Comment Text:
i0-001
COMMENT
CL-02354
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
[email protected]
Thursday, January 21, 2010 11:20 PM
secretary
Regulation of Retail Forex RIN 3038-AC61
As a non-affiliated US-based Retail FX trader, please note for the record that I am STRONGLY
OPPOSED to the 10-1 leverage limit as proposed in RIN 3038-AC61 relating to the Regulation
of Retail Forex.
Counter-productive effects
This senseless limit would in NO way protect, aid or benefit me but rather would greatly harm
me since this restriction, if passed,
[] would require that I submit substantially more margin-funds into non-protected, non-FDIC
insured, non-SlPC eligible accounts, actually exposing me to increased risk in the event of
bankruptcy of my Forex Broker.
[] would NOT divert my business into regulated-Futures trading (as the CFTC is probably
hoping), but rather would cause me to seek an unreliable, higher-risk offshore FX broker to
trade through, whose practices might be questionable.
[] would eliminate one of the greatest benefits of trading Forex : My ability to efficiently deploy
my own trading capital in the way that I choose
¯ would not allow me to remain competitive as an individual investor.
Lower FX vols require far greater leverage
FX volatilities are generally substantially lower than in the Equities or Futures market.
Therefore, significantly more leverage is required simply to capture equivalent trading
opportunities.
I do not want the CFTC to treat me like a child and dictate how I should trade. VVhile 100-1
leverage is available to me - should I choose it - I am never forced to use it.
The bottom line is that OTC Retail Forex trading is NOT Futures trading. Please do not try to
treat it as such!
PLEASE IMMEDIATELY STRIKE YOUR PROPOSED 10-1 LEVERAGE LIMITATIONS.
Don[]t let proposal RIN 3038-AC61 become an expensive lesson in unintended
consequences [].
Thank you.
