Unregistered FX IBâs out and 20million cap FX FCM in http://weblog.fxstreet.com/2008/01/nfa-tough-times.html http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-4626
Interesting, thanks for the link. I guess in round two the list of registered FDMs will shrink quite a lot again. Does anyone understand what the paragraphs in section "SIGNIFICANT PRICE DISCOVERY CONTRACTS" mean?
Not 100% sure of that meaning myself, are their and legal eagles here at the forms that can put this in laymenâs terms for us? From what I understand here this bill destroys most Retail FX players at least as I know them, Looks like the banks and future firms are only ones qualified even the big FX firms like FXCM, Gain and Oranda will meet these qualifications, none are licensed or dealings in on-exchange business to my knowledge!!!! Here is the passed bill http://agriculture.house.gov/inside/Legislation/110/sbsCFTC.pdf already passed House committee of agriculture, so looks to be right around the Conner to becoming realty now.
Found theses links on forex factory on the same topic, very good reads especially This 1sest and 2end ones NFA President urges House Subcommittee to address forex regulatory issues in CFTC reauthorization bill http://www.nfa.futures.org/member/newsLetter2.asp#Testimony http://www.nfa.futures.org/news/newsTestimony.asp?ArticleID=1968 NYMEX Supports Commodity Futures Trading Commission Reauthorization Act of 2007 http://www.marketwatch.com/news/sto...3-4376-97D1-090D7CF42CB4}&dist=TQP_Mod_pressN House moves CFTC reauthorization forward 14/12/2007 The House Committee on Agriculture passed a measure to reauthorize Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). http://www.fow.com/Article.aspx?ArticleID=1787472 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE December 12, 2007 Commodity Futures Trading Commission Reauthorization Approved http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/agriculture_dem/pr_121207_CFTC_reauth.html http://overcriminalized.com/lu.cfm?PrettyID=4605 http://agriculture.house.gov/inside/Legislation/110/CFTC.pdf
The big forex firms - Oanda, FXCM, GFT, Gain - will still be able to operate under the new rules. the bill would apply new requirements to Futures Commission Merchants, to affiliates of Futures Commission Merchants, and to the newly defined retail foreign exchange dealers, each of which would have to maintain adjusted net capital of at least $20 million in order to qualify for certain regulatory exemptions under the Act. Futures Commission Merchants would also have to be primarily or substantially engaged in on-exchange business to qualify. The requirement "to be primarily or substantially engaged in on-exchange business" will apply to futures commission merchants, NOT to "newly defined foreign exchange dealers" such as the big four. The new regulations in effect reclassify registered forex firms as "foreign exchange dealers" so they have to meet the new capital requirements but do not have to do any business on-exchange.
I tend to agree here. I am not a lawyer, so I am not going to post an unqualified, half-baked interpretation of some legislation that was buried in a farm bill. However, the legislation was meant to bring legitimacy and safety to the industry not crush it... and I don't think it could stop firms like Oanda (150 mill) or FXCM (75 mill, and that is just their US branch) or GFT from doing business. In addition to this, I had an account with Gain, and it was not FX it was equities, so not sure why they were mentioned here. This will close the bucket-shops and the fly-by-nights, period.
Not so sure of that, read closely,, the bill states the FX firm would need to have 20m in cap and primarily or substantially engaged in on-exchange business to qualify. and I know for shore none of the firms you presented have on-exchange licensing, if the bill passes, looks to be going strong http://financialservices.law360.com/Secure/ViewArticle.aspx?id=42130 they will ether need to reregistered as an on-exchange business witch also requires acceptance by the exchange or take a back seat ( sort of an IB) to firm already licensed to conduct on-exchange business. Retail foreign exchange dealerâ is a newly defined term under this bill. Under the bill, retail foreign exchange dealers must register with the CFTC and are subject to CFTC rules and to the same anti-fraud authority as are Futures Commission Merchants that engage in retail foreign exchange transactions. In addition, the bill would apply new requirements to Futures Commission Merchants, to affiliates of Futures Commission Merchants, and to the newly defined retail foreign exchange dealers, each of which would have to maintain adjusted net capital of at least $20 million in order to qualify for certain regulatory exemptions under the Act. Futures Commission Merchants would also have to be primarily or substantially engaged in on-exchange business to qualify. The 20m not so much of hurtle for anyone of these firms itâs getting registered to conduct business on an exchange thatâs hard one, firms wait years to by a seat on any exchange, not an easy task.
Wait I take one back âGFTâ is the only one in your bunch that would meet the new laws qualifications at this point, why because they already have business in the futures market. , theirs actually a lot more qualified well capitalized banks and futures firms now offering retail FX for instance FC-stone, Barclays, UBS, RCG/TradeView just to name a few. At this point I would steer clear of any FX brokers thats not also licensed to conduct on-exchange business, no mater how much thay have under cap, CFTA has proclaimed all firms without on-exchange business are illegitimately licensed as FCMs and goâs on to explain CFTC has limited power neither rulemaking nor legal authority over them!! Theirs no doubt big changes for Retail FX coming soon. Source http://www.nfa.futures.org/news/newsTestimony.asp?ArticleID=1968
go to http://www.cftc.gov/files/tm/fcm/fcmdata1107.pdf if it ain't got 25 mil or more I would suggest you send in the withdrawal form now. As for the big forex dealers being ousted because they do not have on-exchange affiliation or registration... all due respect Biggun but i think that is rediculous. And even if it were the case, the top 5 would probably set up a registration just to maintain their current business not to mention enjoy the overflow when the bucketshops go under. Paliz, get with one of the big guys and you will be fine.