trendie
Legendary member
- Messages
- 6,875
- Likes
- 1,433
NO. the absolutely LAST thing you want is lawyers getting involved.
suppose you could prove in a court of law "price action".
then your investments didnt do too well.
are you going to sue "global financial markets" for lack of performance?
would the "past preformance doesnt indicate future performance" caveat become invalid?
if there was a massive market failure, who do you sue?
if MarketMakers spiked the price to trigger stops, can you sue them for moving the market "in such a manner to take the price action away from its natural course, and in so doing, causing a loss where a loss would not have naturally have occurred."
its bad enough we have brokers and spreads to contend with, please dont give lawyers any ideas that they can scoop any of our profits into their pockets with NO RISK on their part.
What is the difference between, Finspreads and, Interactivebrokers if there are no guarantees on the price movements of the global financial markets?
Why is Interactive brokers subject to CGT?
Why is Finspreads not?
Not one of these companies guarantee profit. Why should market speculation not be encompassed as gambling altogether,...unless individual profit can be proved as not being 'lucky'?
Why is Interactive brokers subject to CGT?
Why is Finspreads not?
Not one of these companies guarantee profit. Why should market speculation not be encompassed as gambling altogether,...unless individual profit can be proved as not being 'lucky'?
One Eyed Shark
Well-known member
- Messages
- 257
- Likes
- 13
It may not be able to prove financial markets obey certain rules.
Sure is possible to prove the traders that trade those markets, obey certain rules, that day in day out provide consistant repatable opportunities in those markets.
Sure is possible to prove the traders that trade those markets, obey certain rules, that day in day out provide consistant repatable opportunities in those markets.
Could this be proven? Do the markets have certain laws that they obey day in day out that can be exploited or used to gain financial profit without having to be uncertain about the outcome of an individuals assumptions of price action?
Paul71,
Price action – the financial markets – are a human construct and void of any intrinsic natural laws, ie governed by contingent, not universal laws like the laws of physics. Everything is subjective, not objective.
The best we can say is that the only rule is that of supply and demand, but I don’t see this as a “rule” more a natural evolution or function. Any anomaly here, for example, a simultaneous higher selling price/lower buying price will be short-lived via arbitrage.
Also, speculation is a by-product of the primary function of any market, ie raising capital, insuring risk.
Are you American?
Grant.
Price action – the financial markets – are a human construct and void of any intrinsic natural laws, ie governed by contingent, not universal laws like the laws of physics. Everything is subjective, not objective.
The best we can say is that the only rule is that of supply and demand, but I don’t see this as a “rule” more a natural evolution or function. Any anomaly here, for example, a simultaneous higher selling price/lower buying price will be short-lived via arbitrage.
Also, speculation is a by-product of the primary function of any market, ie raising capital, insuring risk.
Are you American?
Grant.
Last edited:
One Eyed Shark
Well-known member
- Messages
- 257
- Likes
- 13
Is anything guaranteed or do we work through life with probabilities
Paul,
CGT or not reflects current legislation – betting is not subject to CGT. But I reckon this will soon change.
Price action isn’t guaranteed but what if it was? Above I noted the primary function of financial markets is raising capital, hedging risk. However, without the additional liquidity of speculators, most markets would not function as efficiently, especially regarding price discovery.
If prices were guaranteed, what would be the incentive to speculate? No speculators, no liquidity, no price discovery, no raising of capital, no economic/business expansion. Perhaps even more important, no transparency.
Grant.
CGT or not reflects current legislation – betting is not subject to CGT. But I reckon this will soon change.
Price action isn’t guaranteed but what if it was? Above I noted the primary function of financial markets is raising capital, hedging risk. However, without the additional liquidity of speculators, most markets would not function as efficiently, especially regarding price discovery.
If prices were guaranteed, what would be the incentive to speculate? No speculators, no liquidity, no price discovery, no raising of capital, no economic/business expansion. Perhaps even more important, no transparency.
Grant.
If i make a trade with IB...is the outcome guaranteed?
If i produce a profit with IB within the tax year i am taxed on my profits.
What is the definition of gambling/betting within the eyes of the British government?
Unless price action can be proven as evident and obvious in its movements.
Many guests on Bloomberg state that there are no guarantees, are they falsifying facts about the markets?
Any thoughts?
If i produce a profit with IB within the tax year i am taxed on my profits.
What is the definition of gambling/betting within the eyes of the British government?
Unless price action can be proven as evident and obvious in its movements.
Many guests on Bloomberg state that there are no guarantees, are they falsifying facts about the markets?
Any thoughts?
Paul,
I think I see where your coming from. For their privileges, market-makers (stocks, bonds, options) are obligated to display “guaranteed” prices for certain quantities. If you submit a buy or sell order, the price on the screen is what you’ll get assuming the price doesn’t change between submission and reception of order. You could use a “limit” order to avoid a worse price.
The majority (if not all) of futures market consist of speculators, you and me, willing buyers and sellers. There is no guarantee of price. No-one is obligated.
Grant.
I think I see where your coming from. For their privileges, market-makers (stocks, bonds, options) are obligated to display “guaranteed” prices for certain quantities. If you submit a buy or sell order, the price on the screen is what you’ll get assuming the price doesn’t change between submission and reception of order. You could use a “limit” order to avoid a worse price.
The majority (if not all) of futures market consist of speculators, you and me, willing buyers and sellers. There is no guarantee of price. No-one is obligated.
Grant.
What is the definition of gambling/speculating, Grant? Thanks for your reply.
Paul,
Best definition I can think of would be: taking a view of a particular outcome which is uncertain, ie not guaranteed. Maybe this supports your view.
Recall I asked were you American? This was a flippant remark – you’re original question had US litigation written all over it. Now, re your CGT stance. In the US there is an individual (forgot the name) who has refused to pay income tax on the grounds they are illegal. He’s been in and out of court many times over the years. Finally, they got him, and he was sent down.
To clarify, is it your position that you do not need to pay CGT because you are gambling?
The Inland Revenue has deep pockets. Good luck.
Grant.
Best definition I can think of would be: taking a view of a particular outcome which is uncertain, ie not guaranteed. Maybe this supports your view.
Recall I asked were you American? This was a flippant remark – you’re original question had US litigation written all over it. Now, re your CGT stance. In the US there is an individual (forgot the name) who has refused to pay income tax on the grounds they are illegal. He’s been in and out of court many times over the years. Finally, they got him, and he was sent down.
To clarify, is it your position that you do not need to pay CGT because you are gambling?
The Inland Revenue has deep pockets. Good luck.
Grant.
Crap Buddist
Senior member
- Messages
- 2,458
- Likes
- 289
Is a fish & chip shop guaranteed to make money or is that gambling too...?
Trader333
Moderator
- Messages
- 8,753
- Likes
- 1,026
In my view this is highly unlikely when you consider that up to 90% lose and only 10% win. If they start to tax SB then it will also allow losers to offset losses against tax in advance so the net result would be less tax. Whilst the arguments continue that it isn't fair to pay CGT when using direct access, my view has always been that I would rather pay tax on a profit than no tax on a loss. If you are day-trading it is also very unlikely that you will make more profits using SB than with direct access.
Paul
TheBramble
Legendary member
- Messages
- 8,394
- Likes
- 1,170
Offence is the Best form of Defence
Paul71, I understand what you’re asking and I applaud your intent, but if I’m interpreting what you’re saying correctly, you’re suggesting waiting until challenged by HMCR for non-payment of CGT to battle it out.
You’ll be on the back foot if you take that route and your extant contravention of existing law – however successfully subsequently challenged or not, will automatically load the dice against you and cause you more grief and cost that is necessary.
If you want to test this, and I think you’ll need a great deal of financial support to do so, can I suggest you take the battle to them and in the first instance seek a legal position on this from suitably informed and specifically experienced counsel? It’s a lot cheaper to find out in the early stages – trust me.
I suspect you’re onto a loser as my assumption (and it is only an assumption) is that greater powers than you and I have already taken a quick shuftie down this avenue and were it possible, it would have already been so. But that may just be the giver-uper in me talking.
However, get some decent advice from someone whose business it is to advise knowledgeably on such things, not from us nerds on here.
Paul71, I understand what you’re asking and I applaud your intent, but if I’m interpreting what you’re saying correctly, you’re suggesting waiting until challenged by HMCR for non-payment of CGT to battle it out.
You’ll be on the back foot if you take that route and your extant contravention of existing law – however successfully subsequently challenged or not, will automatically load the dice against you and cause you more grief and cost that is necessary.
If you want to test this, and I think you’ll need a great deal of financial support to do so, can I suggest you take the battle to them and in the first instance seek a legal position on this from suitably informed and specifically experienced counsel? It’s a lot cheaper to find out in the early stages – trust me.
I suspect you’re onto a loser as my assumption (and it is only an assumption) is that greater powers than you and I have already taken a quick shuftie down this avenue and were it possible, it would have already been so. But that may just be the giver-uper in me talking.
However, get some decent advice from someone whose business it is to advise knowledgeably on such things, not from us nerds on here.
Similar threads
