It's illegal, especially if you're not notified in advance of the rate or the methodology/benchmarks for determining the variability. At least in Connecticut it is, and that's where IB is headquartered. Give the A.G. a shout, and see what he says. Be REAL curious.
This stipulation in the agreement, if it is indeed fraudulent or illegal or even usurious, negates the agreement. If somebody gives you a document to sign that says they can do something illegal to you, and you sign it, you think you are bound, and they can get away with it? Contract Law 101. To make this a little simpler: Imagine if they hid in the fine print, and we can chop your hand off, and you didn't see it, and they decide to enforce the contract ...you think they can claim, hey, you signed the document and go ahead and chop ... My point is that what they have in the contract could be illegal, usurious or possibly fraudulent. A court or regulator (yeah, right) would have to decide. But no one challenges, and IB knows most of their clients can't even figure out their statements .... so
I have two thoughts. The first one is that in your previous post you adamantly stated that it's illegal. In this one it's 1) ... IF it is indeed fraudulent or illegal 2) ... what they have in the contract COULD be illegal What happened to that certitude? Are we in Vacillation 101? As for that hand thing, do you like fiction novels?
I believe it is fraudulent, illegal and certainly usurious. A court might disagree (Hey, a court once found OJ innocent). Regulators might disagree. (Hey, the SEC once thought Madoff was doing nothing wrong.) Legislators, paid off by lobbyists, might change the laws. Lots of things could make me say, well technically, now it's not .... But yeah, as of right now, I would say it is all these things. Liked the hand analogy, eh? Yeah, I'm a writer, too. I was going to go with sex slave contract, but I figured I might get TOS'd.