2008, it was nothing but volatility, a similar program today makes just over 12% annually but in 2008 we made over 300% and didn’t lose a trade except for one for 8 cents during a power outage. That evidently got someone’s attention and by the fall of 2008 we began to hear about FIFO. I called the NFA as I had a lot to lose by this new restriction. They apologized but she also said that the new restrictions would help a lot more traders than it would hurt, this was at the so called information gathering stage before they were to make up their minds. This is when I learned about the hedging restriction, the other component of RoboMiner, as the program was called back then.
I was all proud of our accomplishments, over 3000 trades with no losses, I never imagined anything like this could ever happen. Serious depression took over when I realized that I had evidently spooked some banker that had the ear of Barney Frank of the Dodd/Frank bill and all my work had hit the US government wall. Ever since then, when we talk about government sanctioned brokers, I take the view that we should have as little to do with investing in the US as possible. I suggest an off shore IBC as an international identity but I am concerned enough about the other actions of the government that I am physically moving my family offshore.
So you can see from my experience that I am somewhat biased but honestly, I’m hoping that others will also pick up that bias and do what ever little that they can to hinder the tyranny in what ever way they can. OK, I’m off my soap box now.
But if these restrictions have in anyway hurt anyone, besides me, I am profoundly sorry, and I am sorry that I didn’t see it coming.
Hey Clint, I would agree with forex assistant and not include any broker who is within the reach of US regulatory stupidity. They have no place being in the offshore thread.
Forex Assistant, Not to worry - our pain is only a sign we need to change what we’re doing. Offshore life is great. Amazing discoveries await you and your family… Having lived the last 11 years in the ‘other Americas’, I’ve found that trading-freedom is just one of many freedoms available to me. The borders of the ‘New World’ seem to have moved!
Clint, My vote goes to continuing to focus the list on offshore brokers.
While we’re on this subject, do you guys have a problem with [B]Investors Europe (Gibraltar) — [/B] due to their restricting U.S. residents to [U]50:1 leverage in compliance with U.S. regulations[/U]?
As you probably recall, Investors Europe has been included in Group 1 of our List for almost 2 years. Initially, they treated U.S. residents just like any other citizens of the world. But, then (more than a year ago) they put us in a special category, as described in the blurb, below.
Here’s a copy and paste from one of their webpages (I bolded the last sentence for emphasis).
US Clients
A ‘U.S. Person’ is defined as one who is permanently resident inside the USA.
The SEC’s interpretation of U.S. federal securities laws limits Non U.S. Broker-Dealers to working with those permanently resident outside the USA. Non U.S. broker-dealers cannot approach and/ or solicit U.S. resident persons because an Internet Web site is interpreted by the SEC as being the same as a telephone call to a client. Non U.S. broker-dealers maintaining an Internet Web site can thus only accept a U.S. person if he or she has not been solicited either directly or indirectly through accessing their web sites under the ‘unsolicited’ exemption Rule 15a-6. U.S. customers wanting to work with Non U.S. broker-dealers can thus only approach Non U.S. broker-dealers under Rule 15a-6 if they have not been to their web sites and should be prepared to certify this fact in writing to ensure compliance with applicable law. [B]Accepted unsolicited U.S clients may only be offered 50/1 leverage in compliance with U.S regulations.[/B]
Please weigh in on whether we should keep Investors Europe in Group 1.
The business entity Investors Europe is junk and should be demoted to Group 2 since they are unwilling or unable to resist the unfair 50:1 leverage limit demanded by our national half black, abortion loving, homosexuality tolerant leader. The only exception where this broker could be considered decent is if your individual trades involve many millions of dollars. In that case all brokers are forced to drastically cut leverage since the banks cannot safely lend many hundreds of millions, especially billions of dollars on individual, unsecured trades, to my knowledge.
I personally have a problem with any laws that singles out one group of people from another, has something to do with morality I think, but IE has such bad customer service that I dropped them even before they dropped Americans. I actually thought that they had dropped forex all together at one point as we couldn’t even get their mt4, but if they are back up then I would go slow with that bunch.
As many others would agree, I do have to say this is one of the most informational and beneficial threads on all of the internet. Just wanted to give you my thanks for your diligence and hard work for the cause. As an update, I was playing around on SHK Direct’s website, and sure enough, it looks like they’re no longer accepting US clients. The very first question on the FAQ page is “Do we accept US clients? - No.” I guess it doesn’t get any more clear than that.
Excuse me for possible “newbie” question, but is it common for broker to be non-profit? Isn’t it against the premise of such business as brokerage service?
Clint, thanks for raising Forex Nation with your people. If anything changes with our setup and ability to serve US citizens off-shore I’ll furnish you the details.
DuEtMatt, let me clarify the not-for-profit conundrum for you. No it’s not common, in fact extensive searching shows that while some brokers make donations to charities, Forex Nation is the first to be “not-for-profit”, meaning ALL our profits go to charity. By Australian commonwealth law and by the regulation of the ACNC, Australia’s Not-For-Profit and Charities Commission, a not-for-profit company can GENERATE profit as long as they USE it for charitable purposes. In addition, a not-for-profit company cannot provide any financial distribution to the company owners or employees beyond their board-approved salary. Directors of a not-for-profit company cannot be paid any fees at all for their service. We at Forex Nation hope this type of not-for-profit becomes much more common. There’s simply enough to share and we think it’s time to do so.
Well Dan, for me you already have shown your honor. I hope you can understand that we are basically brainstorming here to find a solution to a problem that affects all Americans, we are being discriminated against by the world brokers because of the tyranny of our government. It’s really a much bigger question than what is the best broker in a dwindling list of options.
We are trying to figure out how to retain what little we still have left. We are watching as an iron net is being cast over our people and are almost helpless to do anything about it. Banks world wide avoid US citizens like the plague. We are hurting and there isn’t anyone who we can call for help.
If you want to help, with your knowledge of what it is like on the other side of the table, how can Americans position themselves so that the broker is protected from the teeth of the dragon and we can just trade/invest the way we like without the dragon taking a bit out of us. I offered using an IBC from off shore, can you tell us if that is the only way to circumvent the current dilemma?
I would removed Investors Europe for the same reasons others mentioned as there is no room for them in this list. Those who subscribe to the idiocy of US regulations should be avoided as brokers altogether.
From what I have read in Erick’s posts, and on your website, Forex Nation certainly deserves an “honorable mention” (U.S. spelling). And, in the short time that we, on this thread, have known about Forex Nation, I hope that we have treated your firm with the respect you deserve.
But, you and we are on different paths. You are a foreign broker looking to attract a U.S. clientele by offering a top-notch service, while conforming to U.S. regulations. We, on this thread, are looking for foreign brokers who offer top-notch service, while operating completely outside U.S. regulations. Big difference.
So, while we like you immensely, and gladly give you an [I]Unofficial Honorable Mention,[/I] we really don’t have a place for you on our Offshore Broker List.
It’s nothing personal. It’s just the leverage thing, you see. And the FIFO thing. And the hedging thing.
And, at a higher level, it’s our sworn opposition to the CFTC’s long-term agenda for the retail forex business in the U.S. — their agenda being to destroy retail forex, as we know it, and replace it with exchange-traded spot currency “contracts”. But, that’s a whole 'nother issue.
I was browsing through the [B]Forex FS (Australia)[/B] website, and I came across this on their FAQ page:
Where are your servers located?
Our servers are located in the US and Singapore. Our main server is located in New York- EQUINIX NY4.
I immediately wondered whether this “U.S. presence” on their part means that they are now under the thumb of the CFTC, and no longer accepting U.S. residents as clients. So, I went onto “live chat”, and got the answer I was hoping for:
Chat session started at 8:06:53 PM
Please be patient while you are being connected with an operator …
You are now chatting with Support
Support: Hello, how can I help?
You: Hello. I am a U.S resident, and I want to move my forex trading out of the U.S.
Do you accept U.S. residents as new clients?
[B]Support: We welcome all clients and will assess their application on its merits[/B]
You: Thank you. I will gather my documentation, and submit my application.
Support: Not a problem, please don’t hesitate to let us know if you need any assistance
You: Thanks again. Good-bye.
So, Forex FS (Australia) appears to belong where they are — in Group 1 on our List.
While I was on their website, I checked some of the information we show in our List, and found some updates —
a change in the platforms they offer, increases in their allowable leverage, and a tighter spread on GBP/JPY.
Those updates now appear in our List, highlighted in red.
