Forex Peace Army Members Forums>

[buju357]

----- Original Message -----
From: Desmond Wright
To: secretary@cftc.gov
Sent: Saturday, January 23, 2010 7:06 AM
Subject: Regulation of Retail Forex


The new regulations will be a definite disadvantage to forex traders and brokers , they will cause funds to be transfers out of the US , jobs will be lost and peoples livelihood will be at stake, the US can hardly afford this right now , I oppose these new regulations in the strongest possible terms.


Regards

Desmond

If freedom is outlawed , only outlaws will have freedom.

[believe77]

from me
to secretary@cftc.gov
date Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 12:07 PM
subject Regulation of Retail Forex
mailed-by gmail.com

RIN 3038-AC61

Dear Secretary,

my name is Bernard Sugiarta. I am Indonesian and live in my country
I have several Forex accounts in United States of America.
The account I have in the U.S.A. is held by IBFX (Interbank FX) and FXDD.
The balance is not much, but the profit i got can help my cost of living.

I have learned that it is the FTC´s intention to change the maximum leverage for Forex Retail Services to 10:1 and it is for this reason that I am sending this message.

My trading strategy requires a leverage of at least 100:1, which means that if this initiative gets approved I will no longer be able to trade using the same strategy with IBFX, and I will move my funds to another country.
I assume many traders will do the same thing if the initiative becomes law.
With HUGE subsequent impacts on the economy and the creation of jobs within the U.S.
Many American broker will collapse and Very much become unemployed.

So I strongly say NO to 10:1 Leverage for Forex Retail.

I want to thank you in advance for the attention paid to this messge.

Please feel free to contact me via email if you have any questions or comments.

Best Regards,

Bernard Sugiarta

[mechtech63]

to David Stawick:


I lost my job awhile back and before that I was studying forex investing in case of a job loss.

As it happens, I did lose my job, but have been diligently working my forex account to a profitable level.

Now, I can support my family and have a future. It took quite a bit of struggle and learning, but like anything, if you stick with it and don't give up, you can do it.

However, after all my work, I hear that there are proposals to change my profitability. I cannot believe you want to put training wheels on forex investing. So you want to make it safe for everyone by reducing the leverage to 10:1? How will that benefit anyone? How can you inflict financial damage onto American families that work so hard to make forex investing work for them?

If this is to protect new investors, then they should practice before making a risk. There are plenty of disclosures warning people of these risk. You cannot dumb down the market to meet new investor needs.

If these regulations take effect, there will be a mass exodus of investors for US brokerages. The damage to their families and the economy is going to be huge.

You need to leave people to make or break their own future. Their is to much government involvement here. It is getting to the point of destroying our American way of life.

If there are hidden agendas here, you need to dig down deep and ask yourself if you can live with the guilt of what you are doing to American investors. This economy has forced us to re-invent ourselves. With struggle and determination we have achieved that. Now you want to take the dream away? This is not what this country is about.

Sincerely,
Keith Adams
(a new and successful forex investor)

[kellyg]

Dear Secretary,

About four years ago, I had a decent size retail forex account with Refco FX, maybe about 35K or so; all my eggs were in one basket.

Refco Fx went bust and I settled for about 21 cents on the dollar; not a pretty picture.

Today, I have four separate small FX accounts with different brokers; I never let any one these account grow above 12K.

Instead, I skim profits when needed for income and savings. This is how I distribute my "rogue broker" risk; multiple accounts with anywhere from 100:1 to 100:2.5 leverage.

This high leverage allows me to maintain and trade these multiple accounts with relatively low balances. I never exceed usage 10% account equity for any one trade, and risk no more 1-2% loss for any trade.

This is how I manage trade risk and broker risk. I keep the risk small and spread it around. 1-2% leverage is essential for such a program.

By reducing margin, funds become consolidated into fewer larger accounts, into fewer larger brokers and into fewer larger banks, until there are only a few big players left to distribute risk.

Eventually, too big to FAIL will become too big to BAIL!

I subsist on small accounts and managed leverage; the risk is to me and my small accounts, Not the entire financial system.

Sincerely,

Kelly Goodman

[mschultz]

a leverage of 10:1 would mean the end of retail forex. it would push back forex into the middle age of foreign exchange - a time when only banks or large scale investors could afford it.
in the sense that not the decisions of forex traders need to be guarded, but their assets, i make the following proposal:

ease the way how a trader can access his assets in case of insolvence of the broker. create additional funds.
we all know that monitoring is necessary because of a large number of fraudulent cases.
improve the monitoring of the brokers.

please the trader, rule the broker.
the trader is the one who brings all the money into the game. without traders there would not be the large retail market as we know it today.

[Farhad]

I did try to send a comment on the link thta you provided, but it does not get anywhere

[Ingot54]

Hi FPA members

Here is the message I emailed to the CFTC a couple of days ago.

I recommend you all do some thinking about this, and try to come up with your own versions of why the status quo should be preserved.

Ivan

____________________

Dear Secretary CFTC

I am concerned that the proposal to limit the use of leverage to 10:1 will severely reduce the ability to continue to profit from Retail Currency Trading.

I would rather see Retail Forex companies commit a portion of their assets to ensure potential traders can prove they have the understanding required to trade using leverage of 100:1 and so on.

I think the onus should be on the trader, not the Regulator, to show that they are competent to handle the risks.

Here in Australia, the Commonwealth Bank Trading Arm, "Commsec" requires traders to prove that they understand the terminology and the mechanisms of trading before using their trading platform. The test is rigid, and requires traders to do research before answering the questionnaire.

Further, Commsec requires another test before it allows traders to use and set Stop Loss orders.

That is not difficult, and it works.

The onus is on the traders, and the benefit of this is that traders actually become better traders through studying for the test.

Rather than pursue an expensive regulatory pathway, which would require policing, why nor help traders to improve their skills, and require Retail Forex companies to require proof of their ability to handle the risk involved in the use of higher leverage?

This would protect the new traders who jump into these markets to get rich quickly, as well as preserve the ability of more experienced traders to continue to profit as they currently do.

I think my suggestion may put the responsibility back onto Retail Forex as well as clients, and allow the Regulator to continue in the role of overseeing fair trading.

Yours faithfully

Ivan **

Australia

[kkisded]

Mr Secretary



i am writing about the 1:10 leverage.

this is a very bad idea. i will move my account to an offshore forex broker. it will cost jobs.

also less leverage means less profit, and less income from us Taxpayers.

Please don't kill the retail forex here in the USA



sincerely

kkisded

[fahd]

RIN 3038-AC61

Dear Sir,

The proposed regulations for retail forex are outrageous. As a forex trader, I feel that it will have detrimental consequences for all the traders involved with forex trading in USA.

We are all grown-ups and very well know our boundaries and limitations and if somebody decides to cross it, well than its his or her own personal choice. We live in a free world and get to choose whatever we find suitable for our growth. Lowering the leverage to 1:10 on the pretext of giving security to our funds is unjustified.

If somebody wants to commit suicide with his funds, well its his choice. We all take risks everyday and own our decisions since we find them necessary to attain certain goals. Crossing a road can be risky too but this does not mean that the Transportation Secretary should ban all the cars!!!

I hope that you will withdraw these outrageous terms and respect the personal decisions and judgment of others.
Thank you

A concerned forex trader

[melhawk]

Dear Sir or Madam,
With the new proposed legist ration it is a good to bring the registration into account and should of been done before, but what I can’t understand is the change in reducing the maximum leverage for US Retail Forex to 10:1as this for the retailer will just not be viable, at the moment I have three separate accounts in the USA but if this comes into force I will have to close them down and open new accounts to Europe and Australia, I just can’t understand the logic in this part of the legist ration, and it’s my personal belief that this should be reviewed before any implantation.

Regards

Graham Blyth