Which countries are tax free for forex trading? Forex ...
Forex Trading in Canada 2020 Platforms and Brokers ...
Forex Trading In Canada Arc Technologies
Foreign currencies - Canada.ca
Top 10 Best Forex Brokers in Canada 2020 [Canadian Forex ...
How much is the tax on Forex trading...in Canada - Trading ...
Taxes in Canada for trading profits and income - How is ...
Tax on forex trading in Canada
I just started trading forex a few months ago and went from $10k to $14k on Oanda. When do I have to pay taxes? Is it only when I withdraw the funds from Oanda or is it on realized P/L? Also, is this taxed as capitals gains?
Im planning to move to Canada, currently i live in my home country we don't have taxes here on forex income , when i opened my trading account i stated im x nationality and i live in x (my home country) , when i move to Canada if i want to withdrawal from my trading account should i do it directly from my trading account to my bank account back home and then to my bank in Canada, or should i transfer it from my trading account to my bank in Canada, and what is my stand on taxes in both cases
Moving USD/CAD funds and the implication of capital gains taxation
Hello, US Citizen living and working in Ontario. I have both a Canadian bank account and my original US bank account that I still use when I'm travelling/spending money in the US. I'd like to replenish my US-based bank account with more funds using Transferwise if the power of the loonie increases against USD. But I don't want to bother with that if I need to pay a capital gains tax on it. When does/doesn't moving CAD between USD count as an 'investment'? I have noticed the big banks here in Canada often offer chequing/savings accounts in US dollar funds. Has anyone used these? I presume you move your CAD from your primary account to the USD account. But, what if you move the funds back from the USD account to CAD? Does Capital Gains taxation apply here? tl;dr: When does converting currency get considered as FOREX trading? Where's the line drawn?
Need Help - Do Businesses who generate Forex income have to pay GST/HST to the CRA (Canada)
Hey guys, I'm a total noobie here and can't seem to find the answer to this question anywhere. In Canada, if you incorporate yourself and run your trades through your business and earn business income, do you also have to pay GST/HST to the CRA as another business would? I am asking this question because for my current job, I am incorporated (different field) and charge GST/HST, which then goes to the CRA. However, seeing as this is Forex, would it be the same? It's not like you can collect GST/HST from the market....lol Essentially I'm trying to see what is the best option to save my profits going forward. This scenario is based on generating 500K/year in profit via trading:
Claim Capital Gains - 50% of the profit will be taxed at your marginal rate (Until how long though? At what point will the CRA consider it business income instead?)
Sole Proprietor - Income is taxed at the personal income tax rate and you can also claim expenses, in addition you do not pay GST/HST
Incorporated Business - Income is taxed at the corporate tax rate, you can claim expenses and pay yourself dividends (even lower tax rate), BUT - Do you have to pay GST/HST as well?
Sorry for the stupid question, the answer is probably no, but I want to be sure. If I don't have to pay GST/HST then I think registering as a business is a no-brainer. In fact, you can save more money than purely capital gains up to a certain point. Not to mention all the tax-hacks you can have like using the business' money to buy yourself a home completely tax-free in Canada, if you know how to do it. Essentially I'm seeing the best way to pay myself 100K/year while saving the other 400K, to then take it out tax-free on a future home. But yeah, do businesses have to pay GST/HST? Thanks everyone.
Four reasons for buying yen. Forecast for 16.09.20
Ahead of the Fed’s and Bank of Japan’s meetings, the Japanese yen is certainly worth discussing. Enjoy your popcorn and remember to check out the trading signals and trading plan for USDJPY and EURJPY for the nearest weeks at the end of this article.
Fundamental forecast for yen for today
Yoshihide Suga’s unconditional victory in the party race to become Japan’s next Prime Minister, the US-China trade war’s revival and the upcoming presidential elections in the USA redrew investors’ attention to the yen. USDJPY’s quotes have been falling for three days in a row and got close to the level of 105. Rumour has it that the Bank of Japan may get angry and intervene if that level is broken. The situation around EURJPY is interesting too. If Shinzo Abe’s dismissal shocked the financial markets, the information about Yoshihide Suga’s appointment calmed them down. Let me remind you that Yoshihide Suga is Abe’s supporter and one of the authors of the “three arrows” strategy. The new Prime Minister isn’t going to put pressure on the BoJ in order to change monetary policy. He believes that there’s no need to raise taxes in the next 10 years, and that economic growth must improve the country’s financial state. He plans to shake up some sectors and bureaucratic mechanisms, but at the beginning of his term, he’ll need to recover GDP. A clear political context is a boon for a national currency. The fact that Japan chose its PM, while the US has yet to choose its president, is beneficial to USDJPY bears. Still, their main trump is the divergence in the Fed’s and BoJ’s policies: the Fed’s response to recession was so fierce that the fall of the real US bond yields weakened the greenback and would probably continue weakening it.
Dynamics of US bond yields
Source: Wall Street Journal. The yen is growing on the WTO’s ruling that US tariffs on Chinese imports are illegal. Beijing approved of that. Washington got angry. I doubt that the conflict will escalate before the elections. However, it’s obvious that the trade war is a long-lasting subject no matter who takes the US president’s chair. In 2019, global investors thought it was the main factor in market pricing. In 2020, the trade war dropped to the 4th line: the pandemic, November’s US elections and payment default risks have become the number one priority topics. I think the trade war subject has been undeservedly neglected. During a pandemic, imports and exports usually reduce proportionally, and the trade balance remains unchanged. It’s true of Canada, Japan, Britain and Germany. Alas, the US foreign trade deficit is growing and the Chinese one is reducing. China’s industrial sectors are recovering faster, and Beijing may face another round of clashes after the US election.
first build for the student who also likes to game
What will you be doing with this PC? Be as specific as possible, and include specific games or programs you will be using. Mainly league, but will be playing valorant and others. Aswell as possibly streaming What is your maximum budget before rebates/shipping/taxes? 1200 CAD, but am flexible depending on performance i would go more if it was a substantial difference When do you plan on building/buying the PC? Note: beyond a week or two from today means any build you receive will be out of date when you want to buy. Playing with goverment money in my parents basement so pretty much whenever What, exactly, do you need included in the budget? (ToweOS/monitokeyboard/mouse/etc) Full build, i have an older death adder and my trusty keyboard butam open to looking into new Which country (and state/province) will you be purchasing the parts in? If you're in US, do you have access to a Microcenter location? bc , canada. No acess to a microcenter that im aware of If reusing any parts (including monitor(s)/keyboard/mouse/etc), what parts will you be reusing? Brands and models are appreciated. Mouse and keyboard Will you be overclocking? If yes, are you interested in overclocking right away, or down the line? CPU and/or GPU? Possibly in the future but for now no Are there any specific features or items you want/need in the build? (ex: SSD, large amount of storage or a RAID setup, CUDA or OpenCL support, etc) Nothing specific, but performance is key Do you have any specific case preferences (Size like ITX/microATX/mid-towefull-tower, styles, colors, window or not, LED lighting, etc), or a particular color theme preference for the components? No preference, i will be upgrading part in the future i assume, so something i can grow into Do you need a copy of Windows included in the budget? If you do need one included, do you have a preference? I will need windows, but am open to running with the watermark for a bit if it means a difference in builds Extra info or particulars: First pc build for me, i wanna maximize performance for money while also being able to upgrade in the future. I plan on having multiple displays as i trade forex. The 1200 cad price cap is soft for me. I just dont wanna spend 3k on a rig
I am Canadian day trader day trading in US dollars. Will I owe IRS taxes at the end of the year?
I am a Canadian about to start day trading in short term in ForEx and commodities like gold. I will have transactions of over 300 in 1 week for part time (20 hours a week). My trading account is in US dollars but I live in Canada. Will I owe IRS taxes at the end of the year even though I day trade in Canada using US dollars? Please note that I will have more questions when I see responses so I have the facts to prepare for the end of the year. if you could please help me with this, there is not much content on the web for being a Canadian day trader using US dollars for transactions. Any canadian books or legitimate web links to read up on would be great as well. Edit: what is the minimum amount of transactions per hour per week to be categorized as business income/ loss rather than capital gains/loss?
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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
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.
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
New Cold War with drastically reduced economic ties
China resolve their tensions, integrate and run the world together
Transactional US-China relationship of the sort during the 1980s
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
Other countries like Japan and South Korea to dependent on China. Too integrated.
Raise objections to Belt and Road. But no alternative
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.
Commitment Regarding Industrial Policy
Provisions to protect IP
Mechanism which complaints by US companies can be addressed
Bilateral meetings adjudicate disputes. If talks don't produce agreement than US can raise tariffs unilaterally
China uses joint venture requirements, foreign investment restrictions, and administrative review and licensing processes to require or pressure technology transfer from U.S. companies.
China deprives U.S. companies of the ability to set market-based terms in licensing and other technology-related negotiations.
China directs and unfairly facilitates the systematic investment in, and acquisition of, U.S. companies and assets to generate large-scale technology transfer.
China conducts and supports cyber intrusions into U.S. commercial computer networks to gain unauthorized access to commercially valuable business information.
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.
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.
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.
China has joined a multitude of international bodies, and at least in trade, these bodies haven't changed its behavior.
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.
China hasn't dealt with issues like IP protection, market access, subsidies to state own companies and state funded industrial spying.
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.
China uses joint venture requirements, foreign investment restrictions, and administrative review and licensing processes to require or pressure technology transfer from U.S. companies.
China deprives U.S. companies of the ability to set market-based terms in licensing and other technology-related negotiations.
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.
On Tuesday 16th July, just a few weeks ago I was invited to attend a Karatbit, Karatbars/Karatbank presentation. The presentation was touting everything including a blockchain mobile phone. Someone had approached me over the weekend to investigate an investment, they had made with Karatbit/Karatbars. I attended the presentation with some research which, to be honest, was not that favourable to the company but nevertheless still went with an open mind. KaratBank, a Singapore-based financial organization, has propelled another digital currency that it claims is bound to real physical gold. Is this a progressive thought – or a trick? KaratBank, an organization located in Singapore, has quite recently declared the dispatch of KaratBank Coins (KBC), another digital currency it said is attached to gold. Be that as it may, not just the cost of gold, as different monetary forms — to real bits of gold: they're embedded in plastic cards or banknotes. In any event, that is the way it appears upon first sight. KaratBank is a sister company of KaratBars International, located in Germany. KaratBars really sells gold in exceptionally small quantities (like 0.1g to 1g bullions), inserted into plastic cards (Karatbars) or money like notes (CashGold). The notes are famously overpriced: back when 1 gram of gold was $40, the 1g CashGold note cost $65. As per KaratBank whitepaper, 10,000 KBC can be traded for 0.1g CashGold notes. The initial coin offering kicked off earlier this year and proceeded until March 21, with the ICO starting March 22 (1 KBC = $0.05), Coin Telegraph reports. Be that as it may, KaratBars International as an organization is emphatically connected with scams. A basic search for KaratBars on Google returns three connections with the word "scam" in them on the first page. KaratBars was prohibited in Canada in 2014 over an Autorité des marchés agents (AMF) with a Scam warning. The Canadian government found that KaratBars executes some kind of multi-layered marketing (MLM), or "pyramid" scheme organisation that urged individuals to get new recruits and profit from their sales, promising a return of $15,000 to $136,000 every month. In any case, Is KaratBank is a different story? All things considered, yes and no. Upon a more intensive look at the organization's whitepaper, one finds the following: "United States of America citizens, residents (tax or otherwise) or green card holders, as well as residents of Canada, the People's Republic of China or the Republic of Singapore, are not qualified to partake in the KaratBank ICO." As indicated by the Behind MLM site, the explanation behind this may lie in the way that those nations have actualized strict regulation on ICOs, and KaratBank does not have any desire to have anything to do with them. "ICOs are not unlawful in the US or Canada. In the US, however, ICOs are ordinarily viewed as securities and require registration with the [Securities and Exchange Commission]," the site reads. "Singapore hasn't prohibited ICOs however it is one of the nations KaratBars International works in through the shell companies KaratPay and KaratBars Singapore. Singapore regulators closing those organizations down would cripple KaratBars International. The board most likely figure it's best not to take any risks." To work lawfully in any purview, KaratBars International would need to register itself with the proper securities regulator in that jurisdiction, which the organization appears to need to abstain from, raising doubts. From one's point of view what is disheartening is that blockchain is a great new technology and companies like this seem to mix their existing business with cryptocurrencies. Knowing full well that the general public does not really understand cryptocurrencies, let alone blockchain or Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT). As a blockchain consultant, one feels obligated to pose some questions anyone thinking of getting involved should be asking. At the presentation, I heard the presenters say “ Karatbars is giving its members the opportunity to buy gold in small quantities. They also encourage you to save in gold instead of paper money. This can easily be done by buying as little as 0.1 gram of gold or 1 gram - 2.5 gram or 5 grams.” They said members can keep their gold in Karatbars' vault or ask them to send it to you. Cash gold is the most popular form of buying gold as the gold is embedded in a banknote. 24kt gold 99.9% pure makes it easier for anyone to accumulate wealth. Karatbars is also involved in cryptocurrency and got their own coins, namely KBC and KCB coins. I'm going to get very deep into this, but the main thing to remember is that they say, “these coins are increasing in value and that it is backed by gold”. whereas and another Cryptocurrency is backed by nothing. As a self-proclaimed proponent of blockchain and a graduate of Digital Forensics, I feel obligated to say a few words about this presentation on Karatbit or at least as a conscious citizen of this global world of technology users. Blockchain is a magnificent emerging technology that can be harnessed to do so many things. But most importantly it is a technology that provides one single source of truth. If groups are using this single source of truth technology to spread untruths, someone concerned must come out to say something. Blockchain is a technology that can put everyone on an even playing field but it seems very few understand it. The individuals with even the fleeting basic understanding can influence the general public perception of cryptocurrencies. This leads me to ask a great quote from a book called Richest Man in Babylon …. “if you want advice on investing in expensive jewels, why would you go to a butcher?” The following is what the masses are being manipulated to attach their hopes and dreams. It is that “a further drop in the value of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies has recently left investors nursing heavy losses. Many proponents are holding out for a new breakout “if their digital assets can go mainstream.” The most important part of that statement is “if their digital assets can go mainstream”. This made me ask some questions about Karatbit and this is what I came up with. Something is fishy!! Can someone clarify the following? Claim 1: Gold mine worth $900 million provides security. Can’t find any official source as proof. Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyKQIckXyIU Claim 2: Backed by a gold mine in Africa Can’t find any official source as proof. Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5Q3ZvR4b04 Claim 3: Audit report by MM Revisors for a gold mine in Madagascar Can’t find proof that MM Revisors exists. Not sure if this report was published by Karatbars Int (can’t find it on their official website), but this is being circulated by some investors as if it were. Reference: https://karatbars-me.webnode.es/\_files/200000070-01d6002d18/audit.pdf Claim 4: Karatcoin Bank is a fully licensed crypto bank and is situated in Miami Can’t find proof that they are registered as a licensed financial institute in Miami, Florida. Can’t find Karatcoin Bank as a registered corporation, but found Karat Coin Corp. Reference: http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResults?inquiryType=EntityName&searchNameOrder=KARATBANK&searchTerm=Karatbank Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXip2Fizz5U&t=152s Claim 5: Not a pyramid scheme Karatbit describes this as an affiliate program but clearly is a pyramid scheme at best, see links below; Canada: https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/karatbars-quebec-activities-covered-by-prohibition-orders-514201571.html Namibia: https://economist.com.na/43874/extra/karatbars-international-is-a-scamsays-central-bank/ Netherlands: https://www.afm.nl/en/nieuws/2014/mei/waarschuwing-karatbars Claim 6: 100KBC = 1g of Gold at $40 per gram (1 KBC = $0.40) (guaranteed) Total supply = 12,000,000,000 KBC (can’t find figures of circulating, so using supply instead) Total gold needed to cover buy back of all coins: 12,000,000,000 / 100 = 120 000 000g = 120 tons (South Africa as a whole produced 139.9 tons of Gold in 2017). Total money needed to buy back all the coins: 120 000 000g x $40 = $4.8 Billion Can’t find proof that they have 120 tons of gold in storage (or backed up by the mines as claimed) or that they are at least worth $4.8 Billion to buy the gold? Taking a more conservative approach: According to icobench.com, they raised $100 000 000 with their ICO from 60% of the total supply. Let’s assume the 60% of 12,000,000,000 is in circulation. This equals to 7,200,000,000 KBC. Total gold needed for the buyback of 7,200,000,000 KBC: 7,200,000,000 / 100 = 72 000 000g = 72 tons Total money needed to buy back all coins: 72 000 000g x $40 = $2.88 Billion Loss for buying back the KBC that were sold during the ICO: $100,000,000 - $2,880,000,000 = - $2,780,000,000 A potential loss of $2,78 Billion!!! Or am I taking crazy pills? Reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgeHjhlMfn0 Reference: https://icobench.com/ico/karatgold-coin Claim 7: This Forbes.com article gives credibility to the KBC coin This article was written by a Contributor. Reference: https://www.forbes.com/sites/joresablount/2019/05/31/10-blockchain-companies-to-watch-in-2019/#308b507e543f There is no traditional editing of contributors’ copy, at least not prior to publishing. If a story gets hot or makes the homepage, a producer will “check it more carefully,” DVorkin said. Reference: https://www.poynter.org/reporting-editing/2012/what-the-forbes-model-of-contributed-content-means-for-journalism/ “Blogging for Forbes requires being what is commonly referred to as a "self-starter." So far, nobody has said, "Um, you can't do that," or, "Oh, my God, no!" Reference: https://www.forbes.com/sites/susannahbreslin/2011/04/06/how-to-become-a-forbes-blogge#231bb9972862 “Warning over 'scammers paradise' as watchdog reveals victims lost £27m to bitcoin, cryptocurrency and forex frauds last year” • Some 1,850 cases were reported to Action Fraud, a 250% increase on 2017-18 • Victims lost an average of £14,600 - with fewer than 1 in 20 getting money back • Investors are often initially told they've made a profit • They are then encouraged to put in more money - at which point the fraudsters run off with their cash Potential victims have been warned over bogus online 'get rich quick' schemes as it emerged people lost more than £27million to cryptocurrency and foreign exchange scams last year. Fraudsters promise high returns to those who invest, according to Action Fraud and the Financial Conduct Authority. Victims lost an average of £14,600 in 2018-19 and stand little chance of getting their money back. Reports of cryptocurrency and forex investment scams increased by nearly 250 per cent in 2017-18, from 530 to nearly 1,850. The scams work by criminals promoting get-rich-quick online trading platforms through social media. Posts often use fake celebrity endorsements and images of luxury items like expensive watches and cars. Beat the scammers: These then link to professional-looking websites where consumers are persuaded to invest. Often investors are led to believe their first investment has successfully returned a profit, and are then enticed to invest more money or introduce friends in return for greater profits. But the returns stop, the customer account is closed, and the scammer disappears with no further contact. 'Anyone handing over their hard-earned cash should make sure they understand what they're getting into, they've checked it's a legitimate investment, and not rely on hype and excitement from friends or social media. 'Investing isn't a get-rich-quick scheme - and anything that uses fear of missing out or requires you to invest before thinking is best to be avoided.' Those considering an investment to check the following for tips on how to avoid investment fraud at www.fca.org.uk/scamsmart. Scammers can be very convincing so always do your own research into any firm you are considering investing with, to make sure that they are the real deal. 'It's vital that people carry out the necessary checks to ensure that an investment they're considering is legitimate. UK consumers are being increasingly targeted by crypto asset-related investment scams. Certain crypto assets, like Bitcoin and Ether (also known as cryptocurrencies), are not regulated in the UK. This means that buying, selling or transferring these crypto-assets falls outside FCA remit. The same is true for the operation of a cryptocurrency exchange. However, some types of crypto-asset products may be or may involve regulated investments depending on their nature and how they are structured. For example, firms that sell regulated investments with an underlying crypto asset element may need to be authorised by the FCA to do so. In recent months, the FCA claims it has received an increasing number of reports about crypto-asset investment scams. Some of them may involve regulated activities, others don’t, but all use similar tactics. How crypto-asset investment scams work Cryptoasset fraudsters tend to advertise on social media – often using the images of celebrities or well-known individuals to promote cryptocurrency investments. In this case, laughably they said KaratBit was endorsed by Barak Obama’s sister. Who is she and what does she know about cryptocurrencies and blockchain? The ads then link to professional-looking websites. Consumers are then persuaded to make investments with the firm using cryptocurrencies or traditional currencies. The firms operating the scams are usually based outside the UK but will claim to have a UK presence, often a prestigious City of London address. Scam firms can manipulate software to distort prices and investment returns. They may scam people into buying the non-existent crypto asset. They are also known to suddenly close consumers’ online accounts and refuse to transfer the funds to them or ask for more money before the funds can be transferred. Action Fraud has also issued a warning on cryptocurrency scams. How to protect yourself Be wary of adverts online and on social media promising high returns on investments in a crypto asset or crypto asset-related products. Most firms advertising and selling investments in crypto-assets are not authorised by the FCA. This means that if you invest in certain crypto assets you will not have access to the Financial Ombudsman Service or the Financial Services Compensation Scheme if things go wrong. The FCA doesn’t regulate crypto assets like Bitcoin or Ether which are vastly the most recognized cryptocurrencies, let alone KBC, they do regulate certain crypto-asset derivatives (such as futures contracts, CFDs and options), as well as those crypto assets I would consider securities. A firm must be authorised by FCA to advertise or sell these products in the UK – check FCA Register to make sure the firm is authorised. You can also check the FCA Warning List of firms to avoid. You should do further research on the product you are considering and the firm you are considering investing with. Check with Companies House to see if the firm is registered as a UK company and for directors' names. To see if others have posted any concerns, search online for the firm's name, directors' names and the product you are considering. If you’ve already decided you want to invest in gold, this might not be a bad company to side with. But if you’re just looking for an opportunity to earn a sustainable income and become financially independent, there are better options out there.
Due to Alberta SEC rules, Canadian brokers do not allow Alberta residents to trade Forex without being an "accredited investor". I do not qualify. 1) Does the law prohibit Canadian brokers from providing service to me OR does it prohibit me from trading? In other words, if I use an offshore broker, am I breaking any Canadian law? 2) If is illegal and I do it anyway, what power does the SEC have over me, an individual trading my own funds for personal/entertainment purposes? 3) My profits, if any, would not qualify as capital gains. Do I report this as business income, just as if I'd done any contract job for a Canadian? Does it matter for tax purposes that the money came from outside Canada? I'm aware of the inherent risks of having assets at an offshore financial institution. Thanks to anyone who would care to respond.
TLDR; looking to spend a year abroad trading forex. Will I pay taxes on ANY gains when returning to Canada/will CRA investigate me assuming I pay taxes to the Honduran government? I’m planning to spend a year abroad next year in Honduras while I continue to trade forex as my main source of income. The taxes are lower in Honduras (max 25%) as well as the cost of living when compared to Canada, which is a huge factor not including the year long vacation on a beach. I’m not planning to attain citizenship in the Honduras and am planning to return back to Canada the year after. I would simply be day trading on my ~$55K forex account using a non-Canadian broker for the year. Upon returning back will I pay taxes on the foreign income I’ve earned even through I’ve paid taxes in Honduras? What if I’ve significantly increased my wealth (ie. valued at $100k)? Would I pay some type of fee or tax on transferring this money? I will probably be moving mid-year and will also have taxes to pay on my current job ~$59k/year salary and my gains on my current forex account. Not sure if that makes it more cloudy or not. This is post is purely for inquiring about tax on foreign income, not about my trading strategies or money management. Also, I don’t expect to double my money, not really feasible, just a fictional scenario.
The week has started and was led by the only title and header around all economic news which is “US-China trade wars”. US-China trade wars in general had its effect on all markets, including cryptocurrency. The United States wants to tighten cryptocurrency use and claimed that it’s been used by smugglers and drug-dealers and pointed out that most of the transactions are made in China. This week BTC tried to break $10500 on Monday, August 26th and was rejected, the price then was floating between $10400-10300 and continued the correction down to $10027. Uncertainty in the BTC has ended when the price hit $10400 again and showed a massive drop to $9366. We will point out several reasons of this week’s drop. The drop could be a result of an update in the US when rumors on crypto-currency taxation became real. Several notes sent by the IRS to crypto-currency holders pushed some investors to get rid of the BTC and led to a major sell. The Wright and Kleiman case brings another reason to worry about. If Kleiman family surely inheritedbillions of $worth of Bitcoin, then they should declare IRSthe quantity and pay state taxes. Most probably, when these BTC’s received if they exist, the Kleiman family will sell them, which will result another drop-down of BTC. CME Exchange’s futurescontracts forBitcoin is expiring today, though the Exchange showed a record-high $515Mdaily trading volume in May, futures expiry date gave extra-strength to sellers. The price by the time published is traded at $9608 per BTC, from the technical point of view the price still has to find greater grounds for another massive jump. https://preview.redd.it/8f0tliwapnj31.png?width=1468&format=png&auto=webp&s=64a5214d8a583bd7b7f3dcdd5f3de63290697050 Though we can see that a double-bottom pattern in 1-hour chart and most likely BTC will test $9750 https://preview.redd.it/vib20xqcpnj31.png?width=1468&format=png&auto=webp&s=06b1a9de59c8c76ecc447b5e2b0a8d506a79c12b CME Exchange will continue to offer Bitcoin futures which is a positive sign for the cryptocurrency and announcement of the release of ICE-backed Bakkt Bitcoin futuresin September 23 could be that pump to get the price above $10K.
Now let’s move to Forex market
The pair to watch this week and the next week isEURUSD. Economy of Germany which EU's locomotive and other countries are cars, has showed a slight 0.1% decrease in the second quarter of 2019 related to the previous quarter. We can never deny the fact that the EU union with all its economy and power of its currency is completely dependent to the economic well-being of Germany. If the third quarter of this year doesn't show mercy to Germany's economy or Germany doesn't change policies to not only stabilize but improve the economy, the EU should prepare well for recession. Not only economic state of Germany but rumors and news and overall hype over Brexit and Italy's economic crisisare considered to bea sinker of Euro against USD. For Euro to gain powerand for EURUSD to show an uptrend again, firstly all rumors and preparations on recession should be reduced to nothing and EU states should do the needful to prevent the new economic crisis. This week’s economic data from Germany was not positive, IFO Business Climatewasbelow forecasted 95.1 and 94.3 was announced, German GDP was -0.1. These were news which weakened the European currency, although the worst scenario was yet to come. Thursday, August 29 Germany made an announced on the unemployment, and the number was four times higher than on the previous unemployment change, 4K. Since the announcement EURUSD was showing downwards movement and plummeted to 1.0990 If no signs of progress are shown next week, especially if the German Manufacturing PMI numbers don’t show positive, the price will continue downtrend to 1.0950 and find the next support at 1.0850 https://preview.redd.it/cso52ruepnj31.png?width=1468&format=png&auto=webp&s=21e4bdfed18b0bcce872b8714efa4d5d8fdc8b71 The political tension between EU and UK, US and Chinalast week showed us more-or-less unpredictable movements in US, China, HK, EU, UK stock market indices. Since the “trade-war” begun and US applying higher tariffs on Chinese goods and China taking counter-action the only gainers of these back-to-back pokes were Gold and Silver. Gold showed one more time that it’s the most trusted asset to invest. The price hit $1555 highs this week and is now showing signs of short-term correction being traded at $1526. Major Investment institutions such as UBS and Citigroup look positive on Goldsnew summit ascents. Mainly UBS has stated that the next week the price could reach $1600. From the technical point we can see that the price is trying to break the barrier at 1530, and is still unlucky. https://preview.redd.it/huvtsyugpnj31.png?width=1468&format=png&auto=webp&s=9ccae0383301cabe7b0b479bde81b72cee5aa81c This could mean that if the support at $1520 is broken, the correction will continue to $1515 and $1507. If the downtrend is impulsive the price will reach $1494, where it will find support and another upwards move shall be expected. https://preview.redd.it/oyzz33oipnj31.png?width=1468&format=png&auto=webp&s=1ae2f71cb0fece2770bcff716bd59d39e7a9245d At the other hand, confirmation of Gold’s uptrend move will be breaking of resistance at $1530 where the price shall face a mile-stone of resistances at 1545-1563-1571. From the Global prospective we should follow the upcoming Manufacturing PMI’s announcements of Germany and the US, US Non-Farm payrolls and Unemployment rates. Pay a very close attention to announcements of these three states Australia, UK and Canada, as well.Report prepared by analysts from PrimeXBT.
Which bond ETFs trading in Canada guarantee interest and principal at maturity, like individual bonds?
My grandma in Canada asks this same question, but to lessen capital gains tax and forex loss, she prefers bond ETFs that trade in Canada.
Is there a bond ETF I can hold until a maturity date similar to a bond? In theory that should provide interest + return of principal at maturity?
She couldn't spot, on Invesco's or iShares's Canadian websites, the ETF recommendations in u/ChekovsWorm's comments in Feb 2019
Invesco BulletShares and iShares iBonds are exactly what you're looking for. ETFdb has an overview with list on the investment-grade corporate offerings. BulletShares also has a high-yield ("junk bond") target maturity series where, for example, if BSCL is the Corporate target 2021, BSJL will be the Junk bond 2021. Last letter of the symbol is their internal coding for target year, 3rd letter C or J is Corporate (investment grade) or Junk (High-Yield).
2) Misunderstanding about what a bond fund does. ("fund" here means both mutual fund and exchange-traded fund. Except for a very few bond funds that are deliberately designed to "work like an individual bond", namely the "BulletShares" from Invesco (formerly from Guggenheim, which sold its ETFs to Invesco), or the iShares iBonds series of ETFs from BlackRock, bond funds do not have a maturity date when the fund itself expires.
There has been lot of queries regarding Blackhedge. As one of the founders of Blackhedge I thought it would be proper to put up a brief primer on Blackhedge explaining about ourselves and our services and how you can profit from it before it fully goes functional.Those of you who have not visited our website yet can visit us at www.blackhedge.co . In short Blackhedge is the world's first Altcoin centric proprietary trading firm.That is simply we trade all fiat asset classes ( forex, stocks, commodities, bonds) and also crypto currencies with company owned shareholder funds and pay dividends to our shareholders in purely BLK .( This is unlike some bitcoin based hedgefunds who only trade bitcoins)We also finance BLK centric crypto projects and promote blackcoin technology. Most of you by now are probably thinking that we are yet another crypto scam site who will disappear with the money overnight.Most of you might question that is it even legal ??The main issue with most cryptocoiners is trust so far I understand and we are not even asking you to trust us. We are a proper registered firm managing our company owned funds and also acting as a money manager for three very reputed and regulated brokerage houses. As I said you do not need to trust us to make money from us :-). All you have to do is open an account with one of the brokers we are affiliated under and copy our trades in our account. So you do not have to pay money to us directly. You have full control of your money and you may withdraw it anytime you like minus our performance fees which varies from 15 -20 % which the broker directly debits from your account in case of a profit. We also accept clients from U.S and Canada.Sounds interesting ?? Read on. For Non U.S clients Minimum investment :- 100 USD Minimum top up :- 20 USD Performance fee:- 15 % Withdrawal penalty :- Nil Deposit :- Bank Wire/Credit Card and various e-currencies Broker :- Fxopen ( regulated in New Zealand) To open an account all you have to do is to click the following link and invest under our trade signals https://pamm.fxopen.com/en/Pamm/Blackhedge6 For U.S/Canada based clients Minimum investment :- 500 USD Performance fee :- 20 % Withdrawal penalty :- Nil Deposit Mode :- Bank Wire/Credit Cards Broker:- Tallinex( regulated in St. Vincents and Grenadines) To open an account please click the following link open an account http://www.tallinex.com/open-account?i=127745&s=127745 Also note we are not responsible if the broker does not open your account because of the lack of documents on your part or because of their anti- money laundering policies. We also do not provide tax or financial planning advise to clients availing this service. Need futher help or clarifications you can email us at [email protected] Also note a major percentage of the performance fees will go towards financing BLK projects and development of the blackcoin eco system. Further questions you might be pondering upon would be - 1)Is Blackhedge a ponzi scheme ? 2)If it is not a ponzi then is it profitable ? 3)Credentials of the Blackhedge traders ? 1) It cannot be a ponzi scheme because we do not accept any direct money from clients. We manage only our self owned shareholder(member) money .There are no guaranteed quantum of profits.Profits depend upon the performance of our traders. 2) Well you can follow our live trades in twitter at @Blackhedge_ Our trading statistics can be certified and tracked at a reputed third party website http://myfxbook.com/members/blackhedge . Yes we do make money. Need more mind boggling stats ?mail us we will be happy to flood you with more stats. 3)Traders trading our accounts have atleast one international financial certification i.e either a CFA( Certified Financial Analyst) or someone who has cleared all three levels of CMT ( Chartered Market Technician) Program from Market Technicians Association, New York. It is a prerequisite for anyone handling our accounts.We do not guarantee any certain quantum of profits but we do ensure that the trades you follow are done by professional qualified traders.As one of the founders of Blackhedge I have over 10 years of trading experience in the financial markets with both the certifications mentioned. If one wants to make a more active association with us in the capacity of a shareholder, we are open to private equity placements.Shareholders ofcourse gets their dividend in blackcoins and enjoy superior returns by participating directly in the growth of the company. Current Status :- Trading is on and interested folks and copy our trades and also contribute to the growth of blackcoin. Future Plans :- We are working on some other features of our website which will be online soon enough.We are also in the process of developing some pure blackcoin based financial products which I cannot elaborate right now for the sake of confidentiality. I hope members of this community will support us in this venture and together we can make a great coin i.e Blackcoin the greatest. Always bet on BLK. Please share your views with us in this thread/email us at [email protected]/follow us at twitter @Blackhedge_
PM Modi's 17 Achievements During Foreign Visits In Last Few Weeks
Disclaimer: Extracted from a Facebook post by a senior policy maker.. Pasting it as it is, without any modifications "Since last few days, I have seen few jokes on Narendra Modi's foreign visits.... and all people are curious why Narendra Modi visits so many countries, What India achieving from it. Few hidden achievements are as given below.
BJP Govt. convinced Saudi Arabia to not charge “On-Time Delivery” Premium charges on Crude Oil – Young Petrolium minister Dharmendra Pradhan & External affair minister Sushma Swaraj seal the deal.
India will build 4 Hydropower station + Dams in Bhutan (India will get share in Green energy will be produce in future)
India will build Biggest ever dam of Nepal (China was trying hard to get that) – India will get 83% Green energy produce from that hydropower station in free – in future.
Increased relationship with Japan and they agree to invest $30 Billion in DMIC (Delhi – Mumbai Investment Corridor)
Increase relationship with Vietnam and Vietnam now agree to give contract of Oil exploration to ONGC-Videsh (UPA was not ready to take because they are worried of china – major conflict on south-china sea)
Increase Oil Import from Iran despite there is ban by USA. Iran agree to sell in Indian rupees and it save our Forex. India didn’t stop to build “Chabahar” port of Iran.
India – Australia (NaMo is first PM to visit Australia after 28yrs) Despite Australia is major supplier of Coal & Uranium. NaMo able to convinced Tony Abbott and now Australia will supply Uranium for our energy production.
China favoring President lost election in Sri Lanka – Remember UPA lost “Hambantota” port development – read latest report of CIA where they mention RAW has major role in power shift of Sri Lanka. Now Modi has confirmed he is visiting Sri Lanka in April.
With China as Trade Deficit was increasing – NaMo force either Anti-Dumping will be come soon or China have invest into India. – China commit $20 billion Investment in India.
On Security – I think adding “Ajit Doval” in his team is the best decision by NaMo. See the recent tie-up with Pantagon, Israel & Japan. Remember I.K.Gujaral as PM stop RAW’s offensive operations in foreign countries.. Now see how we stop #TerrorBoat and listen his word … “Any Mumbai like attack from Pakistan and Pakistan will lose balochistan”
India approve the Road in North east and around India china border – Remember Just because China’s oppose ADB (Asian Development Bank) didn’t give us fund during UPA regime and UPA hold that file under “Environment Ministry” node – Remember “JAYANTHI TAX” ?
India manage to bring back 4000+ Indians from War zone Yemen and also bring foreign nationals of 41 different countries which put India’s name globally in rescue mission – PM Narendra Modi specially talk to Saudi Arabian king and tell him to allow Indian Airforce planes to fly – as Saudi Arabia was attacking on Yemen and Yemen sky was declared NO-FLY Zone.
India’s Air defense was getting weaker day by day, NaMo has renegotiated Rafale fighter Jets deal with France and bough 36 Jets on ASAP basis.
First time after 42yrs Indian Prime Minister visits Canada, in Bilateral deal, Indian able convince to Canada to supply Uranium for India’s Nuclear reactors for next 5yrs. It will be great help to resolve India’s Power problems.
Canada approve On-Arrival visa for Indian tourists.This is incorrect. Its the other way round which actually happened: Canadians can now have visa on arrival in India.
Till yet we were buying the Nuclear Reactor from Russia or USA and it was much like bagger kind of situation because they were worried about usage of Nuclear reactor for some other use. Now Narendra Modi able to convince France and now France will make Nuclear reactor in India. On MAKE IN INDIA efforts.. with collaboration with Indian company.
During 26th Jan Visit of Barak Obama, NaMo convince USA to drop rule of Nuclear fuel tracking rule and sort-out Liabilities rules which now open the gates for next 16 Nuclear power plant projects."
Hello everyone, just a quick question I'm a resident of Quebec but I do have an ontario address, just wondering what the tax situation would be if I signed up. Before HST you would have to report capital gains/loses to both provincial and federal. I could probably still register for the service and just report this information to revenue quebec no problem, I've done this with (short lived) forex trading outside of Canada. The only issue I see from this is on the ontario side but their tax system is under the federal government now. Quebec knows I'm a resident and as such would expect me to declare investment income. But then when it came time to do taxes so would ontario because it would show up in the CRA that my ontario address is associated with an investment. But I'm pretty sure I could get an exemption if I just explained my tax situation. Registered in ontario living in Quebec.
Hello everyone, I have recently gotten into trading Forex and other instrumentals such as bitcoin. I have been using a practice account with Trading 212 and I just wanted to know if this is a good platform to use. I am also from Canada so if any fellow Canadians know any good ones that I should check out let me know! Furthermore, one that accepts paypal would also be a bonus. Lastly, did anyone who opened a forex account worry about giving out there Social security/social insurance/tax identification number? As these numbers in the wrong hands can really screw you over.
hey yes. now just to Is Forex Trading Tax Free In Canada let you Is Forex Trading Tax Free In Canada know that Is Forex Trading Tax Free In Canada ive just started trading this, this week. dont know alot of it for now. now when i called them i had lots of questions. like min to open an acct. 100 dollars. you can have bull binary where it will expire every 2 hrs. daily where it will expire 3pm ... So, the forex day trading tax implications in Canada are to a certain extent controllable by you. You and/or your account can decide which system will work best for your situation. However, the CRA has pointed out that forex tax reporting must be consistent. So, if you file your profits as business income at the beginning, you cannot later change it to capital gains simply to reap tax benefits ... Taxes on forex if you are a fulltime trade can be more complicated then just looking at capital gains tax. For example, in Canada as a fulltime trader I am not taxed at the capital gains rate but at a normal income rate (which can be and is double in my case). Tax authorities may look at fulltime traders as that is your job whereas capital gains tax is used for people who invest but not for a ... Canada’s economy really got going in January of 1989, when the Free Trade Agreement came into effect. The agreement basically removed all the tariffs (that is the tax imposed on trade) between the US and Canada. In effect, Canada now exports over 70% of its goods to the US. Monetary & Fiscal Policy Next in our list of best forex brokers Canada makes available, is longstanding industry veteran, Forex.com. They are considered one of the market leaders, are IIROC regulated, and have been active in the sector for almost two-decades.As a Canadian user, you can access more than 300 global markets for trading with Forex.com which include more than 80 forex currency pairs, and a wide array of ... If the net amount is $200 or less, there is no capital gain or loss and you do not have to report it on your income tax and benefit return. Report your net gain or loss in Canadian dollars. Use the exchange rate that was in effect on the day of the transaction. If there were transactions at various times throughout the year, you can use the Exchange Rates or Annual Average Exchange Rates (1997 ... Tax reporting on forex trading in Canada is straightforward. Most accounting firms use 988 contracts for spot traders and 1256 contracts for futures traders. That’s why it’s important to talk with your accountant before investing. fxcm canada Once you begin trading, you cannot switch from one to the other. In Canada, it is important you adhere to all day trading equity, non-margin and ... Tax reporting on forex trading in Canada is straightforward. Any income or salary earned is subject to capital gains tax and forex traders should be prepared to pay up to 50% on profits. To make the annual tax filing process stress-free, keep a track of trades, profits, and losses throughout the year. A professional tax advisor can help provide clarity if you’re unclear about your ... That is, if you were in the top tax bracket you’d be taxed at approx 43%. Formula for this example using the top tax bracket would be as follows: (Capital gain x 50.00%) x marginal tax rate = capital gain tax = ($100 x 50.00%) x 43% = $50 x 43% = $21.50. In this example your capital gains tax on $100 is $21.50, leaving you with $78.50.
Day Trading Taxes in Canada (TFSA) - Investing for ...
How much capital do you need? Where can I get a broker? How do I learn to trade stocks? These are all answered in this video! How to start day trading in Can... 📈💰Ultimate Stock Market Portfolio with Automated Dividend Income Tracker: https://cointocapital.com/product/ultimate-personal-finance-spreadsheet/ Read this ... 📈📚 FREE Training Crash Course + Join Our Investing Academy https://bit.ly/theinvestingacademy Today we'll talk about how taxes work in Canada. https://turb... **This video is not intended to be tax advice. Seek your own tax professional about your personal tax situation. ** Grab a copy of the Home Business Success ... Day Trading Taxes in Canada 2020 Day Trading in TFSA Account? - Duration: 15:09. Humbled Trader 157,912 views. 15:09 . How To Make $100+ A Day, Trading With A $1000 Account - Duration: 17:33 ... CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFO: https://rebrand.ly/forex33 And start earning in the Forex Market Now! In our growing international company setting, there are busin... LIVE Forex Trading - LONDON, Thur, ... Day Trading Taxes in Canada 2020 Day Trading in TFSA Account? - Duration: 15:09. Humbled Trader 90,246 views. 15:09 [LIVE] Day Trading $1,000 in 30 ...