US Binary Options Brokers 2020 - Traders From the US Accepted
US Binary Options Brokers 2020 - Traders From the US Accepted
Regulated Binary Options Brokers 2020 - Find the Safest ...
Legal US Binary Options and Brokers - Safest USA Brokers
Binary Options Brokers For Us Citizens - school16.if.ua
Top US Binary Options Brokers 2020 by USBinaryOptions.com
ASIC Regulation Thread - Regarding the proposed changes ( Australians effected the most )
I'm hopeless at formatting text, so if you think you can structure this post better take everything i write and put it into an easy to digest way. I'm just going to type out everything i know in text as fast as possible. I'm not a legal expert, I'm not somehow who understands every bit of information in the PDF's below, but i know I'm a retail trader that uses leverage to make profit which is why I'm posting this, in the hope that someone who can run a charge better than me, will. Some of you are already aware of what might be happening, this is just a post to educate retail traders on changes that might be coming to certain brokers. This effects Australian Customers the most, but also effects those living in other countries that use Australian brokers, such as Pepperstone and others. Last year in August 2019, ASIC ( Australian Securities and Investments Commission ) was concerned about retail traders going into Forex and Binary options without understanding these instruments properly and started sticking their noses in for tough regulation. ASIC asked brokers and anyone with interest in the industry to write to them and explain what should and should not change from the changes they proposed, some of the proposed changes are very misguided and come from a lack of understanding exactly how OTC derivatives actually work. I will provide the link to the paper further down so you can read it yourself and i will provide a link to all the submission made by all parties that sent submissions to ASIC, however the 2 main points of debate are: 1, To reduce the overall leverage available to retail traders to either 20:1 or 30:1. This means people who currently use leverage such as 100:1 to 500:1 and everything in between will be effected the most, even more so are those traders with relatively small accounts, meaning in order to get your foot in the door to trading you will need more capital for it to be viable. ^^ This point above is very important. 2, The removing of Binary options trading, which basically includes products like "Bet if gold will rise to this price in the next 30 seconds" This sort of stuff. So far from all the submissions from brokers and individuals nobody really cares if this changes as far as i know, though if you have concerns about this i would start voicing your disapproval. Though i would not waste your time here, all is pointing to this being eradicated completely with brokers also supporting the changes, I've never used such a product and know very little about them. ^^ This point above isn't very important and will probably be enforced in the future. Still to this day i see retail traders not understanding leverage, they think of it as "dangerous and scary", it's not, position size is the real danger, not leverage. So ASIC is aiming to limit retail traders access to high leverage, they are claiming it is a way to protect traders who don't really understand what they are getting into by attacking leverage and not the real problem which is position size relative to your capital. If it was truly about protecting retail traders from blowing up their accounts, they would look for ways to educate traders on "understanding position sizes and why it's important" rather than attacking leverage, but their goal is misguided or has an ulterior motive . I will give you a small example below. EXAMPLE - We will use 2 demo accounts for demonstration purposes. If you don't understand my example, i suggest you try it for yourself. - Skip if not interested in examples. Lets say we open 2 demo accounts with $1000 in both, one with 20:1 leverage and one with 500:1 leverage and we open an identical position on both accounts ( say a micro lot '0.01' on EURUSD ). You are safer on the 500:1 account as you don't need to put up as much margin as collateral as you would on the 20:1. If the trade we just opened goes against us and continues against us, the account with 20:1 leverage will run out of free margin a lot faster than the 500:1 account. In this simple example is shows you that leverage is not dangerous but safer and gives you a lot more breathing room. This trade was a small micro lot, so it would take hundreds of pips movements to get margin called and blow up that $1000 on each account. Lets now use a different position size to truly understand why retail traders blow up accounts and is the reason why trading can be dangerous. This time instead of opening a micro lot of '0.01' on our $1000 dollar demo accounts, lets open a position size much larger, 5 lots. Remember we only have $1000 and we are about to open a position much larger relative to our capital ( which we should never do because we can't afford to do that ) the 20:1 probably wont even let you place that trade if you don't have enough margin as collateral or if you could open the position you would have a very tiny amount of free margin left over, meaning a small pip movement against you will instantly blow up your $1000 account. On the 500:1 account you wouldn't need to put up as much margin as collateral with more free margin if the trade goes bad, but again a small movement could blow up your account. In this example, both accounts were dangerous because the lack of understanding position sizes, opening a position you can't afford to open. This is what the true danger is, not the leverage. Even in the second example, the higher leverage would "margin call" you out later. So i would go as far to say that lower leverage is more dangerous for you because it margin calls you out faster and just by having a lower leverage doesn't stop you from opening big positions that can blow you up in a 5 pip movement anymore, any leverage size is dangerous if you're opening positions you can't afford to open. This is also taking into consideration that no risk management is being used, with risk management higher leverage is even more powerful. ASIC believes lowering leverage will stop people opening positions that they can't afford. When the reality is no matter how much capital you have $500, $1000, $5000, $50,000, $500,000, $5,000,000. You don't open position sizes that will blow that capital up completely with small movements. The same thing can happen on a 20:1 or 500:1 account. Leverage is a tool, use it, if your on a lower leverage already such as 20:1, 30:1 it means your country has been regulated and you already have harder trading conditions. Just remember higher leverage allows you to open larger position sizes in total for the amount of money you own, but the issue is NOT that your using the higher leverage but because you are opening positions you can't afford, for what ever reason that is, the only fix for this is education and will not be fixed by simply lowing leverage, since you can just as easy blow up your account on low leverage just as fast or if not faster. So what is going on? There might ( get your tinfoil hats on ) be more that is involved here, deeper than you think, other agendas to try and stop small time retail traders from making money via OTC products, theories such as governments not wanting their citizens to be traders, rather would prefer you to get out there and work a 9 to 5 instead. Effective ways to do this would be making conditions harder with a much larger barrier of entry and the best way to increase the barrier of entry for retail traders is to limit leverage, lower leverage means you need to put up more money, less breathing room for trades, lower potential. They are limiting your upside potential and the downside stays the same, a blown account is a blow account. Think of leverage as a weapon, a person wielding a butchers knife can probably destroy a person wielding a steak knife, but both knifes can prove fatal. They want to make sure your holding the butter knife then tell you to butcher a cow with it. 30:1 leverage is still workable and can still be profitable, but not as profitable as 500:1 accounts. This is why they are allowing professionals to use high leverage, this gives them another edge over successful retail traders who will still be trying to butcher a cow with a butter knife, while they are slaying limbs off the cow with machetes. It's a way to hamstring you and keep you away rather than trying to "protect" you. The real danger is not leverage, they are barking up the wrong tree, how convenient to be barking up the very tree most retail traders don't fully understand ( leverage) , pass legislation to make trading conditions harder and at the same time push the narrative that trading is dangerous by making it even harder. A full circle strategy to make your trading conditions worse, so you don't succeed. Listen carefully especially if you trade with any of the brokers that have provided their submissions to ASIC. Brokers want to seem like they are on your side and so far some of the submissions ( i haven't read them all ) have brokers willing to drop their leverage down to 30:1 because they know by dropping the leverage down it will start margin calling out their clients at a much faster rate, causing more blown up accounts / abandoned accounts with residual margin called funds, but they also know that if they make trading environments too hard less people will trade or even worse move their funds elsewhere offshore to unregulated brokers that offer higher leverage. Right now it's all just a proposal, but as governments expand and continue to gain more control over it's citizens, it's just a matter of time till it's law, it's up to you to be vocal about it, let your broker know that if they drop their leverage, you're out, force them to fight for you. If you have any more information related to this, or have anything to add, post below. I'm not an expert at this technical law talk, i know that i do well with 500:1 leverage and turn profits with it, it would be harder for me to do on a lower leverage, this is the reason for my post. All related documents HERE CP-322 ( Consultation paper 322 ) & Submissions from brokers and others. https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resources/find-a-document/consultation-papers/cp-322-product-intervention-otc-binary-options-and-cfds/
Adam Tracy Discusses The Unlicensed Crypto Exchange
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=34&v=aoqJ7SxVwtA Attorney Adam Tracy discusses three jurisdictions to operate an unlicensed cryptocurrency exchange from and the procedure and pitfalls associated therewith. — — A former competitive rugby player, serial entrepreneur and, trader attorney, Adam S. Tracy offers over 17 years of progressive legal and compliance experience in the areas of corporate, commodities, cryptocurrency, litigation, payments and securities law. Adam’s experience ranges from commodities trader for oil giant BP, initial public offerings, M&A, to initial coin offerings, having represented both startups to NASDAQ-listed entities. As an early Bitcoin adapter, Adam has promoted growth of cryptocurrency and offers a unique approach to representing crypto-clients. Based in Chicago, IL, Adam graduated from the University of Notre Dame with dual degrees in Finance and Computer Applications and would later obtain his J.D. and M.B.A. from DePaul University. Adam lives outside Chicago with his six animals, which is illegal where he lives. Primary website: http://www.tracyfirm.com Twitter: https://twitter.com/TracyFirm Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVOa... Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/adamtracy/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thetracyfirm/ Instagram: @adamtracyattorney Telegram: @adam_tracy Skype: @adamtracyesq Email me: [email protected] TRANSCRIPTION: I get this question a lot, and that is do you need a license for an offshore crypto exchange? And answer is no, okay, with some caveats to it. And that main caveat being where you’re domiciled or where you purport to operate from. As I discussed with, you know, like Vanuatu (places like that), the process of domiciling there and operating requires a license in that jurisdiction. In that jurisdiction it is very easy get what is a pseudo securities 4X license. There’s three particular jurisdictions, which allow 4X activity, which includes crypto exchange but doesn’t require license, and those ways are Nevis (which I’m a big fan of and I’ve spoke about before), Saint Vincent, and the Seychelles. None of them require a license to operate a foreign exchange dealer or a foreign exchange broker. That’s why you see a great deal of 4X binary options and other type of companies operating from those jurisdictions. So, it’s great in a sense. One of the pitfalls is that without a license banking becomes very difficult, and banking is already very difficult when you’re dealing with crypto. So now you’re compounding it in the sense that you’re operating an unlicensed 4X exchange. Now I’ve read, and I can’t verify it, that about 90% of 4X brokers actually start out as being unlicensed. And that may, in fact, be accurate, but as you as you grow it does make some sense, especially from a banking perspective and from a transparency perspective, to become licensed, whether that’s like in class C jurisdiction like a Vanuatu or Cyprus or Malta or Gibraltar, or like a Class B, even in UK and Australia, then class A which would be like the United States. So, it’s an interesting thing. And so, you can operate without the license, but you still have to be careful with respect to the jurisdictions in which you’re operating, right? And that’s particularly germane to the United States, right? So if you’re going to operate a crypto exchange based in one these three locales that don’t require any particular licensure, you have to be sure that you’ve got the requisite licensure in the United States, right? And if that entails if you’re dealing Fiat, having money transmitter license, if you’re not dealing with Fiat, at a minimum being money service business. And so the money service business registration (which I’ve also spoke about before) requires you register with FinCEN, and implicates and triggers all your AML KYC Bank Secrecy Act compliance and the whole scheme, which you may be doing anyway, right? It’s good practice to do anyway, but, you know, just because your operating from an unlicensed jurisdiction, it doesn’t mean that you escaped U.S. regulation if you’re going to take US customers. Which is particularly problematic if you’re a US citizen, because, of course, you’re opening the door to a fair amount of liability. So those three nations: Nevis, Saint Vincent, the Seychelles — great places to consider if you’re going to start a crypto exchange or even a 4X Broker, but it comes with its own set of challenges. And when you look at, you know, the ability to get licenses in places like Vanuatu especially, you know, for the cost versus the problems you encounter, it may not be the best place, but it is entirely legal and legitimate to operate from those locales. So hit me up TracyFirm.com. [email protected] is my email, and I’ll talk to soon.
A lot of brokers will refer to a business license as if it is the same thing as regulation, but it is not. Here are the regulated binary options brokers that we recommend: 24option: USA traders are not accepted. Licensed and regulated by CySEC, license #207/13. This was one of the first binary options brokers we ever recommended. A majority of binary options brokers in the US provide access to a free demo account with a virtual trade balance, which is a good opportunity for analysing the trading platform before investing real money. The availability of a demo trading account is one of the many benefits enjoyed by US traders, particularly when we consider the non ... As of date, the US residents face the maximum trouble in finding a binary broker accepting the US clients. The main reason for that is the US law that demands registration of a Forex or binary broker with the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) or the CFTC (Commodities Futures and Trading Commission), as deemed necessary, before accepting the US clients. Here are the Top 5 Best Binary Options Brokers for USA Buyers. 1. Nadex (best options broker overall) A favorite binary options broker among US traders and headquartered in Chicago, Nadex is licensed by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). Nadex is not just a binary options broker but it is a binary exchange operating as per ... Binary Options in the United States. When looking for binary options trading brokers, you should take a few things into consideration: Please note that most US brokers are unregulated. Therefore please do your own research before signing up and before becoming a binary options customer there. All unregulated brokers are “ok” at best.
The Basic Principles Of Binary Options Brokers For Us ...
For those who reside while in the US, or Even though you undoubtedly are a US citizen residing elsewhere on the planet, you should constantly select a US-based binary options broker for the ... Click The Following Link: https://bit.ly/3fd36eA - How Binary options brokers in india us citizens : Free - ProRental can Save You Time, Stress, and Money. Y... Strikingly, the US controls binary options similarly, and there are hardly any brokers out there accepting US traders! ... Which is the Best Binary Options Broker for EU Citizens? Binary options ... I hope you like this detailed review of MarketsWorld, a.k.a. "Markets The World", Binary Options Broker, a Regulated Broker for US Residents, probably the only one among the already few brokers ... us binary options broker, binary options trading usa, binary options, binary options trading, binary options broker 2018, binary options brokers in usa, Best Binary Options brokers in USA, Binary ...