Forex Trading 2020 - Trade FX For Profit. Strategy, Tips ...

ATO Australian tax treatment for options trades 🇦🇺

I am posting this as I hope it will help other Australian options traders trading in US options with their tax treatment for ATO (Australian Tax Office) purposes. The ATO provides very little guidance on tax treatment for options trading and I had to do a lot of digging to get to this point. I welcome any feedback on this post.

The Deloitte Report from 2011

My initial research led me to this comprehensive Deloitte report from 2011 which is hosted on the ASX website. I've been through this document about 20 times and although it's a great report to understand how different scenarios apply, it's still really hard to find out what's changed since 2011.
I am mainly relating myself to the scenario of being an individual and non-sole trader (no business set up) for my trading. I think this will apply to many others here too. According to that document, there isn't much guidance on what happens when you're an options premium seller and close positions before they expire.
Note that the ATO sometimes uses the term "ETO" (Exchange Traded Option) to discuss what we're talking about here with options trading.
Also note: The ATO discusses the separate Capital Gains Tax ("CGT") events that occur in each scenario in some of their documents. A CGT event will then determine what tax treatment gets applied if you don't know much about capital gains in Australia.

ATO Request for Advice

Since the Deloitte report didn't answer my questions, I eventually ended up contacting the ATO with a request for advice and tried to explain my scenario: I'm an Australian resident for tax purposes, I'm trading with tastyworks in $USD, I'm primarily a premium seller and I don't have it set up with any business/company/trust etc. In effect, I have a rough idea that I'm looking at capital gains tax but I wanted to fully understand how it worked.
Initially the ATO respondent didn't understand what I was talking about when I said that I was selling a position first and buying it to close. According to the laws, there is no example of this given anywhere because it is always assumed in ATO examples that you buy a position and sell it. Why? I have no idea.
I sent a follow up request with even more detail to the ATO. I think (hope) they understood what I meant now after explaining what an options premium seller is!

Currency Gains/Losses

First, I have to consider translating my $USD to Australian dollars. How do we treat that?
FX Translation
If the premium from selling the options contract is received in $USD, do I convert it to $AUD on that day it is received?
ATO response:
Subsection 960-50(6), Item 5 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997) states the amount should be translated at the time of the transaction or event for the purposes of the Capital Gains Tax provisions. For the purpose of granting an option to an entity, the time of the event is when you grant the option (subsection 104-20(2) ITAA 1997).
This is a very detailed response which even refers to the level of which section in the law it is coming from. I now know that I need to translate my trades from $USD to $AUD according to the RBA's translation rates for every single trade.
But what about gains or losses on translation?
There is one major rule that overrides FX gains and losses after digging deeper. The ATO has a "$250k balance election". This will probably apply to a lot of people trading in balances below $250k a lot of the FX rules don't apply. It states:
However, the $250,000 balance election broadly enables you to disregard certain foreign currency gains and losses on certain foreign currency denominated bank accounts and credit card accounts (called qualifying forex accounts) with balances below a specified limit.
Therefore, I'm all good disregarding FX gains and losses! I just need to ensure I translate my trades on the day they occurred. It's a bit of extra admin to do unfortunately, but it is what it is.

Credit Trades

This is the scenario where we SELL a position first, collect premium, and close the position by making an opposite BUY order. Selling a naked PUT, for example.
What happens when you open the position? ATO Response:
The option is grantedCGT event D2 happens when a taxpayer grants an option. The time of the event is when the option is granted. The capital gain or loss arising is the difference between the capital proceeds and the expenditure incurred to grant the option.
This seems straight forward. We collect premium and record a capital gain.
What happens when you close the position? ATO Response:
Closing out an optionThe establishment of an ETO contract is referred to as opening a position (ASX Explanatory Booklet 'Understanding Options Trading'). A person who writes (sells) a call or put option may close out their position by taking (buying) an identical call or put option in the same series. This is referred to as the close-out of an option or the closing-out of an opening position.
CGT event C2 happens when a taxpayer's ownership of an intangible CGT asset ends. Paragraph 104-25(1)(a) of the ITAA 1997 provides that ownership of an intangible CGT asset ends by cancellation, surrender, or release or similar means.
CGT event C2 therefore happens to a taxpayer when their position under an ETO is closed out where the close-out results in the cancellation, release or discharge of the ETO.
Under subsection 104-25(3) of the ITAA 1997 you make a capital gain from CGT event C2 if the capital proceeds from the ending are more than the assets cost base. You make a capital loss if those capital proceeds are less than the assets reduced cost base.
Both CGT events (being D2 upon granting the option and C2 upon adopting the close out position) must be accounted for if applicable to a situation.
My take on this is that the BUY position that cancels out your SELL position will most often simply realise a capital loss (the entire portion of your BUY position). In effect, it 'cancels out' your original premium sold, but it's not recorded that way, it's recorded as two separate CGT events - your capital gain from CGT event D2 (SELL position), then, your capital loss from CGT event C2 (BUY position) is also recorded. In effect, they net each other out, but you don't record them as a 'netted out' number - you record them separately.
From what I understand, if you were trading as a sole tradecompany then you would record them as a netted out capital gain or loss, because the trades would be classified as trading stock but not in our case here as an individual person trading options. The example I've written below should hopefully make that clearer.
EXAMPLE:
Trade on 1 July 2020: Open position
Trade on 15 July 2020: Close position
We can see from this simple example that even though you made a gain on those trades, you still have to record the transactions separately, as first a gain, then as a loss. Note that it is not just a matter of netting off the value of the net profit collected and converting the profit to $AUD because the exchange rate will be different on the date of the opening trade and on the date of the closing trade we have to record them separately.

What if you don't close the position and the options are exercised? ATO Response:
The option is granted and then the option is exercisedUnder subsection 104-40(5) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997) the capital gain or loss from the CGT event D2 is disregarded if the option is exercised. Subsection 134-1(1), item 1, of the ITAA 1997 refers to the consequences for the grantor of the exercise of the option.
Where the option binds the grantor to dispose of a CGT asset section 116-65 of the ITAA 1997 applies to the transaction.
Subsection 116-65(2) of the ITAA 1997 provides that the capital proceeds from the grant or disposal of the shares (CGT asset) include any payment received for granting the option. The disposal of the shares is a CGT event A1 which occurs under subsection 104-10(3) of the ITAA 1997 when the contract for disposal is entered into.
You would still make a capital gain at the happening of the CGT event D2 in the year the event occurs (the time the option is granted). That capital gain is disregarded when the option is exercised. Where the option is exercised in the subsequent tax year, the CGT event D2 gain is disregarded at that point. An amendment may be necessary to remove the gain previously included in taxable income for the year in which the CGT event D2 occurred.
This scenario is pretty unlikely - for me personally I never hold positions to expiration, but it is nice to know what happens with the tax treatment if it ultimately does come to that.

Debit Trades

What about the scenario when you want to BUY some options first, then SELL that position and close it later? Buying a CALL, for example. This case is what the ATO originally thought my request was about before I clarified with them. They stated:
When you buy an ETO, you acquire an asset (the ETO) for the amount paid for it (that is, the premium) plus any additional costs such as brokerage fees and the Australian Clearing House (ACH) fee. These costs together form the cost base of the ETO (section 109-5 of the ITAA 1997). On the close out of the position, you make a capital gain or loss equal to the difference between the cost base of the ETO and the amount received on its expiry or termination (subsection 104-25(3) of the ITAA 1997). The capital gain or loss is calculated on each parcel of options.
So it seems it is far easier to record debit trades for tax purposes. It is easier for the tax office to see that you open a position by buying it, and close it by selling it. And in that case you net off the total after selling it. This is very similar to a trading shares and the CGT treatment is in effect very similar (the main difference is that it is not coming under CGT event A1 because there is no asset to dispose of, like in a shares or property trade).

Other ATO Info (FYI)

The ATO also referred me to the following documents. They relate to some 'decisions' that they made from super funds but the same principles apply to individuals they said.
The ATO’s Interpretative Decision in relation to the tax treatment of premiums payable and receivable for exchange traded options can be found on the links below. Please note that the interpretative decisions below are in relation to self-managed superannuation funds but the same principles would apply in your situation [as an individual taxpayer, not as a super fund].
Premiums Receivable: ATO ID 2009/110

Some tips

submitted by cheese-mate-chen-c to options [link] [comments]

Your Pre Market Brief for 07/16/2020

Pre Market Brief for Thursday July 16th 2020

You can subscribe to the daily 4:00 AM Pre Market Brief on The Twitter Link Here . Alerts in the tweets will direct you to the daily 4:00 AM Pre Market Brief in this sub.
Updated as of 4:45 AM EST
-----------------------------------------------
Stock Futures:
Wednesday 07/15/2020 News and Markets Recap:
Thursday July 16th 2020 Economic Calendar (All times are in EST)
(JOBLESS CLAIMS TODAY)
News Heading into Thursday July 16th 2020:
NOTE: I USUALLY (TRY TO) POST MANY OF THE MOST PROMISING, DRAMATIC, OR BAD NEWS OVERNIGHT STORIES THAT ARE LIKELY IMPORTANT TO THE MEMBERS OF THIS SUB AT THE TOP OF THIS LIST. PLEASE DO NOT YOLO THE VARIOUS TICKERS WITHOUT DOING RESEARCH! THE TIME STAMPS ON THESE MAY BE LATER THAN OTHERS ON THE WEB.
Upcoming Earnings:
Commodities:
COVID-19 Stats and News:
Macro Considerations:
Most Recent SEC Filings
Other
-----------------------------------------------
Morning Research and Trading Prep Tool Kit
Other Useful Resources:
The Ultimate Quick Resource For the Amateur Trader.
Subscribe to This Brief and the daily 4:00 AM Pre Market Brief on The Twitter Link Here . Alerts in the tweets will direct you to the daily brief in this sub
submitted by Cicero1982 to pennystocks [link] [comments]

addaff

addaff

What Is Capitalism?

Capitalism is an economic system in which private individuals or businesses own capital goods. The production of goods and services is based on supply and demand in the general market—known as a market economy—rather than through central planning—known as a planned economy or command economy.
The purest form of capitalism is free market or laissez-faire capitalism. Here, private individuals are unrestrained. They may determine where to invest, what to produce or sell, and at which prices to exchange goods and services. The laissez-faire marketplace operates without checks or controls.
Today, most countries practice a mixed capitalist system that includes some degree of government regulation of business and ownership of select industries.
Volume 75% 2:05

Capitalism

Understanding Capitalism

Functionally speaking, capitalism is one process by which the problems of economic production and resource distribution might be resolved. Instead of planning economic decisions through centralized political methods, as with socialism or feudalism, economic planning under capitalism occurs via decentralized and voluntary decisions.

KEY TAKEAWAYS

  • Capitalism is an economic system characterized by private ownership of the means of production, especially in the industrial sector.
  • Capitalism depends on the enforcement of private property rights, which provide incentives for investment in and productive use of productive capital.
  • Capitalism developed historically out of previous systems of feudalism and mercantilism in Europe, and dramatically expanded industrialization and the large-scale availability of mass-market consumer goods.
  • Pure capitalism can be contrasted with pure socialism (where all means of production are collective or state-owned) and mixed economies (which lie on a continuum between pure capitalism and pure socialism).
  • The real-world practice of capitalism typically involves some degree of so-called “crony capitalism” due to demands from business for favorable government intervention and governments’ incentive to intervene in the economy.

Capitalism and Private Property

Private property rights are fundamental to capitalism. Most modern concepts of private property stem from John Locke's theory of homesteading, in which human beings claim ownership through mixing their labor with unclaimed resources. Once owned, the only legitimate means of transferring property are through voluntary exchange, gifts, inheritance, or re-homesteading of abandoned property.
Private property promotes efficiency by giving the owner of resources an incentive to maximize the value of their property. So, the more valuable the resource is, the more trading power it provides the owner. In a capitalist system, the person who owns the property is entitled to any value associated with that property.
For individuals or businesses to deploy their capital goods confidently, a system must exist that protects their legal right to own or transfer private property. A capitalist society will rely on the use of contracts, fair dealing, and tort law to facilitate and enforce these private property rights.
When a property is not privately owned but shared by the public, a problem known as the tragedy of the commons can emerge. With a common pool resource, which all people can use, and none can limit access to, all individuals have an incentive to extract as much use value as they can and no incentive to conserve or reinvest in the resource. Privatizing the resource is one possible solution to this problem, along with various voluntary or involuntary collective action approaches.

Capitalism, Profits, and Losses

Profits are closely associated with the concept of private property. By definition, an individual only enters into a voluntary exchange of private property when they believe the exchange benefits them in some psychic or material way. In such trades, each party gains extra subjective value, or profit, from the transaction.
Voluntary trade is the mechanism that drives activity in a capitalist system. The owners of resources compete with one another over consumers, who in turn, compete with other consumers over goods and services. All of this activity is built into the price system, which balances supply and demand to coordinate the distribution of resources.
A capitalist earns the highest profit by using capital goods most efficiently while producing the highest-value good or service. In this system, information about what is highest-valued is transmitted through those prices at which another individual voluntarily purchases the capitalist's good or service. Profits are an indication that less valuable inputs have been transformed into more valuable outputs. By contrast, the capitalist suffers losses when capital resources are not used efficiently and instead create less valuable outputs.

Free Enterprise or Capitalism?

Capitalism and free enterprise are often seen as synonymous. In truth, they are closely related yet distinct terms with overlapping features. It is possible to have a capitalist economy without complete free enterprise, and possible to have a free market without capitalism.
Any economy is capitalist as long as private individuals control the factors of production. However, a capitalist system can still be regulated by government laws, and the profits of capitalist endeavors can still be taxed heavily.
"Free enterprise" can roughly be understood to mean economic exchanges free of coercive government influence. Although unlikely, it is possible to conceive of a system where individuals choose to hold all property rights in common. Private property rights still exist in a free enterprise system, although the private property may be voluntarily treated as communal without a government mandate.
Many Native American tribes existed with elements of these arrangements, and within a broader capitalist economic family, clubs, co-ops, and joint-stock business firms like partnerships or corporations are all examples of common property institutions.
If accumulation, ownership, and profiting from capital is the central principle of capitalism, then freedom from state coercion is the central principle of free enterprise.

Feudalism the Root of Capitalism

Capitalism grew out of European feudalism. Up until the 12th century, less than 5% of the population of Europe lived in towns. Skilled workers lived in the city but received their keep from feudal lords rather than a real wage, and most workers were serfs for landed nobles. However, by the late Middle Ages rising urbanism, with cities as centers of industry and trade, become more and more economically important.
The advent of true wages offered by the trades encouraged more people to move into towns where they could get money rather than subsistence in exchange for labor. Families’ extra sons and daughters who needed to be put to work, could find new sources of income in the trade towns. Child labor was as much a part of the town's economic development as serfdom was part of the rural life.

Mercantilism Replaces Feudalism

Mercantilism gradually replaced the feudal economic system in Western Europe and became the primary economic system of commerce during the 16th to 18th centuries. Mercantilism started as trade between towns, but it was not necessarily competitive trade. Initially, each town had vastly different products and services that were slowly homogenized by demand over time.
After the homogenization of goods, trade was carried out in broader and broader circles: town to town, county to county, province to province, and, finally, nation to nation. When too many nations were offering similar goods for trade, the trade took on a competitive edge that was sharpened by strong feelings of nationalism in a continent that was constantly embroiled in wars.
Colonialism flourished alongside mercantilism, but the nations seeding the world with settlements were not trying to increase trade. Most colonies were set up with an economic system that smacked of feudalism, with their raw goods going back to the motherland and, in the case of the British colonies in North America, being forced to repurchase the finished product with a pseudo-currency that prevented them from trading with other nations.
It was Adam Smith who noticed that mercantilism was not a force of development and change, but a regressive system that was creating trade imbalances between nations and keeping them from advancing. His ideas for a free market opened the world to capitalism.

Growth of Industrial Capitalism

Smith's ideas were well-timed, as the Industrial Revolution was starting to cause tremors that would soon shake the Western world. The (often literal) gold mine of colonialism had brought new wealth and new demand for the products of domestic industries, which drove the expansion and mechanization of production. As technology leaped ahead and factories no longer had to be built near waterways or windmills to function, industrialists began building in the cities where there were now thousands of people to supply ready labor.
Industrial tycoons were the first people to amass their wealth in their lifetimes, often outstripping both the landed nobles and many of the money lending/banking families. For the first time in history, common people could have hopes of becoming wealthy. The new money crowd built more factories that required more labor, while also producing more goods for people to purchase.
During this period, the term "capitalism"—originating from the Latin word "capitalis," which means "head of cattle"—was first used by French socialist Louis Blanc in 1850, to signify a system of exclusive ownership of industrial means of production by private individuals rather than shared ownership.
Contrary to popular belief, Karl Marx did not coin the word "capitalism," although he certainly contributed to the rise of its use.

Industrial Capitalism's Effects

Industrial capitalism tended to benefit more levels of society rather than just the aristocratic class. Wages increased, helped greatly by the formation of unions. The standard of living also increased with the glut of affordable products being mass-produced. This growth led to the formation of a middle class and began to lift more and more people from the lower classes to swell its ranks.
The economic freedoms of capitalism matured alongside democratic political freedoms, liberal individualism, and the theory of natural rights. This unified maturity is not to say, however, that all capitalist systems are politically free or encourage individual liberty. Economist Milton Friedman, an advocate of capitalism and individual liberty, wrote in Capitalism and Freedom (1962) that "capitalism is a necessary condition for political freedom. It is not a sufficient condition."
A dramatic expansion of the financial sector accompanied the rise of industrial capitalism. Banks had previously served as warehouses for valuables, clearinghouses for long-distance trade, or lenders to nobles and governments. Now they came to serve the needs of everyday commerce and the intermediation of credit for large, long-term investment projects. By the 20th century, as stock exchanges became increasingly public and investment vehicles opened up to more individuals, some economists identified a variation on the system: financial capitalism.

Capitalism and Economic Growth

By creating incentives for entrepreneurs to reallocate away resources from unprofitable channels and into areas where consumers value them more highly, capitalism has proven a highly effective vehicle for economic growth.
Before the rise of capitalism in the 18th and 19th centuries, rapid economic growth occurred primarily through conquest and extraction of resources from conquered peoples. In general, this was a localized, zero-sum process. Research suggests average global per-capita income was unchanged between the rise of agricultural societies through approximately 1750 when the roots of the first Industrial Revolution took hold.
In subsequent centuries, capitalist production processes have greatly enhanced productive capacity. More and better goods became cheaply accessible to wide populations, raising standards of living in previously unthinkable ways. As a result, most political theorists and nearly all economists argue that capitalism is the most efficient and productive system of exchange.

Capitalism vs. Socialism

In terms of political economy, capitalism is often pitted against socialism. The fundamental difference between capitalism and socialism is the ownership and control of the means of production. In a capitalist economy, property and businesses are owned and controlled by individuals. In a socialist economy, the state owns and manages the vital means of production. However, other differences also exist in the form of equity, efficiency, and employment.

Equity

The capitalist economy is unconcerned about equitable arrangements. The argument is that inequality is the driving force that encourages innovation, which then pushes economic development. The primary concern of the socialist model is the redistribution of wealth and resources from the rich to the poor, out of fairness, and to ensure equality in opportunity and equality of outcome. Equality is valued above high achievement, and the collective good is viewed above the opportunity for individuals to advance.

Efficiency

The capitalist argument is that the profit incentive drives corporations to develop innovative new products that are desired by the consumer and have demand in the marketplace. It is argued that the state ownership of the means of production leads to inefficiency because, without the motivation to earn more money, management, workers, and developers are less likely to put forth the extra effort to push new ideas or products.

Employment

In a capitalist economy, the state does not directly employ the workforce. This lack of government-run employment can lead to unemployment during economic recessions and depressions. In a socialist economy, the state is the primary employer. During times of economic hardship, the socialist state can order hiring, so there is full employment. Also, there tends to be a stronger "safety net" in socialist systems for workers who are injured or permanently disabled. Those who can no longer work have fewer options available to help them in capitalist societies.

Mixed System vs. Pure Capitalism

When the government owns some but not all of the means of production, but government interests may legally circumvent, replace, limit, or otherwise regulate private economic interests, that is said to be a mixed economy or mixed economic system. A mixed economy respects property rights, but places limits on them.
Property owners are restricted with regards to how they exchange with one another. These restrictions come in many forms, such as minimum wage laws, tariffs, quotas, windfall taxes, license restrictions, prohibited products or contracts, direct public expropriation, anti-trust legislation, legal tender laws, subsidies, and eminent domain. Governments in mixed economies also fully or partly own and operate certain industries, especially those considered public goods, often enforcing legally binding monopolies in those industries to prohibit competition by private entities.
In contrast, pure capitalism, also known as laissez-faire capitalism or anarcho-capitalism, (such as professed by Murray N. Rothbard) all industries are left up to private ownership and operation, including public goods, and no central government authority provides regulation or supervision of economic activity in general.
The standard spectrum of economic systems places laissez-faire capitalism at one extreme and a complete planned economy—such as communism—at the other. Everything in the middle could be said to be a mixed economy. The mixed economy has elements of both central planning and unplanned private business.
By this definition, nearly every country in the world has a mixed economy, but contemporary mixed economies range in their levels of government intervention. The U.S. and the U.K. have a relatively pure type of capitalism with a minimum of federal regulation in financial and labor markets—sometimes known as Anglo-Saxon capitalism—while Canada and the Nordic countries have created a balance between socialism and capitalism.
Many European nations practice welfare capitalism, a system that is concerned with the social welfare of the worker, and includes such policies as state pensions, universal healthcare, collective bargaining, and industrial safety codes.

Crony Capitalism

Crony capitalism refers to a capitalist society that is based on the close relationships between business people and the state. Instead of success being determined by a free market and the rule of law, the success of a business is dependent on the favoritism that is shown to it by the government in the form of tax breaks, government grants, and other incentives.
In practice, this is the dominant form of capitalism worldwide due to the powerful incentives both faced by governments to extract resources by taxing, regulating, and fostering rent-seeking activity, and those faced by capitalist businesses to increase profits by obtaining subsidies, limiting competition, and erecting barriers to entry. In effect, these forces represent a kind of supply and demand for government intervention in the economy, which arises from the economic system itself.
Crony capitalism is widely blamed for a range of social and economic woes. Both socialists and capitalists blame each other for the rise of crony capitalism. Socialists believe that crony capitalism is the inevitable result of pure capitalism. On the other hand, capitalists believe that crony capitalism arises from the need of socialist governments to control the economy.
SPONSORED

Start with $30 trading bonus

Trade forex and CFDs on stock indices, commodities, stocks, metals and energies with a licensed and regulated broker. For all clients who open their first real account, XM offers a $30 trading bonus to test the XM products and services without any initial deposit needed. Learn more about how you can trade over 1000 instruments on the XM MT4 and MT5 platforms from your PC and Mac, or from a variety of mobile devices.Compare Investment Accounts


https://preview.redd.it/grfmt8oe4le41.png?width=1199&format=png&auto=webp&s=49d71283e37563aff53287dff7c1f99f993fb8b5
submitted by MattPetroski to ItalicoIntegralism [link] [comments]

Trump Didn’t Kill the Global Trade System. He Split It in Two.

This article is taken from the Wall Street Journal written about nine months ago and sits behind a a paywall, so I decided to copy and paste it here. This article explains Trump's policies toward global trade and what has actually happened so far. I think the article does a decent job of explaining the Trade War. While alot has happenedsince the article was written, I still think its relevant.
However, what is lacking in the article, like many articles on the trade war, is it doesn't really explain the history of US trade policy, the laws that the US administration is using to place tariffs on China and the official justification for the US President in enacting tariffs against China. In my analysis I will cover those points.

SUMMARY

When Trump entered the White House people feared he would dismantle the global system the US and its allies had built over the last 75 years, but he hasn't. He has realign into two systems. One between the US and its allies which looks similar to the one built since the 1980s with a few of quota and tariffs. As the article points out
Today, Korus and Nafta have been replaced by updated agreements(one not yet ratified) that look much like the originals. South Korea accepted quotas on steel. Mexico and Canada agreed to higher wages, North American content requirements and quotas for autos. Furthermore, the article points out Douglas Irwin, an economist and trade historian at Dartmouth College, calls these results the “status quo with Trumpian tweaks: a little more managed trade sprinkled about for favored industries. It’s not good, but it’s not the destruction of the system.” Mr. Trump’s actions so far affect only 12% of U.S. imports, according to Chad Bown of the Peterson Institute for International Economics. In 1984, 21% of imports were covered by similar restraints, many imposed by Mr. Reagan, such as on cars, steel, motorcycles and clothing. Protectionist instincts go so far in the US, there are strong lobby groups for both protectionist and freetrade in the US.
The second reflects a emerging rivalry between the US and China. Undo some of the integration that followed China accession to the WTO. Two questions 1) How far is the US willing to decouple with China 2) Can it persuade allies to join.
The second is going to be difficult because China's economic ties are greater than they were between the Soviets, and China isn't waging an ideological struggle. Trump lacks Reagan commitment to alliance and free trade. The status quo with China is crumbling Dan Sullivan, a Republican senator from Alaska, personifies these broader forces reshaping the U.S. approach to the world. When Mr. Xi visited the U.S. in 2015, Mr. Sullivan urged his colleagues to pay more attention to China’s rise. On the Senate floor, he quoted the political scientist Graham Allison: “War between the U.S. and China is more likely than recognized at the moment.” Last spring, Mr. Sullivan went to China and met officials including Vice President Wang Qishan. They seemed to think tensions with the U.S. will fade after Mr. Trump leaves the scene, Mr. Sullivan recalled. “I just said, ‘You are completely misreading this.’” The mistrust, he told them, is bipartisan, and will outlast Mr. Trump. both Bush II and Obama tried to change dialogue and engagement, but by the end of his term, Obama was questioning the approach. Trump has declared engagement. “We don’t like it when our allies steal our ideas either, but it’s a much less dangerous situation,” said Derek Scissors, a China expert at the American Enterprise Institute whose views align with the administration’s more hawkish officials. “We’re not worried about the war-fighting capability of Japan and Korea because they’re our friends.”
The article also points out unlike George Kennan in 1946 who made a case for containing the Soviet Union, the US hasn't explicitly made a case for containing the Soviets, Trump's administration hasn't, because as the the article explains its divided Michael Pillsbury a Hudson Institute scholar close to the Trump team, see 3 scenarios
Pillsbury thinks the third is most likely to happen, even though the administration hasn't said that it has adopted that policy. The US is stepping efforts to draw in other trading partners. The US, EU and Japan have launched a WTO effort to crack down on domestic subsidies and technology transfers requirement. US and Domestic concerns with prompted some countries to restrict Huawei. The US is also seeking to walloff China from other trade deals. However, there are risk with this strategy

ARTICLE

Trump Didn’t Kill the Global Trade System. He Split It in Two.

INTRODUCTION

My main criticism of this article is it tries like the vast majority of articles to fit US trade actions in the larger context of US geopolitical strategy. Even the author isn't certain "The first goes to the heart of Mr. Trump’s goal. If his aim is to hold back China’s advance, economists predict he will fail.". If you try to treat the trade "war" and US geopolitical strategy toward China as one, you will find yourself quickly frustrated and confused. If you treat them separately with their different set of stakeholders and histories, were they intersect with regards to China, but diverge. During the Cold War, trade policy toward the Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc was subordinated to geopolitical concerns. For Trump, the trade issues are more important than geopolitical strategy. His protectionist trade rhetoric has been fairly consistent since 1980s. In his administration, the top cabinet members holding economic portfolios, those of Commerce, Treasury and US Trade Representative are the same people he picked when he first took office. The Director of the Economic Council has changed hands once, its role isn't as important as the National Security Advisor. While State, Defense, CIA, Homeland Security, UN Ambassador, National Security Advisor have changed hands at least once. Only the Director of National Intelligence hasn't changed.
International Trade makes up 1/4 of the US economy, and like national security its primarily the responsibility of the Federal government. States in the US don't implement their own tariffs. If you add the impact of Treasury policy and how it relates to capital flows in and out of the US, the amounts easily exceed the size of the US economy. Furthermore, because of US Dollar role as the reserve currency and US control of over global system the impact of Treasury are global. Trade policy and investment flows runs through two federal departments Commerce and Treasury and for trade also USTR. Defense spending makes up 3.3% of GDP, and if you add in related homeland security its at most 4%. Why would anyone assume that these two realms be integrated let alone trade policy subordinate to whims of a national security bureaucracy in most instances? With North Korea or Iran, trade and investment subordinate themselves to national security, because to Treasury and Commerce bureaucrats and their affiliated interest groups, Iran and the DPRK are well, economic midgets, but China is a different matter.
The analysis will be divided into four sections. The first will be to provide a brief overview of US trade policy since 1914. The second section will discuss why the US is going after China on trade issues, and why the US has resorted using a bilateral approach as opposed to going through the WTO. The third section we will talk about how relations with China is hashed out in the US.
The reason why I submitted this article, because there aren't many post trying to explain US-China Trade War from a trade perspective. Here is a post titled "What is the Reasons for America's Trade War with China, and not one person mentioned Article 301 or China's WTO Commitments. You get numerous post saying that Huawei is at heart of the trade war. Its fine, but if you don't know what was inside the USTR Investigative report that lead to the tariffs. its like skipping dinner and only having dessert When the US President, Donald J Trump, says he wants to negotiate a better trade deal with other countries, and has been going on about for the last 35 years, longer than many of you have been alive, why do people think that the key issues with China aren't primarily about trade at the moment.

OVERVIEW OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE ORIENTATION

Before 1940s, the US could be categorized as a free market protectionist economy. For many this may seem like oxymoron, how can an economy be free market and protectionist? In 1913, government spending made up about 7.5% of US GDP, in the UK it was 13%, and for Germany 18% (Public Spending in the 20th Century A Global Perspective: Ludger Schuknecht and Vito Tanzi - 2000). UK had virtual zero tariffs, while for manufactured goods in France it was 20%, 13% Germany, 9% Belgium and 4% Netherlands. For raw materials and agricultural products, it was almost zero. In contrast, for the likes of United States, Russia and Japan it was 44%, 84% and 30% respectively. Even though in 1900 United States was an economic powerhouse along with Germany, manufactured exports only made up 30% of exports, and the US government saw tariffs as exclusively a domestic policy matter and didn't see tariffs as something to be negotiated with other nations. The US didn't have the large constituency to push the government for lower tariffs abroad for their exports like in Britain in the 1830-40s (Reluctant Partners: A History of Multilateral Trade Cooperation, 1850-2000).
The Underwood Tariffs Act of 1913 which legislated the income tax, dropped the tariffs to 1850 levels levels.Until 16th amendment was ratified in 1913 making income tax legal, all US federal revenue came from excise and tariffs. In contrast before 1914, about 50% of UK revenue came from income taxes. The reason for US reluctance to introduced income tax was ideological and the United State's relative weak government compared to those in Europe. After the First World War, the US introduced the Emergency Tariff Act of 1921, than the Fordney–McCumber Tariff of 1922 followed by a Smoot-Hawley Act of 1930. Contrary to popular opinion, the Smoot-Hawley Act of 1930 had a small negative impact on the economy, since imports and exports played a small part of the US economy, and the tariffs were lower than the average that existed from 1850-1914.
Immediately after the Second World War, when the US economy was the only industrialized economy left standing, the economic focus was on rehabilitation and monetary stability. There was no grandiose and ideological design. Bretton Woods system linked the US dollar to gold to create monetary stability, and to avoid competitive devaluation and tariffs that plagued the world economy after Britain took itself off the gold in 1931. The US$ was the natural choice, because in 1944 2/3 of the world's gold was in the US. One reason why the Marshall Plan was created was to alleviate the chronic deficits Europeans countries had with the US between 1945-50. It was to rebuild their economies so they could start exports good to the US. Even before it was full implemented in 1959, it was already facing problems, the trade surpluses that the US was running in the 1940s, turned to deficits as European and Japanese economies recovered. By 1959, Federal Reserves foreign liabilities had already exceeded its gold reserves. There were fears of a run on the US gold supply and arbitrage. A secondary policy of the Bretton woods system was curbs on capital outflows to reduce speculation on currency pegs, and this had a negative impact on foreign investment until it was abandoned in 1971. It wasn't until the 1980s, where foreign investment recovered to levels prior to 1914. Factoring out the big spike in global oil prices as a result of the OPEC cartel, it most likely wasn't until the mid-1990s that exports as a % of GDP had reached 1914 levels.
Until the 1980s, the US record regarding free trade and markets was mediocre. The impetus to remove trade barriers in Europe after the Second World War was driven by the Europeans themselves. The EEC already had a custom union in 1968, Canada and the US have yet to even discuss implementing one. Even with Canada it took the US over 50 years to get a Free Trade Agreement. NAFTA was inspired by the success of the EEC. NAFTA was very much an elite driven project. If the Americans put the NAFTA to a referendum like the British did with the EEC in the seventies, it most likely wouldn't pass. People often look at segregation in the US South as a political issue, but it was economic issue as well. How could the US preach free trade, when it didn't have free trade in its own country. Segregation was a internal non-tariff barrier. In the first election after the end of the Cold War in 1992, Ross Perot' based most of independent run for the Presidency on opposition to NAFTA. He won 19% of the vote. Like Ross Perot before him, Donald Trump is not the exception in how America has handled tariffs since the founding of the Republic, but more the norm.
The embrace of free trade by the business and political elite can be attributed to two events. After the end of Bretton Woods in 1971, a strong vested interest in the US in the form of multinationals and Wall Street emerged advocating for removal of tariffs and more importantly the removal of restrictions on free flow of capital, whether direct foreign investment in portfolio investment. However, the political class embrace of free trade and capital only really took off after the collapse of the Soviet Union propelled by Cold War triumphalism.
As mentioned by the article, the US is reverting back to a pre-WTO relations with China. As Robert Lighthizer said in speech in 2000
I guess my prescription, really, is to move back to more of a negotiating kind of a settlement. Return to WTO and what it really was meant to be. Something where you have somebody make a decision but have it not be binding.
The US is using financial and legal instruments developed during the Cold War like its extradition treaties (with Canada and Europe), and Section 301. Here is a very good recent article about enforcement commitment that China will make.‘Painful’ enforcement ahead for China if trade war deal is reached with US insisting on unilateral terms
NOTE: It is very difficult to talk about US-China trade war without a basic knowledge of global economic history since 1914. What a lot of people do is politicize or subordinate the economic history to the political. Some commentators think US power was just handed to them after the Second World War, when the US was the only industrialized economy left standing. The dominant position of the US was temporary and in reality its like having 10 tonnes of Gold sitting in your house, it doesn't automatically translate to influence. The US from 1945-1989 was slowly and gradually build her influence in the non-Communist world. For example, US influence in Canada in the 1960s wasn't as strong as it is now. Only 50% of Canadian exports went to the US in 1960s vs 80% at the present moment.

BASIS OF THE US TRADE DISCUSSION WITH CHINA

According to preliminary agreement between China and the US based on unnamed sources in the Wall Street Journal article US, China close in on Trade Deal. In this article it divides the deal in two sections. The first aspects have largely to do with deficits and is political.
As part of a deal, China is pledging to help level the playing field, including speeding up the timetable for removing foreign-ownership limitations on car ventures and reducing tariffs on imported vehicles to below the current auto tariff of 15%. Beijing would also step up purchases of U.S. goods—a tactic designed to appeal to President Trump, who campaigned on closing the bilateral trade deficit with China. One of the sweeteners would be an $18 billion natural-gas purchase from Cheniere Energy Inc., people familiar with the transaction said.
The second part will involve the following.
  1. Commitment Regarding Industrial Policy
  2. Provisions to protect IP
  3. Mechanism which complaints by US companies can be addressed
  4. Bilateral meetings adjudicate disputes. If talks don't produce agreement than US can raise tariffs unilaterally
This grouping of conditions is similar to the points filled under the 301 investigation which serve the basis for initiating the tariffs. I have been reading some sources that say this discussion on this second group of broader issues could only be finalized later
The official justifications for placing the tariffs on Chinese goods is found under the March 2018 investigation submitted by the office of the President to Congress titled FINDINGS OF THE INVESTIGATION INTO CHINA’S ACTS, POLICIES, AND PRACTICES RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, AND INNOVATION UNDER SECTION 301 OF THE TRADE ACT OF 1974. From this investigation the United States Trade Representative (USTR) place US Tariffs on Chinese goods as per Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. Here is a press release by the USTR listing the reasons for placing tariffs, and the key section from the press release. Specifically, the Section 301 investigation revealed:
In the bigger context of trade relations between US and China, China is not honoring its WTO commitments, and the USTR issued its yearly report to Congress in early February about the status of China compliance with its WTO commitments. The points that served as a basis for applying Section 301, also deviate from her commitments as Clinton's Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky paving the way for a trade war. Barshefsky argues that China's back sliding was happening as early as 2006-07, and believes the trade war could have been avoided has those commitments been enforced by previous administrations.
I will provide a brief overview of WTO membership and China's process of getting into the WTO.
WTO members can be divided into two groups, first are countries that joined in 1995-97, and were members of GATT, than there are the second group that joined after 1997. China joined in 2001. There is an argument that when China joined in 2001, she faced more stringent conditions than other developing countries that joined before, because the vast majority of developing countries were members of GATT, and were admitted to the WTO based on that previous membership in GATT. Here is Brookings Institute article published in 2001 titled "Issues in China’s WTO Accession"
This question is all the more puzzling because the scope and depth of demands placed on entrants into the formal international trading system have increased substantially since the formal conclusion of the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations in 1994, which expanded the agenda considerably by covering many services, agriculture, intellectual property, and certain aspects of foreign direct investment. Since 1994, the international community has added agreements covering information technology, basic telecommunications services, and financial services. WTO membership now entails liberalization of a much broader range of domestic economic activity, including areas that traditionally have been regarded by most countries as among the most sensitive, than was required of countries entering the WTO’s predecessor organization the GATT.
The terms of China’s protocol of accession to the World Trade Organization reflect the developments just described and more. China’s market access commitments are much more far-reaching than those that governed the accession of countries only a decade ago. And, as a condition for membership, China was required to make protocol commitments that substantially exceed those made by any other member of the World Trade Organization, including those that have joined since 1995. The broader and deeper commitments China has made inevitably will entail substantial short-term economic costs.
What are the WTO commitments Barshefsky goes on about? When countries join the WTO, particularly those countries that weren't members of GATT and joined after 1997, they have to work toward fulfilling certain commitments. There are 4 key documents when countries make an accession to WTO membership, the working party report, the accession protocol paper, the goods schedule and service schedule.
In the working party report as part of the conclusion which specifies the commitment of each member country what they will do in areas that aren't compliant with WTO regulations on the date they joined. The problem there is no good enforcement mechanism for other members to force China to comply with these commitments. And WTO punishments are weak.
Here is the commitment paragraph for China
"The Working Party took note of the explanations and statements of China concerning its foreign trade regime, as reflected in this Report. The Working Party took note of the commitments given by China in relation to certain specific matters which are reproduced in paragraphs 18-19, 22-23, 35-36, 40, 42, 46-47, 49, 60, 62, 64, 68, 70, 73, 75, 78-79, 83-84, 86, 91-93, 96, 100-103, 107, 111, 115-117, 119-120, 122-123, 126-132, 136, 138, 140, 143, 145, 146, 148, 152, 154, 157, 162, 165, 167-168, 170-174, 177-178, 180, 182, 184-185, 187, 190-197, 199-200, 203-207, 210, 212-213, 215, 217, 222-223, 225, 227-228, 231-235, 238, 240-242, 252, 256, 259, 263, 265, 270, 275, 284, 286, 288, 291, 292, 296, 299, 302, 304-305, 307-310, 312-318, 320, 322, 331-334, 336, 339 and 341 of this Report and noted that these commitments are incorporated in paragraph 1.2 of the Draft Protocol. "
This is a tool by the WTO that list all the WTO commitment of each country in the working paper. In the goods and service schedule they have commitments for particular sectors. Here is the a press release by the WTO in September 2001, after successfully concluding talks for accession, and brief summary of key areas in which China hasn't fulfilled her commitments. Most of the commitments made by China were made to address its legacy as a non-market economy and involvement of state owned enterprises. In my opinion, I think the US government and investors grew increasingly frustrated with China, after 2007 not just because of China's back sliding, but relative to other countries who joined after 1997 like Vietnam, another non-market Leninist dictatorship. When comparing China's commitments to the WTO its best to compare her progress with those that joined after 1997, which were mostly ex-Soviet Republics.
NOTE: The Chinese media have for two decades compared any time the US has talked about China's currency manipulation or any other issue as a pretext for imposing tariffs on China to the Plaza Accords. I am very sure people will raise it here. My criticism of this view is fourfold. First, the US targeted not just Japan, but France, Britain and the UK as well. Secondly, the causes of the Japan lost decade were due largely to internal factors. Thirdly, Japan, UK, Britain and France in the 1980s, the Yuan isn't undervalued today. Lastly, in the USTR investigation, its China's practices that are the concern, not so much the trade deficit.

REASONS FOR TRUMPS UNILATERAL APPROACH

I feel that people shouldn't dismiss Trump's unilateral approach toward China for several reasons.
  1. The multilateral approach won't work in many issues such as the trade deficit, commercial espionage and intellectual property, because US and her allies have different interest with regard to these issues. Germany and Japan and trade surpluses with China, while the US runs a deficit. In order to reach a consensus means the West has to compromise among themselves, and the end result if the type of toothless resolutions you commonly find in ASEAN regarding the SCS. Does America want to "compromise" its interest to appease a politician like Justin Trudeau? Not to mention opposition from domestic interest. TPP was opposed by both Clinton and Trump during the election.
  2. You can't launch a geopolitical front against China using a newly formed trade block like the TPP. Some of the existing TPP members are in economic groups with China, like Malaysia and Australia.
  3. China has joined a multitude of international bodies, and at least in trade, these bodies haven't changed its behavior.
  4. Dealing with China, its a no win situation whether you use a tough multilateral / unilateral approach. If the US endorse a tough unilateral approach gives the impression that the US is acting like the British during the Opium War. If you take a concerted Western approach you are accused of acting like the 8 Powers Alliance in 1900.
  5. Trump was elected to deal with China which he and his supporters believe was responsible for the loss of millions manufacturing jobs when China joined the WTO in 2001. It is estimate the US lost 6 Million jobs, about 1/4 of US manufacturing Jobs. This has been subsequently advanced by some economists. The ball got rolling when Bill Clinton decided to grant China Most Favored Nation status in 1999, just a decade after Tiananmen.
  6. China hasn't dealt with issues like IP protection, market access, subsidies to state own companies and state funded industrial spying.
To his credit, Trump has said his aim was not to overthrow authoritarian governments, and that even applies to the likes of Iran. The Arab spring scared Russia and China, because the US for a brief moment placed the spread of democracy over its security interest.

UNDERSTANDING HOW THE US MAKES DECISIONS REGARDING CHINA

At this moment, China or the trade war isn't an area of great concern for the American public, among international issues it ranks lower than international terrorism, North Korea and Iran's nuclear program.
According to the survey, 39 percent of the country views China’s growing power as a “critical threat” to Americans. That ranked it only eighth among 12 potential threats listed and placed China well behind the perceived threats from international terrorism (66 percent), North Korea’s nuclear program (59 percent) and Iran’s nuclear program (52 percent). It’s also considerably lower than when the same question was asked during the 1990s, when more than half of those polled listed China as a critical threat. That broadly tracks with a recent poll from the Pew Research Center that found concern about U.S.-China economic issues had decreased since 2012.
In looking at how US conducts relations foreign policy with China, we should look at it from the three areas of most concern - economic, national security and ideology. Each sphere has their interest groups, and sometimes groups can occupy two spheres at once. Security experts are concerned with some aspects of China's economic actions like IP theft and industrial policy (China 2025), because they are related to security. In these sphere there are your hawks and dove. And each sphere is dominated by certain interest groups. That is why US policy toward China can often appear contradictory. You have Trump want to reduce the trade deficit, but security experts advocating for restrictions on dual use technology who are buttressed by people who want export restrictions on China, as a way of getting market access.
Right now the economic concerns are most dominant, and the hawks seem to dominate. The economic hawks traditionally have been domestic manufacturing companies and economic nationalist. In reality the hawks aren't dominant, but the groups like US Companies with large investment in China and Wall Street are no longer defending China, and some have turned hawkish against China. These US companies are the main conduit in which China's lobby Congress, since China only spends 50% of what Taiwan spends lobbying Congress.
THE ANGLO SAXON WORLD AND CHINA
I don't think many Chinese even those that speak English, have a good understanding Anglo-Saxon society mindset. Anglo Saxons countries, whether US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Ireland are commerce driven society governed by sanctity of contracts. The English great philosophical contributions to Western philosophy have primarily to do with economics and politics like Adam Smith, John Locke, David Hume and Thomas Hobbes. This contrast with the French and Germans. Politics in the UK and to a lesser extent the US, is centered around economics, while in Mainland Europe its religion. When the Americans revolted against the British Empire in 1776, the initial source of the grievances were taxes.
Outside of East Asia, the rest of the World's relationship with China was largely commercial, and for United States, being an Anglosaxon country, even more so. In Southeast Asia, Chinese aren't known for high culture, but for trade and commerce. Outside Vietnam, most of Chinese loans words in Southeast Asian languages involve either food or money. The influence is akin to Yiddish in English.
Some people point to the Mao and Nixon meeting as great strategic breakthrough and symbol of what great power politics should look like. The reality is that the Mao-Nixon meeting was an anomaly in the long history of relations with China and the West. Much of China-Western relations over the last 500 years was conducted by multitudes of nameless Chinese and Western traders. The period from 1949-1979 was the only period were strategic concerns triumphed trade, because China had little to offer except instability and revolution. Even in this period, China's attempt to spread revolution in Southeast Asia was a threat to Western investments and corporate interest in the region. During the nadir of both the Qing Dynasty and Republican period, China was still engaged in its traditional commercial role. Throughout much of history of their relations with China, the goals of Britain and the United States were primarily economic,
IMAGINE JUST 10% OF CHINA BOUGHT MY PRODUCT
From the beginning, the allure of China to Western businesses and traders has been its sheer size I. One of the points that the USTR mentions is lack of market access for US companies operating in China, while Chinese companies face much less restrictions operating in the US.
This is supported by remarks by Henry Paulson and Charlene Barshefsky. As Paulson remarked
Trade with China has hurt some American workers. And they have expressed their grievances at the ballot box.
So while many attribute this shift to the Trump Administration, I do not. What we are now seeing will likely endure for some time within the American policy establishment. China is viewed—by a growing consensus—not just as a strategic challenge to the United States but as a country whose rise has come at America’s expense. In this environment, it would be helpful if the US-China relationship had more advocates. That it does not reflects another failure:
In large part because China has been slow to open its economy since it joined the WTO, the American business community has turned from advocate to skeptic and even opponent of past US policies toward China. American business doesn’t want a tariff war but it does want a more aggressive approach from our government. How can it be that those who know China best, work there, do business there, make money there, and have advocated for productive relations in the past, are among those now arguing for more confrontation? The answer lies in the story of stalled competition policy, and the slow pace of opening, over nearly two decades. This has discouraged and fragmented the American business community. And it has reinforced the negative attitudinal shift among our political and expert classes. In short, even though many American businesses continue to prosper in China, a growing number of firms have given up hope that the playing field will ever be level. Some have accepted the Faustian bargain of maximizing today’s earnings per share while operating under restrictions that jeopardize their future competitiveness. But that doesn’t mean they’re happy about it. Nor does it mean they aren’t acutely aware of the risks — or thinking harder than ever before about how to diversify their risks away from, and beyond, China.
What is interesting about Paulson's speech is he spend only one sentence about displaced US workers, and a whole paragraph about US business operating in China. While Kissinger writes books about China, how much does he contribute to both Democrats and the Republicans during the election cycle? China is increasingly makING it more difficult for US companies operating and those exporting products to China.

CONTINUED

submitted by weilim to IntlScholars [link] [comments]

NEX AMA Answers!

Some of the NEX team went through the questions asked a couple of days ago, but due to the answers being posted sporadically, i thought it might be better collating answers and reposting for visibility!
I highly recommend reading through if you are interested in NEX!
    NEX team marked as
U = u/Unignorant, C = u/Canesin, L = u/Localalhost_coz  
Original post here
Q: What is the NEX marketing plan to grow in terms of a customer base ? And how far is the team away from a finished product? During most of the interviews I noticed the team reference comparison to Binance, how does the interface match binance in a decentralized environment? (u/sheldonbraganza)
(U)We will have a complete product out on TestNet in Q2, and a fully working cross-chain exchange on the NEO and Ethereum networks in Q3.
NEX is marketing to two primary groups of users: (1) Mainstream users who want an easier experience buying altcoins with cryptocurrency. Through our network of banking partners, we will make it easy for anyone in the world to buy tokens on NEO, ETH (and eventually other chains) using their national currencies. (2) Bots and traders: we aim to have best-in-class trading APIs for high performance, computational trading. We will have better and faster APIs than today's centralized exchanges, with the added benefit of these systems running on decentralized networks
The point of our off-chain matching engine tech is to enable the same (or better!) usability as an exchange like Binance, while keeping around the decentralized model. The off-chain engine makes trading just as performant as today's centralized exchanges, and makes it much easier to support the kind of cross-chain trading functionality that has long been a pipe dream for decentralized exchanges. We are very much inspired by other exchanges like Coinbase in this regard, and we will be the first DEX to achieve this.
(C) Just to remember that NEX is also going after costumers that usually are not considered by other exchanges with its features to facilitate peer to peer payments requests, invoicing and tipping/gifts.
Q:Can you elaborate on NEX staking? The whitepaper was fuzzy about it and had terms like "staking percentage". (u/r3dh4r7)
(U) The NEX staking rate will be from 25-75%. Committing to stake for one day gives a rate of 25%, which increases linearly to a rate of 75% if you are willing to stake for 2 years By staking rate, we mean the percentage of revenue you will get from NEX fee collection proportional to the tokens you hold. For example, if you hold 10% of all NEX tokens and are staking at a rate of 75%, then you will receive .10 * .75 = 7.5% of all fee revenue generated by NEX over that period.
We will confirm these details in an updated white paper release coming out today or tomorrow. ~ If you commit for two years, the first year will still be at 75%.
Q:How soon do you introduce Fiat pairs? (u/coinonymous1)
(U) Our network of banking partners will begin to go live in Q2. That means users will be able to enter the ecosystem with national currencies through the NEX extension and web-based exchange interface.
(C) To clarify, this are not direct trading pairs on the exchange itself (i.e. JPY/NEX) but a easy method to on ramp and cashout using the tools. Users will be able to acquire NEO and GAS with fiat and any other tokens traded at NEX will be using the exchange itself.
Q: The chrome extension is great but why should I still rely on desktop to access NEX interface ? When can we expect Iphone/ Android App? (u/cryptobuddy_1712)
(U) We are planning native android/iOS apps. Depending on how fast we can grow, they may be out by Q3.
(C) Mobile presence is a complex topic, depending of how much of the full experience you want to provide - that will depend on the support shown by 3rd party wallets, if they adopt NEX APIs.
Q: Will you guys be supporting Ledger integration any time soon? Nex chrome add-on, Nex exchange integration...?! Plans to list the Nex token on other exchanges before the release of your own? What are the plans to continue supporting Neon wallet now that Nex came out with their extension for chrome? Will Nex exchange introduce fiat deposits/withdrawals? (u/mihai_ss)
(U) Yes, ledger is on the roadmap. We cannot comment on other exchange listings right now. We love and will continue to support Neon wallet (you are speaking to its creator :) as a great desktop wallet and complementary partner to our extension. NEX will support national currencies in/out of the exchange through our network of banking partners.
(C) Not only ledger but hardware wallets in general. Ledger is priority currently given that it is quite popular in NEO. We have to have in mind that NEX is trying to do a lot of different things to make usage easier to new users (that probably don't have a ledger!), there is currently about 96k users of it (more than this sub) so we will focus on fixing the corner cases and issues that appears frequently with such large user base first.
Q:More and more people are using mobile apps for trading. Don't you think nex should also have its own iOS and Android app. Are the API being developed future proof to integrate with mobile apps for trading and seeing candle charts. (u/Cryptobanku)
(U) We agree with the power for mobile, and future proofing the API is 100% on our mind. Longer term, we are planning native iOS/android apps.
Q:So NEX is a security right? What does that mean exactly? The Token only will be available on the neon exchange? In order to get the exchange dividends are we gonna be forced to put our tokens on stake mode? If so, once we put our tokens on stake mode does that mean we are not gonna be able to move them or sell them for a specific period of time? (u/sersimovi)
(U) NEX is a registered European security. It will be traded on NEX exchange, but that is not the only place it will be traded (I cannot say more than that right now). Being a registered security is amazing for investors. It means that all of the sketchy things that so often happen with cryprocurrencies/tokens (things like market manipulation or insider trading) are made explicitly illegal. It also means that we, as a company, go through an extensive audit. For that, we have partnered with the top tier accounting firm Ernst and Young.
The staking model means that you commit to staking your NEX for a certain amount of time to receive a share of fee revenue. The minimum amount of time you can stake NEX is one day. The maximum time you can stake is two years. While staked, you cannot move or sell the NEX tokens.
(C) All that plus the investor don't need to fear it will crash because someone classified it as a security in the future.
Q:When will the official sale date be announced and when will the official tokens per neo be determined? (u/rborsb9)
(L) We are still working with our legal partners to determine a final sale date, but it will be sometime at the end of April. The tokens per Neo/Gas will be determined from the 10 day moving average of the price before the sale begins.
Q:What do you think sets NEX apart from the countless other DEXs that are starting up right now? Why should people invest in NEX vs Switcheo/Etherdelta/Binance(once they release)?
(U) NEX will be the first usable, performant, and cross-chain DEX. Out of all the exchanges you mentioned, none of them are using an off-chain matching engine, which quite simply means none of them can do what we are doing.
In addition to that, NEX has by far the most generous revenue share model of any exchange you have mentioned. This is because we are embracing being a security (not hiding behind some questionably legal utility token). The people who invest in us will be treated very well by this model.
As for competitors: Switcheo unfortunately doesn't work. There is no volume, and the SC is broken (or at least didn't work when I tried it; the transaction failed and it stole the small amount of GAS I tried to trade). Etherdelta has higher volume but still ridiculously low overall. And again, just try to use Etherdelta... it is a usability disaster. There is really no comparison here. Binance might do something interesting, if they decide to do anything. But we have better technical talent than Binance, so I am not too worried.
Q:What % volume neon exchange will support compared with top centralized exchanges? Thanks big neo fan! (u/myfriendbaubau)
(U) We will support just as much volume as today's centralized exchanges.
Q: Will NEX have a stable coin? (u/masi252)
(U) We have looked into various implementations and ideas surrounding stable coins and have determined that it is not something we are planning on doing in the near future.
Cont: What about when Alchemint releases? (u/Bing0to)
(C) We wanted to do a fundamental strong stable coin that was capital efficient. Unfortunately there is some pre-requisites for that to be possible that currently is lacking in crypto markets. We will continue to monitor how this space evolves and our ideas are stored waiting the future when they can be applied.
Q:Can we expect the erc20 token trading earlier than q3? (u/markerizza)
(U) Q3 is the current roadmap projection. It is possible it will happen earlier depending on our growth.
Q: Will the token sale be via smart contract, so that we recieve our tokens right away? (u/Ebrii)
(U) Yes
Q: will you guys have an official subreddit and telegram anytime soon? (u/markerizza)
(U) No, we dislike the idea of project oriented telegrams. There are too many opportunities for scammers. We may have a subreddit in the future, but not anytime soon.
Q: What is the plan to get liquidity on the platform? It seems to be the biggest problem with current DEXs. (u/Mutedtommy)
(U) We have strategic partnerships for this. We are also working with other partners to develop some nice APIs for high performance trading.
Q: On the site you say that the ORIGINAL winners can participate in the second round (9000$) options, do you mean only the first round lottery winners or the first and second round winners combined? (u/FrancoisFrancis)
(U) Any lottery winners (whether first or second draw) have the opportunity to participate in both rounds 1 and 2. Please see this medium post for clarification: https://medium.com/neon-exchange/nex-extension-and-lottery-q-a-667e56f58e4a
Q: If you chose to participate in round 2 from the KYC process, does that mean you are guaranteed a spot? The medium article seems to indicate there will be an additional lottery from those who selected that option to see who from round one is eligible for round 2. (u/DwyerMatt)
No one is guaranteed a spot in round 2. It is even possible (though extremely unlikely) that all NEX is sold out in round one. This would happen if everyone who is selected goes through KYC and participates at 100%. (U)
Q: Will NEX tokens only be tradeable on NEX or is there a chance of it being listed on other exchanges like Binance? (u/Frank_Sinatra88)
(U) See an answer above. Not just NEX, but I can't say more than that right now.
Q: How do you see NEO compare to other coins on its network ? Like another coin could be valued more than NEO itself ? And will NEX always be bound to NEO? (u/BN_Boi)
(U) It is unlikely but possible that a NEP5 token could eventually achieve a higher marketcap than NEO itself.
NEX is not bound to NEO much at all. Our token will live as a NEP5 on NEO, and that is how users will receive staking rewards, but we will support trading very early on Ethereum as well.
(C) Google runs atop of other companies infrastructure (telecom providers), but it is valued more than all of them. The same thing can (and probably will) happen in token land, it will just take a while - when infrastructure becomes less important than applications and platforms atop of it. Like with the internet.
NEX behind the scenes (as the DEX is cross-chain from start) is using NEO capabilities, but the future of both is broad and uncertain. As a long term strategy the NEX company will do what it can to improve its underling technology and remove risk from its business.
Q: Is there a vesting period for the half of available NEX tokens that will not be sold during the ICO? (u/ETHERjimbo)
(U) The founder and employee tokens (25%) will vest over two years.
Q: Whitepaper uses an example $100m in the fee distribution calculation. If NEX is truly a security token and the whitepaper is your prospectus then you must provide further data on fwd looking statements. The NEX token gives the right to fee distribution. Given this you must provide assumption based forecasts on expedited fees over the next 3 years. This will support price discovery. How can the market properly price the token when fee expectations are unknown.(u/nsheahan82)
(C) Fee structure is defined on whitepaper and version v1.1 contains a example section as stated. Version v2.0 (to be released very soon) contains the actual staking portion (25% to 75% linear over two years growth on staking).
Guess work on the volume would in reality be very indigenous, look at volume behavior market wise (https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bitcoin/#charts) so much variation. Following the 3 years trend we could say trading volume will be bigger than the world economy, clearly that is not happening.
Q: Would NEX Staking be a 50% or 75% as stated on the whitepaper? (u/GMDaddy)
(C)See answer above, it starts at 25% and goes up to 75%. The increase is linear and maximum period is 2 years.
Cont: By linear, you mean like as an option where the user has the choice on picking whether to stake it from 25% up into 75%?
(C)No, when you start staking it starts at 25% and by linear I mean it increases at a constant rate of about 2.08% per month for two years until it reach 75%.
(U)To clarify fabio's comment: yes, you can choose a fixed rate of 75% by committing to stake for two years.
Q: A massive attraction to NEX is the prospect of decentralised banking. What makes decentralised banking better than traditional banking? (u/kabelofthe3rd)
(C)Our goal is to facilitate crypto trading at large, this touches from usage of applications to investing passing by funds management and invoicing solutions. What this enables is a digital cashless economy, we call it the smart economy. In the smart economy users are in control of their funds using this advanced technological tools to perform the tasks above and current banking solutions are no longer needed.
Q: Once NEX is rolled out, what will be the easiest way for US residents to buy some stake? I'm aware it's going to be issued as a security so I'm thinking the NEX token will only be tradable on NEX itself because most non decentralized exchanges will not list security's or tokens that don't pass the Howet Test. Is this correct?(u/Cozmo525)
(C)You are correct, for US persons you will need to wait other licensed exchanges list NEX or we acquire the proper licenses to allow US people to trade securities. Whatever happens first =)
Q: Can I stake only NEX or also other Token f.e. NEO? (u/masi252)
(C) NEO doesn't need to be staked, you already can claim GAS on NEX extension.
Q: How do you plan to compete with Switcheo when they have first movers advantage and will be live for months before your platform will be? (u/toneeey1)
(C)We plan to compete with anyone in our market by providing better products.
Q: Will TNC be utilized? (u/molly1nora)
(C)That is not planned, NEX has it own custom scaling solutions already in development.
Q: Do you see exchanges not listing NEX, due to the fact that you guys are direct competition? (u/detnah)
(C)That is a tricky question, I believe competition will not be with every exchange - in special centralized ones, as CEX they will more focused in national markets and we are going after broad chain level trade.
Q: Is there a chance in the future you will also introduce other coins to the exchange sich as ERC-20 tokens etc? If so you'd blow all competition out the water. (u/Frank_Sinatra88)
(C)Yes, ERC-20 tokens will be supported by Q3 together with NEP-5.
Q: Will NEX APIs support mobile Dapps or Wallets? (u/johndon96)
(C)Both, APIs are in general not target to a specific application, is up to the developers to use it in their products.
Q: What are the team's plans to make NEX the best decentralized exchange and one of the best projects ever released? (u/its_me_TAG)
(C)We will be working close to our costumers, never afraid of breaking status quo and never ending improvements. NEX will never be done.
Q: Are there any plans to open up some Nex-Stores in several spots around the Globe? (u/michaeluebelhart)
(C)No, but will have a online swag store :D
Q: Is it possible that in the long future to have forex pairs listed on NEX? (u/BR8889)
(C)In a future where fiat has token representations or stable coins are indeed stable.
Q: When will we see the updated Whitepaper? (I know for example that you plan to integrate ERC20 tokens earlier than mentioned in the original Whitepaper) (u/mambor)
(C) Target is this weekend. We could delay if redacting detects things that should be changed/improved.
Q: What is your go-to-market strategy? (u/Dux_AMS)
(C) We already have >100k users. ;)
submitted by menofthenorth to NEO [link] [comments]

Hello, new traders. Here are a few words from my four and a half years of experience.

Hey! I’m a full time currency and cryptocurrency trader, I need to point out a few major fallacies and misconceptions I frequently see in this community and others.
First up. If it’s your first year trading expect to fail. Actually, if there was a contract I could buy that’d pay me out if you ended up liquidating your account in the next 12 months, I’d literally bet on your failure. You need to immediately reduce your trading account to 1/10th of its original size for your first year of trading. Seriously, do it. You are betting that you can outperform billions of dollars of institutional order flow, typically with basic patterns or default setting indicators with no experience. Which brings me to my next point.
Your strategy is not your identity, stop treating what you use to trade as dogma. That indicator or pattern you’re using, can you tell me why it works? Not HOW to use it, but what fundamental paradigm it uses to accurately predict future price action. There are legitimate answers, but trying to use your indicators/patterns without understanding why is like driving across the country without knowing how to open or what’s inside the hood or your car. Sure, you’re going to get pretty far, but eventually it’ll break down and you won’t have a clue what to do, stranded and starving in the middle of the desert.
Chances are, while you were reading this you came up with one of three answers in your head as to why your indicatopattern works. Let me guess. “Everyone else uses it, it’s made me money so far, it’s natures law (for you Fibonacci folks,) or it’s a proven standard.” All of those are appeal to authority fallacies. For instance....
How does a compass work? Are the answers “well everybody else uses compasses” or “compasses are a proven standard” WHY a compass works? If you don’t know how a compass works and you’re lost, you aren’t going to know what variables will stop the compass from working. You might be in the Southern Hemisphere, that’d lead you in the exact opposite direction, but you wouldn’t know it because you DON’T KNOW WHY it works. Then die of starvation shortly after because you didn’t understand a tool paramount to your survival and couldn’t find your way back to civilization. If you’re lost in the ocean of institutional investors, AT LEAST understand why your tools work.
For instance, why does divergence work? You probably know that divergence represents a reversal.
Divergence doesn’t form because of “price” or “its losing momentum,” divergence forms because an oscillator defines a data set that expands and contracts based on the activity in the period lookback you define for it. When you have an expanding data set, it requires increasingly drastic moves to register the same “extreme” values. If you have a tight data set and you have a huge outlier, the data set widens to compensate with every candle close. So now that you have a wider data set, an equal move would register as a less extreme event as defined by the oscillator. That’s why divergence forms/works.
Seriously, it’s worth learning these things. Unless you can explain why something works like I just did with divergence you shouldn’t EVER use it in your arsenal. Then if you do take the time to learn the “why,” you’ll start realizing that a lot of the commonly accepted tools are fundamentally broken. For instance, with your new understanding of divergence, think about overbought or oversold signals. Why would a new outlier of a data set imply a return to the center of the data set if the data set is in an active state of expansion, CAUSED by the outlier?
Now if you’re relying on an appeal to authority fallacy for understanding, could it be that the authority that presented the information doesn’t have your best interest at heart? Breakout patterns for example. If you have a bull flag, and you’re betting on bullish trend continuation, I’ll take a wild guess about where you put your stop loss. Oh, below the bull flag? Large players know this and will scoop up your stops before pushing price up. How often have you said, “wow, I was right but I stopped out just before trend continuation!” The “golden standard” of technical analysis is only so to make the masses of retail traders a predictable herd of cattle.
Also, stay away from entirely subjective strategies that will always appear correct in hindsight. Oh, how many times have you redrawn that Elliot wave extension to match what happened instead of what you predicted? Don’t you dare bring up the Fibonacci to justify your subjective drawings either. Fibonacci doesn’t work because “it’s natures law” or the “golden rule,” it just happens to be very similar to the first standard deviation of any price move. So why are you using a static reading to predict a dynamic value that changes with every candle close?
For TA that actually works (if you use it correctly,) I can recommend ichimoku, though only on macro timeframes and requires a lot of reading to use properly.
Mark Whistler’s books on volatility are my biggest recommendation to learn. Any strategy using WAVE PM and 3D WAVE PM are ideal, treating price strictly as reactionary, multiperiod probability distributions gives an excellent “why” in the chaos of the markets. The compression and expansion cycles can be defined to the exact period on any timeframe with the right readings. I created a write up a while back going in depth on my findings on probability distributions here. https://www.reddit.com/Forex/comments/ah5bxo/lets_talk_about_the_basics_of_advanced_volatility/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app
I also created a google doc over the years and filled it with a few resources I’ve used to learn, I can hand it out if you dm me.
Finally, don’t forget to do your FA. Macro level economic indications are incredibly important for defining the long term alignment of expectations. However never trade the news, this is an important distinction. Don’t bet that the US dollar will go down because Trump made a stupid tweet, please. What you SHOULD do is measure the strength of the move and the EXPANSION caused by the FA and identify where the compression begins afterwards. For every period of expansion, there is a predictable compressionary range that follows that is equal to the expansion. For every action there’s an equal and opposite reaction. Instead of betting on the news, bet on the reaction after the news has cooled off.
That’s all that immediately comes to mind. Feel free to ask any questions.
submitted by FallacyDog to Forex [link] [comments]

New rule! Also are cryptocurrencies an investment, will there be a crash? Everything answered here!

This is going to be the only crypto post for now and an announcement:
Rule 6: Bitcoins & cryptocurrenies should be discussed in CryptoCurrency. Posts regarding this topic will be automatically removed.
If there's a stock correlated with cryptocurrencies, like coinbase going IPO, then that's fine, you might have to message the mods after posting to have it approved, no big deal.
Also if you're questioning whether something is an investment or not, just search for it on personalfinance. For general currency trading strategies, see forex .
If you're wondering if bitcoins are an investment or if there will be a crash, read on.

Are cryptocurrencies an investment?

This post is going to deal with bitcoins & cryptocurrencies as an investment... they're more speculative. All currencies are speculative mostly due to how the forex market works, but more because of exchange rates between countries keep currencies balanced (including inflation, country debt, interest rates, political & economic stability, etc), so you can only profit in price fluctuations.
Sure you could buy the currency of a depressed country, like Mexico decades ago, and then hold in the hopes it'll go up (which it did for Mexico), but that's also speculation (no one knew Mexico would pay off so much debt).
Bitcoins are also affected by other countries' currency values, but more so by the future expectation of legitimacy, world wide adoption, limited gains from mining, and eventual limit in supply. But at any given moment the United States could pay off more debt, raise interest rates to reduce inflation (or cause deflation), grow GDP, or even reduce the supply of USD all of which would increase the value of USD (keep in mind bitcoins can't do any of these things).
Far too many people are treating cryptocoins as an investment because currently (June 5th 2017) a lot of crypto investors are worth a lot of money, god bless you people, so this post will also help you determine if we're headed for a crypto crash and maybe you can keep those profits.

Should I invest in cryptocurrencies?

Understand that an investment is something you hope will go up in the future or provide income, both of which for the long term vs speculation which profits on short term inefficiencies.
Speculative securities are typically commodities, options, bonds, and currencies, but also stocks that are volatile enough to give you extreme returns or extreme loses.

Examples of investments:

Examples of speculation:

Reducing the risk of speculation

Typically for speculation you reduce risk by reducing your trade size and timeframe, but since you're trying to invest into something that is speculative, you can try:
Asset allocation, a strategy that reduces risk.. If you're 80% stocks, 15% bonds, 4% gold, and 1% bitcoins, if something were to happen to bitcoins, you still have 99% of your money.
But even very aggressive long term portfolios leave speculation out completely and just go 100% stocks because stocks benefit from growth while speculative securities like gold benefit from global turmoil in the short term. Only mid risk & mid term portfolios can take advantage of gold's speculative returns.
I also mention asset allocation because many crypto investors have been using this strategy on a portfolio of 100% crypto coins, but that doesn't help you reduce the overall risk of crypto coins, you're just reducing the risk of 1 speculative asset with another speculative asset. 100% crypto portfolio would face the same risks such as being made illegal, IRS aggressively hunting down crypto profits, a drop in correlated coin markets, or just a loss of popularity would all cause a sell off. Even the USD or Chinese currencies becoming more valuable would reduce the value of crypto coins.

Should I buy coins right now?

Cryptocoins are a better investment after a period of consolidation when volatility has stabilized:

Bitcoin 2013/2014 speculation, chart

Bitcoin 2015 consolidation, chart

Source Bitstamp exchange, while the volume is #2 to GDAX, Bitstamp is better to look at for historical price/data, more charts here.

RSI & MACD key for above charts and primer

Analyzing overbought signals

So the first chart above have RSI & MACD screaming that bitcoin is overbought and you shouldn't invest in 2013/2014.
The black squares in the 2nd chart show consolidation and reduced volatility, a "better" time to invest. If you were trading short term, it would be a whole different story, and there would be opportunities to buy & short, but since this is written for investing, the small overbought signals are ignored, so if you were to buy Bitcoin at $300 inside the first blacksquare (2nd chart) and then it suddenly drops to 25%, it's okay because the volatility is much lower compared to previous price movements (nothing compared to 80% loss in the 1st chart). Any investor would tell you a 25% drop is terrible, but bitcoins are speculative and that kind of drop is pretty damn good for this level of volatility.

Nothing goes straight up forever

and anything that comes near this vertical incline will eventually lose 80% to near 100%, always happens, it's usually preceded by emotions (price euphoria), attention, and increased volume, all classic signs that something is becoming riskier.
Other speculative securities gaining multiples and then losing 80% to near 100% of value:

Notable comments on reddit:

*This is just to get you guys looking at different subs on this topic, and yeah it's mostly anti-crypto, but don't let that discourage you.

Is Bitcoin going to crash?

Maybe, the signals are getting louder, you tell me: The only chart you wanted to see this entire time.
So based on the above chart, is bitcoin overbought? MACD levels are the same as 2013's crash, but the increased in value is around 4.3x or 2.4x (depending on which you look at), so maybe we'll see another spike before a crash, I don't know, it's up to interpretation right now. There's the emotional price levels of 3000 and 4000 that we might have no problem getting to in an overbought environment before a correction. And how big will the correction be? I think 80%, but it very well could be around 50% down to $1200, the previous level of resistance which would become support.
I put everything above in its own wiki here.
Well I hope that helps everyone. Sorry to anyone that may feel butthurt on classifying cryptocoins as speculation, I hope you understand the facts. Feel free to argue or agree with this. If I made any mistakes and you point them out, I'll correct them and give you credit for it in an update to this post and the wiki.
Also the automod will is just going to blanket remove posts (not comments) with the following keywords {crypto, bitcoin, btc, etherium, altcoin} (see update 4 below) (this will eventually get relaxed if Coinbase ever IPOs) and then it'll send the user this message:
"Sorry your post[link] was removed in stocks because of rule 6: Bitcoins & cryptocurrenies should be discussed in CryptoCurrency. You can find more information in our are-cryptocurrencies-investments wiki. If you're trying to discuss a non-OTC stock related to cryptocoins like Coinbase IPO, or this was just a mistake, message the mods and they'll approve your post, thanks."
Update: Created wiki, added relevant websites and sub reddits. Also turned on automod reply.
Update2: those relavant websites and subreddits I put into the wiki, thanks u/dross99 for recommending ethereum

Relevant websites/wikis

Relevant subreddits

  • CryptoCurrency - main sub to learn about all bit & altcoins
  • ethtrader - trading eth
  • ethereum - for more eth information
  • btc - the place to have bitcoin discussions or r/CryptoCurrency; while Bitcoin does have a lot of information on Bitcoins in general, you'll find many reddit subs completely opposed to Bitcoin for heavy censorship of discussions, especially those critical of bitcoins, so you're better off reading the sub's wikis and discussing bitcoins in btc & r/CryptoCurrency
  • personalfinance
Update3: Shoutout to the mods on CryptoCurrency
Update4: Updated auto mod keywords, it's not a blanket catch all, a little completed to understand if you don't know regex but it looks like this
"crypto ?(trading|investing)","(should(| I)|could(| I)|can(| I)|how to|is it worth) (buy|sell|mine|min)(|ing) (btc|btcs|bitcoin|ether|etherium|eth|litecoin|ripple|altcoin)" 
submitted by provoko to stocks [link] [comments]

#For Review: 'Intrinsically Tradable Tokens' (ITT's) are their own exchange

For Review: 'Intrinsically Tradable Tokens' (ITT's) are their own exchange

Introducing Intrinsically Tradable Tokens, ERC20 compliant tokens in which you can buy and sell directly from the contract.
Ropsten 0xa9e001bebe4b281f7229b0305f553ab3c511fef5
Live 0xa15c784319fa96d3E36cFE97fbadD89Ec704A8dc

ITT's extend the ERC20 API with:

buy(uint price, uint amount, bool make) sell(uint price, uint amount, bool make) cancel(uint price) withdraw(uint ether) 
and other ancillary exchange state getters (see Github repo for full API) such as :
etherBalanceOf(address holder) getBook() getOrdersOf(address trader) spread(bool side) 
The intrinsic exchange functionality works on a FIFO matching maketaker algorithm. A new order may be iteratively filled by multiple make orders on the book or if unfilled, can be put on the book itself as a make order.
ITT demo contracts have been deployed on the Ropsten test chain on which a number of Buy and Sell orders have already been placed for you to play with. The demo ITT and future, more functional ITT's can be can be interacted with using the front end DAPP ITTDesk.

Use Cases

This demo ITT serves to demonstrate the exchange functionality of a basic ITT contract and does not have much intrinsic value in the token itself beyond being a purely speculative coin.
The ITT API and base contract are open source and offered to the community in order to extend or attach value adding functionality to the token side.
As is, crowd funding and token sales become as trivial by simply placing ask orders (see Self Funding below).
Better still would be to extended ITT functionality to make a 'Payable ITT' which becomes a simple but highly versatile pay to an unknown many mechanism which can distribute payments according to proportional holdings. Such holdings might represent shareholders, a rewards system or perhaps be used to fund and manage a DAO's project funds. (I do have a Payable ITT but will not likely release it until the community has confidence in the basic ITT contract)
Other value adding developments might be to couple ITT's to fiat currencies for truly low friction decentralised forex.

Current State of Development

As deployed, the ITT Demo contract is yet to undergo extensive testing and formal verification. It appears to work as intended (unless compiled with 0.4.5+commit.b318366e! My first launch attempt drove me crazy until that bug was announced). The contract on both chains have been verified on etherscan.io etherscan.io.
The ITTDesk app is very much in alpha release, minimalist and clunky in it's function. It is written on Meteor and attempts to use Mist styling and elements. Probably best just to clone the repo and run it up in Meteor at this stage. It features intelligent ask/bid/buy/sell trade buttons to assisting in validating user inputs in the order fields.
I am not an experienced web developer, so feed back, suggestions, criticisms are most welcome. In particular, I've not been able to work up the filters without causing browser timeout.

How does it work?

The order book utilises a mapping of 'Circular Linked Lists (CLL)' from the LibCLLi library to order and lookup the booked prices and iterate the FIFO's at each price. Each FIFO in the mapping is keyed by its price and holds all the addresses of traders who have made orders at that price. A trader can only have a single order at any particular price. An attempt to book another order at the same price will adjust and put the order at the back of the FIFO queue. This prevents FIFO hogging in which a trader might otherwise starve other orders by continually topping up their own.
A second trivial mapping holds the actual order amounts. It is keyed by a SHA3 hash of the trader's address with the price of the order (and is actually what limits the trader to one price, one order).
The CLL's heads are static at mapping key '0'. To use as a FIFO, nodes are simply inserted previous to the head and removed from next to the head. A FILO (stack) can be implemented with equal simplicity.
In the case of the price list, the links either side of the head are the highestBid (previous) and lowestAsk (next) making the head node itself the market spread. The price list is artificially bound to minimum (uint 1) and maximum (uint 2**128) prices. New price nodes are inserted relative to the head (spread) after iterating through an order search.
Looping operations in Smart Contracts can be bug prone and costly, especially with state mutations in each loop as in the ITT's matching algorithm. For this reason, the order matching loop is dynamically limited by the gas supply from msg.gas and will exit with a partially filled order rather than throw it. The remainder does not get put on the book as a make order as it would cause a bid/ask collision at that price. Because of this looping, gas cannot be estimated and it is up to the trader to consider the costs and adjust the amount of gas prior to ordering.
The matching algorithm is not without architectural efficiency however which almost halves the number to calls to STORE by virtualising (caching to memory) the taker's state variables prior to the matching loop and writing back to store once the matching and making operations exit.

Security and Resilience

ITT's hold ether balances and therefore are presumed to be targeted by hacking attempts. A number of security features and practices have therefore been programmed into the contract.
All external or payable state mutating functions are 'reentry protected' by a mutex which is set and cleared in the internal function safeSend(), which is called only by the public function withdraw(). This practice ensures a single entry and exit.
The architecture also separates entry validation logic and parameter preparation which is kept in the external/payable functions, from state mutation logic which is kept in the internal functions. This allows for a secure, flexible, inheritable API/interface layer from which to extend the contract while keeping the basic ITT internal functionality the same.
In the ITT Demo, the default function is unimplemented and therefore throws if payments are sent to anything other than the payable buy() function.
Attention must also be drawn to some rather unconventional use of uint math in the matching loop. Elsewhere, the contract uses explicitly safe maths functions, however the nature of an exchange function requires numerous inverse and signed integer operations. It was found that casting between int and uint became an onerous task with potentially unpredictable outcome and a design decision was made to simply treat uint as signed within the matching loop. In this case -1 == 2**256-1 and is used in multiplication to change the sign of trade amounts during matching.
In light of the signed uint adoption, a further mathematical constraint was placed on the maximum price and amount allowed being 2**128 which prevents any multiplication overflows.

Testing

Given that this contract is Proof of Concept deployment primarily for public review, it should be considered insecure. It has been tested for functionality but no exhaustive testing regime or formal verification has been put against it. It is undeniably a big ugly contract with complex logic and so should be viewed with suspicion.
Interacting with the Live contract is thereby at your own risk!

Self Funding

Being the deploying owner of this Demo ITT, I am granted the full balance of tokens and have placed both ask and bid orders as examples. Purchasing my Ask orders on the Live chain does transfer real ether to my balance and so I am trailing this as a channel for funding my development efforts rather than chasing bounties, competitions, donations, (a real job) or what have you. If you buy tokens here, you could consider it as a much appreciated donation which you might also be able to return a speculative profit from! It would certainly make my life easier. :)

Who Am I?

My name is Darryl Morris AKA o0ragman0o. I'm an independent (and some what isolated) Australian Ethereum developer. Though fairly quite, I've been following Ethereum developments since November 2014 (PoC 6) and have been small time mining since Olympic, though not now with expensive Australian electricity. I am best known on [forum.ethereum.org](forum.ethereum.org) where I am a mod. I've been crypto aware since 2009 when I tried bitcoin in it's infancy. I got 71/70 marks for Griff Green's notorious 'DAO Ninja' homework though obviously needed 72 to recognise the complex of vulnerabilities in that code!
My interests are in developing delegative democracy technologies with which to render all politicians obsolete (particularly ones beginning with 'T'). To that end I've developed the ITT contract as a funding component of a democracy DAO framework I call 'Ethenian DAO'.
Looking for interested collaborators.
Cheers Darryl
submitted by o0ragman0o to ethereum [link] [comments]

How to stop being so obsessed with becoming successful and rich?

AskReddit How can I stop obsessing over success ? u/tgpop Hey guys, long story short, i'm a 23 year old male, and have had a whole host of anxiety issues (OCD, general anxiety, some mild depression thrown in there too for good measure).
I've been to therapy, am on meds (beta blockers to treat the physical symptoms of anxiety; some prozac to control the cognitive side of things) and yet, most of the time, I have a chronic state of tension and stress, and I believe it's due to early teen experiences.
I'll not go into too much detail, because If I do people will only pick apart what I'm saying. Basically when I was 14 I got very,very unhealthily addicted to stock trading/forex trading. Spent thousands of hours refining a method, and at one point when I was 18 was offered some money to trade. I turned that opportunity down because I felt way out of my depth and was burned out from forex and stock trading (for anyone involved in the markets, i'm sure you get what I mean, even as a swing trader it is impossible to fully switch off).
I guess ever since I give that opportunity up, I have always hated myself and the sense of regret is overwhelming. Every time I try and dabble back into the markets, I end up doing ok and all of a sudden (like now) , I just get absorbed totally by it again, and it's constantly on my mind.
So what have I done, aside from trading in the meantime? After I quit trading at 18,I actually had to take a year off before heading to university to build some confidence in myself.
Of course, I don't deny that brain chemistry plays a role here as well. Starting that year out at 18 I was suicidal and seriously burned out. I had stress-induced hair loss, insomnia etc. I was diagnosed with OCD and general anxiety at the time. No matter what self help book or therapist I went to said, I couldn't shake the anxiety or stress. What amazed me was that during that year out, I actually took a job in a busy subway store. And I freakin' loved it. worked 100+ hour weeks for months on end, became the stores youngest manager, learned the ins and outs of the fast food business. Didn't even care that it was minimum wage, it was just so satisfying to be an ace at something, no matter how 'petty' a subway store may seem.
I then went to university, focused on getting good grades, and told myself not to look at trading ever again. I came out with the top marks in my university year three years in a row, and landed a training contract with a big 4 accounting firm after not screwing up on a summer internship.
That's basically where I am now. I'm really enjoying accounting. But , still ongoing, is this pressure to succeed at business, trading,investing or something along those lines. I just can't shake this off, and whilst I know I do enjoy accounting, I really can't help lose this sense of self hatred and materialism.
I'm certain that my brain chemistry plays a massive role. And logically speaking, I would objectively say someone with my personality is probably suited to a stable, rewarding career with constant stimulation and challenging tasks. Despite that, it's just something I can't switch off, I literally cannot stop thinking about markets, trading, stocks, investing. Worse still, any time I do 'get back in' to it, I am completely in the zone, infatuated with the whole experience of trading.
I am just really confused to be honest. My OCD makes it very difficult to make decisions or come to conclusion on issues like this. On one hand, I can't keep myself in check or obsessing about markets when I do dabble in them. On the other hand, no matter how rewarding some other pursuit it, I am always trying to 'fill a hole' in one area or another. Heading into accounting? cool, let's make partner in 15 years. At the gym? Right, lets get super ripped and start a successful fitness business. Like working at subway? save up all your money and start a franchise-business.
I would really appreciate any help here. I just feel like a sack of shit if i'm not achieving something 'great'. I can literally not relax. If i'm not doing something productive I am stressed and down. I do not want to end up twice divorced and a depressed alcoholic at 40.
submitted by tgpop to Advice [link] [comments]

For Review: 'Intrinsically Tradable Tokens' (ITT's) are their own exchange

For Review: 'Intrinsically Tradable Tokens' (ITT's) are their own exchange

Introducing Intrinsically Tradable Tokens, ERC20 compliant tokens in which you can buy and sell directly from the contract.
Ropsten 0xa9e001bebe4b281f7229b0305f553ab3c511fef5
Live 0xa15c784319fa96d3E36cFE97fbadD89Ec704A8dc

ITT's extend the ERC20 API with:

buy(uint price, uint amount, bool make) sell(uint price, uint amount, bool make) cancel(uint price) withdraw(uint ether) 
and other ancillary exchange state getters (see Github repo for full API) such as :
etherBalanceOf(address holder) getBook() getOrdersOf(address trader) spread(bool side) 
The intrinsic exchange functionality works on a FIFO matching maketaker algorithm. A new order may be iteratively filled by multiple make orders on the book or if unfilled, can be put on the book itself as a make order.
ITT demo contracts have been deployed on the Ropsten test chain on which a number of Buy and Sell orders have already been placed for you to play with. The demo ITT and future, more functional ITT's can be can be interacted with using the front end DAPP ITTDesk.
This demo ITT serves to demonstrate the exchange functionality of a basic ITT contract and do not have intrinsic value in the token itself beyond being a purely speculative coin.
The ITT API and base contract are open source and offered to the community in order to extend or attach value adding functionality to the token side.
The simplest example of an extended function ITT might be to make a 'Payable ITT' which becomes a simple but highly versatile pay to an unknown many mechanism which can distribute payments according to proportional holdings. Such holdings might represent shareholders, a rewards system or perhaps be used to fund and manage a DAO's project funds. (I do have a Payable ITT but will not likely release it until the community has confidence in the basic ITT contract)
Other value adding developments might be to couple ITT's to fiat currencies for truly low friction decentralised forex.

Current State of Development

As deployed, the ITT Demo contract is yet to undergo extensive testing and formal verification.
The ITTDesk app is still minimalist in it's function though is written on Meteor and attempts to use Mist styling and elements. I am not an experienced web developer, so feed back, suggestions, criticisms are most welcome.

How does it work?

The order book utilises a mapping of 'Circular Linked Lists (CLL)' from the LibCLLi library to order and lookup the booked prices and iterate the FIFO's at each price. Each FIFO in the mapping is keyed by its price and holds all the addresses of traders who have made orders at that price. A trader can only have a single order at any particular price. An attempt to book another order at the same price will adjust and put the order at the back of the FIFO queue. This prevents FIFO hogging in which a trader might otherwise starve other orders by continually topping up their own.
A second trivial mapping holds the actual order amounts. It is keyed by a SHA3 hash of the trader's address with the price of the order (and is actually what limits the trader to one price, one order).
The CLL's heads are static at mapping key '0'. To use as a FIFO, nodes are simply inserted previous to the head and removed from next to the head. A FILO (stack) can be implemented with equal simplicity.
In the case of the price list, the links either side of the head are the highestBid (previous) and lowestAsk (next) making the head node itself the market spread. The price list is artificially bound to minimum (uint 1) and maximum (uint 2**128) prices. New price nodes are inserted relative to the head (spread) after iterating through an order search.
Looping operations in Smart Contracts can be bug prone and costly, especially with state mutations in each loop as in the ITT's matching algorithm. For this reason, the order matching loop is dynamically limited by the gas supply from msg.gas and will exit with a partially filled order rather than throw it. The remainder does not get put on the book as a make order as it would cause a bid/ask collision at that price. Because of this looping, gas cannot be estimated and it is up to the trader to consider the costs and adjust the amount of gas prior to ordering.
The matching algorithm is not without architectural efficiency however which almost halves the number to calls to STORE by virtualising (caching to memory) the taker's state variables prior to the matching loop and writing back to store once the matching and making operations exit.

Security and Resilience

ITT's hold ether balances and therefore are presumed to be targeted by hacking attempts. A number of security features and practices have therefore been programmed into the contract.
All external or payable state mutating functions are 'reentry protected' by a mutex which is set and cleared in the internal function safeSend(), which is called only by the public function withdraw(). This practice ensures a single entry and exit.
The architecture also separates entry validation logic and parameter preparation which is kept in the external/payable functions, from state mutation logic which is kept in the internal functions. This allows for a secure, flexible, inheritable API/interface layer from which to extend the contract while keeping the basic ITT internal functionality the same.
In the ITT Demo, the default function is unimplemented and therefore throws if payments are sent to anything other than the payable buy() function.
Attention must also be drawn to some rather unconventional use of uint math in the matching loop. Elsewhere, the contract uses explicitly safe maths functions, however the nature of an exchange function requires numerous inverse and signed integer operations. It was found that casting between int and uint became an onerous task with potentially unpredictable outcome and a design decision was made to simply treat uint as signed within the matching loop. In this case -1 == 2**256-1 and is used in multiplication to change the sign of trade amounts during matching.
In light of the signed uint adoption, a further mathematical constraint was placed on the maximum price and amount allowed being 2**128 which prevents any multiplication overflows.

Testing

Given that this contract is deployed primarily for public review, it should be considered insecure. It has been tested for functionality but no exhaustive testing regime or formal verification has been put against it. It is undeniably a big ugly contract with complex logic and so should be viewed with suspicion.
Interacting with the Live contract is thereby at your own risk!

Self Funding

Being the deploying owner of this Demo ITT, I am granted the full balance of tokens and have placed both ask and bid orders as examples. Purchasing my Ask order on the Live chain does transfer real ether to my balance and so I am trailing this as a channel for funding my development efforts rather than chasing bounties, competitions, donations, (a real job) or what have you. If you buy tokens here, you could consider it as a donation which you might also be able to return a speculative profit from! It would certainly make my life easier. :)

Who Am I?

My name is Darryl Morris AKA o0ragman0o. I'm an independent (and some what isolated) Australian Ethereum developer. Though fairly quite, I've been following Ethereum developments since November 2014 (PoC 6) and have been small time mining since Olympic, though not now with expensive Australian electricity. I am best known on [forum.ethereum.org](forum.ethereum.org) where I am a mod. I've been crypto aware since 2009 when I tried bitcoin in it's infancy. I got 71/70 marks for Griff Green's notorious 'DAO Ninja' homework though obviously needed 72 to recognise the complex of vulnerabilities in that code!
My interests are in developing delegative democracy technologies with which to render all politicians obsolete (particularly ones beginning with 'T'). To that end I've developed the ITT contract as a funding component of a democracy DAO framework I call 'Ethenian DAO'.
Looking for interested collaborators.
submitted by o0ragman0o to ethtrader [link] [comments]

Possibly switching careers and not sure how to convince prospective employers that I'll be a long-term employee.

So, my resume might make me out to be a bit flaky.
I started one degree, a year in, transferred to another university (the degree was really crappy, and the university too). The other one was better, but 3 years in I got accepted to a really good university in the States and moved there. I graduated.
All 3 degrees were somewhat arts related, so nothing businesslike. The first one had a focus on advertising, but I never got to that, as the first year was very traditional arts based.
I've come to the conclusion (long story, involving family, and me being fed up with my current situation, 26- jobless and stuck with family problems), that I'd like to move out and just get any job.
So I'm trying to get into the forex/binary options/trading industry, whatever you call it. It's huge in my country, so there's constantly jobs available.
Even though I possess a skill they always want: Languages (I speak more than 3 fluently), I'm not their ideal candidate.
My social skills are not that great, and even though they hire just about anyone, (you don't need any skills for entry-level positions because they offer training), they want to see extroversion in a person.
The last interview I went to, the lady asked some general questions, and even though I answered them the way she wanted, she was a bit stuck on how I have 3 artsy degrees and nothing on my resume related to their industry or business in general or customer service.
I said I was looking for a long term job, but it didn't seem to help.
I have a job listed on my CV, working in promotions, where I used to hand out product samples and interact with people, but I don't think she cared for that.
She pointed out how I worked as a lyricist for about 2 years, but when asked if I still do that, I said no. I regret not expounding on the interview.
For lyricist I could have said that I didn't like the contract, which was true. My manager got 20% of all profits and if I had any kind of job during that contract (other than it), he got 20% of my profits, even if the job continued when the contract expired (what kind of bs is that? who does that?)
If she had known I quit not because I got bored and do that all the time, but because I was being treated unfairly, it would have been different, no?
Another thing I wish I had mentioned, though I'm hoping you can tell me if my logic is sound, I have epilepsy that has only recently been discovered though I've had it all my life (a type that isn't easily noticeable) and I might not be able to work in my field anyway if the doctors conclude that lights and sounds affect my health.
So I wish when she had asked me 'what was your first job choice upon graduation, or what would you rather chose right now if given the chance...' that I had said I had epilepsy and couldn't work in my field either way because of that, and am thus seeking work elsewhere without having to obtain another degree.
Would that have helped reassure her I wasn't a fight risk?
I'm not sure how to land a job like that, since I don't look like someone that would last long, but I really just want a job so I can move out and be on my own and not be surrounded by my toxic family. They are really starting to get on my nerves and I just want a place of my own, a stable job whatever it might be and time for myself to de-stress.
submitted by 12084182 to careeradvice [link] [comments]

Introduction to Nadex - Contract Settlement iFOREX Education - What is Leveraged Trading? What is CFD Trading?  IG Singapore LIVE DAY TRADING - HOW TO TRADE THE E-MINI S&P 500 FUTURES CONTRACT(ES) The Best FOREX Price Action Trading Indicator - Shift Theory Ratio Price Action Analysis Trading Currency Futures vs Forex (Trade Set-up Example)

Forex trading can be very risky and is not appropriate for all investors. It is common in most forex trading strategies to employ leverage. Leverage entails using a relatively small amount of capital to buy currency worth many times the value of that capital. Leverage magnifies minor fluctuations in currency markets in order to increase potential gains and losses. By using leverage to trade ... Various trading instruments are treated differently at tax time. Short-term gains on futures contracts, for example, can be eligible for lower tax rates than short-term gains on stocks. Furthermore, active traders may be qualified to choose the mark-to-market (MTM) status for IRS purposes. This allows deductions for trading-related expenses, such as platform fees or education. It is strongly ... The taxation of forex contracts is complex, but at least it gives you options. No pun intended. Among the key decisions any forex trader must make, though, is deciding on the tax regime that will govern his or her trades. How do you want your profits or losses to be treated under the tax code? Uncle Sam gives you two options: Do you want to treat them as an ordinary gain or loss, as described ... We believe that in many cases, spot forex can be treated like forex forwards, qualifying for lower 60/40 tax rates in Section 1256(g) on major currency pairs only. If you have significant trading gains on spot forex contracts, these tax rates may be very desirable. We make a case for using Section 1256(g) on spot forex transactions, with certain conditions and restrictions. It’s essential to ... Retail forex and professional accounts will be treated very differently by both brokers and regulators, as professional classification involves accepting greater risks. An ECN account will give you direct access to the forex contracts markets. So research what you need, and what you are getting. Leverage. For European forex traders this can have a big impact. Retail forex leverage is capped at ... Retail forex and professional accounts will be treated very differently by both brokers and regulators for example. An ECN account will give you direct access to the forex contracts markets. So research what you need, and what you are getting. Leverage. For European forex traders this can have a big impact. Forex leverage is capped at 1:30 by the majority of brokers regulated in Europe. Assets ... Forex futures and options are 1256 contracts and taxed using the 60/40 rule, with 60% of gains or losses treated as long-term capital gains and 40% as short-term. Spot forex traders are considered ...

[index] [7735] [23618] [91] [11778] [2762] [13007] [26897] [13867] [28959] [8644]

Introduction to Nadex - Contract Settlement

The PulseWave System is an essential source of information and technology that make sense of an economic environment that is volatile. The trigger based syst... IG is Singapore's top CFD and Forex provider. We offer CFD trading on thousands of shares plus forex, indices, commodities, options and more. What we do We help our clients trade financial markets ... How Nadex settles contracts at expiration. All contracts, binary options or bull spreads are settled on the basis of the underlying market. On Nadex indices and commodities, settlement values are ... A leverage of 400:1 for example, means you can purchase up to 400 times more for the same amount you want to invest. Let’s see how it works! Adam is looking to invest in gold. He wishes to buy ... The Best FOREX Price Action Trading Indicator - Shift Theory Ratio Price Action Analysis There is a new category of technical analysis available for trading the FOREX markets. Trading currency futures vs Forex will be the topic of this video. During this video, I will show you trading examples of the EUR/USD Forex pair and the 6E Futures contract. Today Patrick from Gorilla Futures walks us through how to trade a two candle rejection signal. This is where one candle closes in the opposite direction of the trend and the following candle ...

https://arab-binary-option.matchflec.ga