I don’t think that’s true. I also don’t see the need to send my money out of the US, plus I would never leverage myself at 100:1. The regulations are in place to help keep my money safe and if you use reputable firms that have been around for a while in the US, it’s a good thing. I do use multiple brokers, but for the sake of example, I’ve used MB Trading the longest and most consistently because they are a solid firm with a good reputation, (plus I am happy with their execution and spreads in general and more so than the others I either use or have used). Just my two cents, but I don’t think regulation is ALL bad.
True is that you should use leverage at all :-), or if you use that you have the right to us any that you want.
And Yes, regulation is BAD. The commission is only care about there own funds, they want that companies pays them big amount of funds to take a license. The question is only one it is Money. And How do you think where this companies will take all this amounts? They will take it from us, customers. Personally I don’t want that some commission took my profit and my funds and tells me what I can do and what i Can not.
I still say trying to open account with USA id with any offshore broker nowadays isn’t a wise move. It is better in the long run to open account with [I]non-USA identification.[/I] The main reason for this is that there has been a pattern of brokers simply dropping their USA clients when it is no longer convenient. Just about all of the major offshore brokers, including the ones like FxOpen, GoMarkets, etc who initially laughed at CFTC regulation [I]ALL folded[/I] when the going got tough. I doubt very much that if the bigger and more experienced brokers determined it was better to not accept USA retail clients, that the smaller brokers will be more successful. It’s just not worth the headache.
TradersWay does seem interesting offer, though.
Yes! And re goldylocks’ avatar, glad you asked: YES! 
Would have checked in earlier, but forgot the ‘no more notices till you log in again’ rule on BP and expected notices. lol
Have more to report as well, will see how it all sums up for forum usefulness.
you mean, po.tradersway?
Yes, U.S.-resident currency traders are now lumped with inhabitants of every “suspicious” so-called country in the world. Why suspicious? The Govsters told us so!! THINK about this.
OK, that’s too big an order. Let’s simplify it: Which countries have not yet knuckled under to the CENTRAL BANK SYSTEM? Which so-called countries (face it: ‘country’ is simply a line on a map and not the identity of the people who live there) – which ones have so far refused to join the MONEY system? YUP. Now you’re thinking! 
I talk to a number of traders regularly and for those who are still maintaining “residence” in U.S., we agree that putting all our allocated FX trading capital into any firm all at once is and always has been inappropriate. again, food for thought if that’s what anyone still does.
first thought upon your first post to this thread: Interesting username! Maat?
When we realise we are being herded about by the ‘good shepherds,’ we will begin to make far more interesting (and profitable) decisions.
Been on live w/ Pax now for three months.
"Paxforex is a broker which regulated by STP.It also give more opportunity to open multiple demo account which is very effective beginner.Experience with this I like best it. "
Who is STP?
Is there an MT4 broker on earth who does NOT allow multiple demos?
What is your native language? This will help me understand what you are trying to say.
more on the subject, that being PaxForex, in a moment.
A fine and tricky broker this is. They are raking in the cash, so I project a happy future for PAX. Great name, too! I have no fears of them disappearing into the shady twilight, as they are making far too much moola and recently getting piles of new accounts. Much better ‘protection’ than CFTC ever offered, lol.
Be aware:
They have software in place which screws execution. In my first post on this broker I reported 2-3 seconds latency. It goes to 5-6 seconds if (a) you trade upward of 20 standard lots, or (b) you show a profitable pattern of trading.
Further, that software is ‘smart.’ For example: If I am shorting in a falling market, it will drag my request downward and only accept my trade at the next quiet pause (far lower than even my specified slippage limit). Conversely, if I am shorting a blastoff rocket of a bull market, BOOM my trade goes in at exactly the price where I hit the button. Tasty stuff for a broker.
At significant tops & bottoms, even a pending order placed hours before gets ignored and an “invalid price”/“trade context is busy” message is supplied instead.
Spreads, as I posted earlier, are FAT. I once saw 1.0 on E/U in a fast-plunging move this past week; that was the first time EVER I saw it below the norm; 1.0 lasted for one or two seconds then it snapped back to its usual major session lows, namely 1.6-1.9 variable pips.
A friend communicated with them to ask why they freeze (1) trade close, (2) moving of stops, and (3) moving of targets, when price is within the stoplevel range – they told him that their liquidity providers insist on it and besides, lots of brokers do this. We’re left to suppose that this explanation was meant to be “the why.”
Does anyone know of ANY other broker who pulls this kind of horse$hite in 2012?
LOL, anyway, they welcome scalpers! If I pulled these kinds of antics, I’d welcome scalpers as well. Myself , I don’t call it ‘scalping,’ I call it STM (short-term momentum) trading. Manual STM. Go ahead and try it on this broker, friends. Succeed as you may, the account will dwindle, LOL. 3.0+ pips on E/U? That puts paid to Asian session for our purposes. [not so bad actually - now I get to nap during that time. ;)]
Hedging, as I posted earlier, indeed leaves margin at level of initial trade, BUT only after it’s placed. The account must be adequate to COVER full margin the other way. So if your short cost $360 and you want to hedge on that instrument, you need $360 minimum free equity +spread to do the long.
On my tests, stopouts begin at 10% and complete at 5% of free equity.
The platform dropouts I noted back in April were reported to said support crew and immediately stopped.
Withdrawals via wire in amounts less than $10K have been received in 9 business days (about average for outfits such as this one).
Response times on support have been extraordinarily superb: as low as 20 minutes, and never more than one hour, no matter the hour. Calm, cordial and always ready with a detailed response in pidgin-but- easily-understood English.
- The bonus they offer IS available for withdrawal according to the terms they publish. Easy mark for high-volume traders to hit, so look at their terms and see if they suit your style and plan.
Here ends our PAX report, lol.
pcguy007 wrote,
Trading point no longer allows usa traders thanks to CFTC
they returned my funds promptly
they also advised me that if i get an offshore business they will still not allow me to trade becuase i have an ip address based in usa.
i think they are blowing smoke but just FYI.
Trading-Point, when we had accounts with them, drove us round the bend with Chris Holmes (our “dedicated account manager”) phoning up at ALL hours, repeatedly from day ONE, is he lonely? Always wanting to natter away and only method to disengage was near-rudeness. Email? OH NO, Chris wants it on PHONE only. Nothing in writing, lol. When we needed assistance he was right there with a dusty answer which took centuries to be done with and quite artfully yielded nothing useful ever.
Now to the relevant point of this post: Upon our unceremonious booting from TradingPoint in MARCH (far earlier than most), we were told by staff we’d receive a secret communication soon and did we want to entertain it? SUre, we said. This other git calls and whispers that if we open offshore corp, all’s laughing and no trouble. We need only sign up THROUGH HIM (top-secret, understand?) and he’ll handle everything for us.
That’s the truth so good riddance and don’t look back!
Here ends our commentary on the infamous Trading POINT! LOL!
Clint,
This link brings up a splash page stating Deutsche Bank no longer offers dbFX to individuals or small institutions. If goes on to say FOREX.com has acquired some aspects of dbFX’s business and “invites us to give them a try.”
Mike
Early last week, went to one of our demo accounts on Varchev to test an EA and couldn’t log in. Error message was: “Old version.” Wow, I guess this is MANDATORY! So ran LiveUpdate, got new version.
Tried the testing; something didn’t work. The ‘update’ shouldn’t be so named. It was an opportunity for the broker to reduce the demo server’s usefulness. In other words, Varchev have downgraded their feeds to the demo platforms. In slow markets they show only full-pip moves, so we can no longer trade the fractional levels.
This just to keep traders aware of how brokers worldwide are using various methods to “short squeeze” our profits by whatever means available.
Probably related to their Greek liquidity providers, and likely a result of LPs pulling out.
-
Yes (i think) TradersWay.com The client’s login is po.tradersway.com.
-
My thoughts on the “why” the CFTC clamped down are two fold. 1) They are keeping US Residents “safe” from the big bad outside world. They have no enforceable jurisdiction of broker actions outside the USA. 2) (more ‘conspiracy’) They are controlling the money flow of how US dollars are used in non-US financial institutions (think: ‘EuroDollar’ futures). Remember that the USD is the de-facto world reserve country. Also keep in mind that the original proposal to limit leverage to 1:10, etc received over 9000 comments against it, yet CFTC still decided it was in the public’s best interest to push forward with the limiting of leverage and eventually elimitating US Resident choices as to whom they could trade with ‘for their own good’ (by sneaking into the Frank-Dodd bill). In the same way they chased online gambling offshore. Difficult to track money this way. I don’t want to go too deep into it; just to give you a summary.
-
Maat name: See this definition. If you’re crunching for time, the first paragraph is sufficient.
Yes, and just turn it all around and we have something approaching the truth. We’ve seen how these descriptive terms in law and public relations tend to mean their opposites. “Privacy” means “Surveillance” – “Security” means “Armed Threats,” “Freedom” means “Control” and so forth. Where’s George Orwell when ya need him? whilst the Problem -> Reaction -> Solution model was employed to make 1:50 seem ‘a fair compromise,’ heh heh.
I’ll be interested to hear how TradersWay works out for you. Looking back in my notes, I found it was only their policy of reducing leverage as equity grows (to 1:50 eventually) which stopped us from opening there.
And thank you for the reference for Maat – I had read Dr Asante’s page some time back, but primarily recalled the Egyptian deity of that name. Tremendously life-enhancing concept, thanks again!
Mike,
For that link, you dug all the way back to post #5 on this thread. Obviously, the info in that post is now out of date.
[B]dbFX[/B] has been relegated to Group 2 in our List (brokers who do not accept U.S. clients) since 14 months ago.
Here is the post in which we said [I][B]auf wiedersehen[/B][/I] to dbFX — 301 Moved Permanently
Sorry to stir up the ashes Clint. I started the thread from the beginning and posted that before I realized they’re all gravestones. My bad. But thanks for not flaming me. I did read the last 5 pages and it looks like I’ve got some work to to do chop through all the thieves and *****s in order to keep my hard-earned pips too.
This is a [I][B]brilliant[/B][/I] thread and thanks for your persistently hard work at it.
Mike
<edit> I just read my posted post and saw the Naughty Word Protection Service hard at work. Hmm, Webster’s lists the word I used - it’s a [I]robust[/I] word, but I didn’t think it was naughty… curiouser and curiouser.
Just withdraw as you approach the limit. I’m sure you could negotiate something with the admin to continue to give you 1:200 or whatever you request. Requests like these are not advertised.
I understand that even forex.com offers 1:200 for their uk branch with no max upper limit. Fxopen ECN is 1:500 up to $25,000. GoMarkets is like 1:500 up to either $10,000 or $25,000. But again, just gotta ask if you want to go above. IBFX Au offers 1:400 with no upper limits. Their margin call/stop levels are 125%/75% margin level. Instaforex is 1:600 with no known upper limit. Remember that you can open multiple accounts, although they may ask you to fund the first one before they open subsequent ones.
Hello,
thank you for your feedback. Concerning our support staff we had a lack of a few hours per day in the past especially during asian session. This problem should be solved now because we hired new support staff covering 24 hours per day now.
Concerning deposit fees there is no way to change it. We know that some other brokers don´t charge but let me explain how it work. Every broker has to pay fees accepting customer funds using third party provider. Somer broker just pay these fees for there customers, but be sure they will do all to get this money back by being a dealing desk broker or by having not so good trading conditions. For us it is impossible because we are a true ECN/STP Broker and looking at our spreads you will see that we try to keep them as low as possible and offering good trading conditions. Several improvements on this will be done in the near future.
Regards
FX Choice Support Team
Quite so, negotiation is key and an excellent reminder for new traders.
The brokers mentioned above are available to U.S. residents but only if working through an offshore corporate structure. With one in place, our options far outstrip the 30 currently listed in Post #1.
Thank you for very valuable info about Paxforex as I have an account there also, it is very interesting. I will share some comments.
Basically yes, I have faced it with another two MT4 forex brokers.
My experience was the following: deposit fast. Withdraw to Credit card about 5 days, that is long, but as I have funds back I can bear it. Profit they allow to withdraw only to bank account, so it tooks me 3 days to receive it. (Unfortunately due unexpected market movement have to go and deposit funds again 
)
Thanks FXAll, and sorry the market moved against your position… that has happened to me at least a dozen times, when I made a withdrawal and then put some or all right back in. Plus fees. ;-D The markets [and the wonderful middlemen/brokers who make it all possible for us] are great teachers aren’t they?
It’s interesting to hear there are brokers who freeze trades within the stoplevels. If you are comfortable telling who they are, I think it would enlarge our knowledge and be valuable to other traders. These are the kinds of detail most of us have no way of knowing until we are stuck in the situation saying, “Huh??”
Our bank is in the States, and deposit is swift but w/d much slower. Withdrawals go through correspondent banks (either Deutsche or JP Morgan) so the transit time stretches on and on. May I ask which country your bank is in? it sounds as if your w/d are processed more quickly. Thanks again for your input on PaxForex!
Hi GypsyTrader,
Yeah it is true.
Sure, well know FXPro and IronFx, but they do not accept US clients, they are Cyprus regulated brokers.
Yes, in Russia and I use USD. So mu funds also go through corespondent banks. Maybe it took so long type because there were some bank holidays. I haven’t faced situation when bank W/D process were more than 3 working days.