Any specific examples?
Which specific section of the Dodd-Frank Act stipulates this in regard to foreign US-controlled companies?
Brave…,
You’re arguing with a fool.
This guy can’t even keep his story straight from one month to the next.
Look at what he wrote on March 8, 2012:
Compare that to what he wrote on April 8, 2012:
This guy doesn’t have a clue what he’s talking about.
But, he wants desperately to sound like some sort of forex “authority”.
In just one post, he talks about (1) consistent profits, and (2) guys tripling and quadrupling their initial capital daily.
Gee, let’s see how that works. Let’s say that you’re one of these “consistently profitable” traders who triples his account every day — you know, like the guys he’s referring to.
Let’s say you start with $100 on Sunday. By Friday, you have $24,300. By the following Friday, you have $5,904,900.
And, after one month (say, 22 trading days), you have over $3 Trillion.
And that’s just tripling your account every day, like the “consistent” traders that sman knows and hangs out with!
Yeah, this guy is just full of valuable forex knowledge.
And he’s obviously intent on provoking anyone on this thread who will take the bait. That’s what trolls do.
Definition of a TROLL from InternetSlang.com — “A deliberately provocative message board user”
Their banning individual US traders any government lawyer can make a case against an individual who opens an offshore business to specifically trade FOREX. This is not tax avoidance but illegal in the very sense of the word and is not a good way to bypass CFTC rules.
I didn’t ask you for more of your bull****. I asked you for a specific section of the Dodd-Frank Act (citation only).
Anyone or entity without at least $10,000,000 in liquid capital is NOT exempt from the rules of the CFTC and that includes corporations, I don’t have the time or inclination to do YOUR homework for you. Research it for yourself and you will find what the law prescribes for this specific situation.
No reference to a specific section? Nuff said. :60:
Ha ha! They protected me against REFCO a treat! Beautiful job, well done CFTC! lol.
Now: I want to say this kindly, …sman - and I mean no offence at all. It’s important to read carefully before replying, and if you are a liar (see Clint’s most recent post here) it is especially important to read all one’s own previous posts to keep those lies all lined up - particularly before appearing to be a paycheck for CFTC on this thread.
[B]Clint[/B], a quick question for you: Are you able to update the first-page list, or do BabyPips admin need to wander over in order edit it?
This is just a friendly reminder to all who want to commit a crime and bypass the CFTC rules. A paycheck for CFTC? This is all public information.
Effective 90 days from its inception, the Dodd-Frank Act bans most retail OTC forex transactions. Section 742© of the Act states as follows:
“…[B]A person [which includes companies][/B] shall not offer to, or enter into with, a person that is not an eligible contract participant, any agreement, contract, or transaction in foreign currency except pursuant to a rule or regulation of a Federal regulatory agency allowing the agreement, contract, or transaction under such terms and conditions as the Federal regulatory agency shall prescribe…”
Do you hold us for retards here? Where are foreign offshore companies mentioned in your citation?
A retail foreign exchange transaction is one between an eligible counter-party and a retail customer.3 Generally, retail customers are:
Individuals with less than $10 million in total assets, or less than $5 million in total assets if entering into the transaction to manage risk, and who are not registered as futures or securities professionals;
[B]
Companies, other than financial institutions and investment companies, with less than $10 million in total assets, or a net worth less than $1 million if entering into the transaction in connection with the conduct of their businesses; and
Commodity pools that have less than $5 million in total assets.[/B]
Offshore companies are included you can call them the NUMBER is on that site with their address in DC. I spoke with my attorney and they put me in touch with a government lawyer and it was confirmed so this is a bad idea and old one …
LOL. Offshore companies are domiciled in other countries with their own laws. Did your attorney say the US laws now replace the local laws in those countries?
Originally Posted by [B]bravehoststamps[/B] [[IMG]http://forums.babypips.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png[/IMG]](http://forums.babypips.com/rate-my-broker/36221-going-offshore-escape-cftc-post339303.html#post339303)
That's one heck of an odd way. For most, it's a lot easier to simply open an account with a foreign broker like FinFX.fi or MyFXChoice.com that accept the US customers with no restrictions. Or, if one wants an account with a foreign broker which does not directly accept the US customers, they can just set up an offshore company with a nominee director and open the trading account on the company's name.
[I][U]What is a ‘paycheck’[/U]? It’s someone working to further the aims of another entity, without revealing their connection. Someone with no apparent personal interest in the matter who hammers hard against it – to sway opinion.
[/I]
Would you kindly let us know where we can read of the case CFTC are building against FinFX and FX Choice? Or whomever “them” is meant to be?
[I] Sorry but these sman posts all look like intentional confusion and fear-mongering to me, and I’ve seen such things too many times before to miss their meaning. Just my opinion.[/I]
(1) It seems you meant to write [B]“They’re banning individual US traders. . .”[/B] Which traders have been banned so far? [U]or, if none[/U]: Which traders are in process of being banned? [U]and[/U]: Who is doing the banning? [U]and[/U]: What does “banning” mean in your context? “any government lawyer can make a case against an individual…” How in the world do you know what “any” lawyer can or cannot do under these circumstances? What is your background, please?
(2) The statement [B]“This is not tax avoidance but illegal in the very sense of the word”[/B] is legal advice plain and simple. Are you an attorney, solicitor or barrister? [U]If no[/U]: Have you consulted with the lawyer you say you contacted, as to unauthorised practice of law? Just ask about UPL.
(3) [B]". . .is not a good way to bypass CFTC rules."[/B] What are the good ways then?
This post has been offered as an example and warning to those who would spend time (one’s most valuable resource) trying to squeeze sense from rocks. :5:
The best way to avoid the law rather than breaking it by creating an illegal offshore company or working with an offshore broker both of which have been clearly stated in the Government rulings in the above posts to the letter of the law as illegal would be to set up residence in another country and pursue a legitimate trading broker which is regulated by a US government entity such as CFTC NFA SEC…etc.
LOL, ah yes. You’re going right along with the Agenda of making Americans “the new boat people.”
However, you seem to have missed out questions (1) and (2) ?
And we’re still awaiting your response to Clint’s last post, #1363 above… 
It is banning individual traders read the law:
Effective 90 days from its inception, the Dodd-Frank Act bans most retail OTC forex transactions. Section 742© of the Act states as follows:
“…A person [which includes companies] shall not offer to, or enter into with, a person that is not an eligible contract participant, any agreement, contract, or transaction in foreign currency except pursuant to a rule or regulation of a Federal regulatory agency allowing the agreement, contract, or transaction under such terms and conditions as the Federal regulatory agency shall prescribe…”
Dodd-Frank Act and July 15th Deadline
**sman, you’re repeating yourself. You’re skipping loads of questions. I see seven of them waiting your response. You’re cherry-picking, understand? You’re growing eloquent in the cause of a gang we have no reason to kow-tow to as legitimate in any sense. And you’re sorely tempting me to really waste my time posting CVs for every last one of its members.
If you are an accredited legal expert, please post your credentials. Then I’ll be all ears as you describe and support the basis and extent of jurisdiction of the CFTC, a bunch of revolving-door brokers and dealers by the by. Otherwise the fear-mongering you’re clearly set on expanding is just bogey-man tales for children.
Absent your full response to all the questions you’ve conveniently missed out answering, off I go instead to some productive activities.
Cheers and enjoy your day.
As long as you are not a resident of the USA or a country under UN Embargo, we can accept your account application.
Hullo again fxfrench! I’m finding many firms will accept a non-U.S. domiciled corporation as a client even with a U.S.-resident trader on board. So far most of those will also approve the above arrangement with U.S.-resident officers/directors/what-have-you.
Would you kindly spend a few moments outlining FXOpen’s policies relevant thereto? and if legal have given guidance or references to their umbrella MOU(s), I’d be grateful to learn more – as much as you can share here. cordial regards as always.