No. Because the premium paid is "unsettled" until the next day. This is an SEC rule. T +1. Even though it shows up right away, technically those funds are not in your account. Oh, and before I logged on I see that Earth-Imperator started a new thread which he now includes T +1... which he learned from MY post in this thread. Never a mention of T+1 until I said it. Looks like our little know-it-all "option expert" just got schooled by The Great and all Knowing VZ. In his new thread he even post a picture... obviously VZ sent him down a new rabbit-hole. >>> You're welcome. >>>>AND WITH THAT SAID--- THE FACT THAT HE NEVER KNEW ABOUT T+1 SETTLEMENT RULES<<<< I strongly suspect after reading his subsequent posts about how they wouldn't let him open an overnight position and that everything changed out of the blue... Stay with me now because this gets a little complicated.... My guess is probably the day before he opened and closed a position using unsettled funds and TastyTrade or whoever is handling his $500 account put THE OTHER SEC RESTRICTION on his account he obviously doesn't know about. This idiot... not knowing about the T+1 incurred his 3rd good faith violation. Prior to that, you can open up a position with unsettled funds and hold overnight... BUT... 3 good faith violations and the SEC Reg T requires the broker to restrict the account to purely "settled" funds for the next 90 days. IE, he can no longer open an overnight position after he round-tripped one that day with settled funds. Our idiot is in the penalty box for the next 90 days. "But it's a bug in their software!" No... it's "you're a f'ing idiot that thinks you know everything" and you're too f'ing stupid to not listen to people that offer you explanations that YOU solicited.
@vanzandt, this posting of mine proves that I used T+1/T+2 much earlier, you little liar! https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/td-ameritrade-api-questions.372300/#post-5752786 You are blocked by me and you know it, but you are still posting your spam in my threads. Stop that!
Then how can Tasty Trade clearly state: The premium received from the sale of the put can be applied to the initial requirement.
Moderator! @spy and @vanzandt are spamming the thread with fakes and lies. They are even completely blocked by me, but they still spam my threads!
@vanzandt, you liar! First you in length did not believe the "requirement = strike - premium" argument of mine, but now you have given it up and wrongly think that there instead was a "good faith violation" by using unsettled cash. You loser, you are all wrong b/c if that were the case then the support would have told it to me. Of course there is another possibility: since TDA is in the midst of a transition to become part of the Schwab company, then maybe something went wrong during that transition process. Just speculating. On the said day (last Thursday) I experienced 2 glitches: UnsettledCash went inexplainable to almost twice the normal value (and on the next day (ie. T+1 for options) auto-fixed itself as expected), and the second issue being the topic of this thread.
This clueless @vanzandt guy was asking me what I mean by "premium". Priceless! ROTFL! And this guy wants to participate in a discussion on options trading...
The regulators allow you to set requirements about minimums. No other TD/Schwab people griping. These circumstances generally get worse.