---

Forex multi-account manager Z-X-N
Accepts global forex account operation, investment, and trading
Assists family office investment and autonomous management

---

The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has not explicitly prohibited Chinese citizens from opening foreign exchange trading accounts, but brokers generally set strict compliance thresholds for Chinese citizens.

---

In the two-way trading scenario of foreign exchange investment, while the MAS has not explicitly prohibited Chinese citizens from opening foreign exchange trading accounts, regulated forex brokers generally set strict compliance thresholds for Chinese citizens, especially those residing in mainland China long-term. Most institutions have tightened or even suspended account opening services for citizens holding only mainland Chinese citizenship. The core reason for this phenomenon lies in the rigid requirements of cross-border regulatory coordination and compliance, as well as the constraints of the Anti-Money Laundering (AML) regulatory system. The relevant policy details, account opening thresholds, compliance risks, and feasible paths are summarized below.
From a core policy perspective, the MAS regulatory framework does not explicitly exclude Chinese citizens from the prohibited account opening group. However, its "Know Your Customer" (KYC) principle, anti-money laundering regulations, and cross-border financial business management rules impose clear client verification obligations on brokers, indirectly raising the compliance threshold for Chinese citizens opening accounts. Specifically, brokers must comprehensively verify the applicant's identity information, actual residency status, the legality of the source of funds, and investment suitability. They must also proactively cooperate with relevant domestic and international foreign exchange management regulations and cross-border investment supervision requirements, such as strictly adhering to the annual $50,000 foreign exchange purchase limit for individuals and strictly prohibiting assistance to clients in illegal cross-border fund transfers. These compliance requirements collectively constitute the core basis for brokers' account opening verification of Chinese citizens.
In the actual implementation of these mainstream account opening thresholds, the entry conditions faced by Chinese citizens with different statuses vary significantly. Among them, Chinese citizens holding Singapore Employment Passes (EP), Student Passes, and Permanent Resident (PR) status are a priority group for account opening under the regulatory compliance framework. They can submit account opening applications to MAS-licensed brokers normally. The core requirements are to provide complete proof of local address (such as rental contracts, utility bills, etc.), valid visa or residency documents, and proof of funds that meets the requirements (such as salary slips, asset certificates, etc.). The review process is basically the same as that for ordinary Singapore local investors. In stark contrast, it is significantly more difficult for mainland Chinese citizens holding only mainland ID cards and tourist visas to open accounts. Most MAS-licensed brokers explicitly do not accept account opening applications from clients with such status. Only a few institutions open account opening channels for clients with only mainland Chinese status, but they set extremely high asset thresholds, usually requiring clients to provide proof of assets of more than US$200,000, along with strict processes such as video-witnessed interviews and in-depth verification of the source of funds. The overall account opening cycle is long and the review requirements are stringent. Furthermore, regarding the attempts by some mainland clients to circumvent MAS regulatory hurdles by using brokers' overseas licensed entities, it's crucial to understand that such account opening methods face multiple limitations: firstly, strict adherence to the relevant regulations of the corresponding regulatory region is required, such as the UK FCA's 30:1 leverage cap for retail forex trading; secondly, these accounts are not protected by the MAS regulatory system, meaning investors cannot enjoy Singapore's local investor protection mechanisms, resulting in significant shortcomings in rights protection.
For Chinese citizens participating in forex investment account openings under the MAS regulatory system, core compliance requirements and potential risk warnings require close attention. In terms of fund security and regulatory protection, if investors choose to open accounts with brokers not licensed by MAS or platforms without any regulatory qualifications, they will directly face multiple risks, including lack of fund security, illegal leverage, and illegal cross-border fund transfers. Such platforms often operate outside of regulation, making it extremely difficult for investors to seek redress in the event of fund misappropriation or platform collapse. Even when choosing a broker's overseas licensed entity, it's essential to verify the authenticity of its regulatory qualifications, the completeness of its fund segregation mechanisms, and the specific content of its investor protection policies through official channels beforehand to avoid losses due to inadequate regulatory information verification. Regarding cross-border compliance, Chinese citizens must strictly abide by relevant regulations on foreign exchange management within and outside China. It is strictly prohibited to transfer funds for foreign exchange investment through illegal channels such as borrowing others' foreign exchange purchase quotas or using underground banks. Such actions violate relevant laws and regulations and may face administrative penalties. Furthermore, when submitting an account opening application to a broker, citizens must actively cooperate with the KYC verification process, providing true and complete identity information, proof of address, and proof of the source of funds. Falsification of materials or forged information may result in the account being frozen or closed, and invested funds may be at risk of being unable to be withdrawn normally.
For Chinese citizens with a genuine need to open an account, the following feasible paths can be chosen based on their own circumstances: First, if you already hold a long-term visa or residency status in Singapore (such as EP, student pass, PR, etc.), you can prioritize preparing complete application materials, including proof of local residence, valid residency documents, and proof of funds (such as pay stubs, bank statements, etc.), and submit the account opening application directly to an MAS-licensed broker. The approval rate for such applications is relatively high, and the account is regulated and protected by MAS. Second, if you are a purely mainland Chinese citizen but meet the criteria for high-net-worth clients, you can select MAS-licensed brokers that explicitly accept mainland high-net-worth clients. Institutions should prepare compliant asset certificates, detailed explanations of the source of funds, valid identity documents, and proof of mainland address in advance. They should complete the entire review process, including video verification and risk assessment, as required. They will need to continuously cooperate with the institution's compliance follow-up and information update requirements. Thirdly, if the above two conditions cannot be met, they can consider Hong Kong SFC-licensed brokers. These institutions have relatively clear account opening policies for mainland clients and are strictly regulated by the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission (SFC). Their implementation standards in areas such as fund segregation mechanisms and investor protection policies are more comprehensive, making them more suitable for the compliant account opening needs of purely mainland clients.

The Japanese Financial Services Agency (JFSA), through the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act and supporting administrative guidelines, defines foreign exchange margin trading (FX) as a "specified financial product" and implements a strict principle of territorial management.

---

The regulatory logic centers on "investor protection + market stability," rather than simply based on nationality discrimination: Unless a client is identified as a "Japanese resident," regardless of their residency status or short-term entry record, they are prohibited from accepting retail leveraged forex services from licensed institutions. This restriction is mandatory; brokers who violate it will be considered to have engaged in "improper business conduct," facing business suspension orders, administrative fines, and even criminal prosecution.
The criteria for determining "Japanese residents" are clearly defined in the JFSA's "Guidance on Investor Protection in the Financial Instruments Trading Industry": proof of residence in Japan and the original "Resident Certificate" or Residence Card must be provided simultaneously, and the residence must be a stable address for at least six months. Chinese citizens, with only a passport, Chinese ID card, or short-term Japanese visa, cannot meet these requirements, thus their account opening process is blocked at the system level. This ban applies to all licensed "Category 1 Financial Instruments Trading Industry" businesses regulated by the JFSA, including leading platforms, with no exceptions.
It is important to note that the ban only applies to "margin trading," a type of leveraged derivative product. For unleveraged spot foreign exchange transactions, Japan's Banking Law does not exclude non-residents. Some city banks (such as Mitsubishi UFJ Bank and Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation) allow foreigners holding short-term visas to open ordinary foreign currency deposit accounts, but they must complete strict KYC and fund source verification. The account functions are limited to exchange and deposit, and margin netting or leverage is prohibited. If a customer attempts to circumvent identity verification by forging resident registration certificates, using someone else's address, or using an offshore agent, the platform will immediately freeze the account and force liquidation upon discovery. The relevant funds may be transferred to the Tokyo District Public Prosecutors Office for investigation of criminal proceeds. Simultaneously, this behavior also violates China's Foreign Exchange Control Regulations regarding the prohibition of falsely declaring the purpose of funds, and individuals within China will face administrative penalties from the State Administration of Foreign Exchange and credit record sanctions.
As for alternative pathways, Chinese citizens seeking yen-related exposure should turn to international brokers holding licenses from the UK's FCA, Australia's ASIC, or Hong Kong's SFC, and conduct CFD or spot transactions on yen currency pairs offered by them. However, when choosing a platform, it is still necessary to verify the contracting parties, the bank segregating funds, the dispute resolution venue, and whether login via mainland China IP addresses to avoid falling into offshore fraud traps. Funds leaving the country must strictly adhere to China's annual $50,000 foreign exchange purchase quota. The purpose field must be truthfully filled with verifiable items such as "tourism" or "education." It is forbidden to circumvent the quota through splitting transactions, underground banks, or over-the-counter virtual currency exchanges; otherwise, domestic banks may suspend subsequent foreign exchange purchases according to the "Detailed Rules for the Implementation of Personal Foreign Exchange Business."
In short, the JFSA's territorial regulatory principle excludes "non-residents" from the retail leveraged foreign exchange market. There is practically no compliant window for Chinese citizens to open accounts on Japanese domestic platforms. The only feasible option is to indirectly obtain yen asset exposure through licensed institutions in other jurisdictions while simultaneously fulfilling parallel obligations under China's foreign exchange controls. Any attempt to circumvent the ban through "nominee holding" or "offshore shell companies" faces a high probability of being held accountable by both Chinese and Japanese regulators. The financial and legal risks are uncontrollable and should be avoided with extreme caution.

The EU-level regulatory framework does not contain provisions that directly prohibit Chinese citizens from opening trading accounts, but this does not mean that Chinese citizens can smoothly enjoy foreign exchange trading services within the EU's regulatory scope.

---

In the context of two-way foreign exchange investment, the EU-level regulatory framework specifically covers the regulatory rules led by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) and core regulations such as the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive II (MiFID II) and the Markets in Financial Instruments Regulation (MiFIR). While it does not contain provisions that directly prohibit Chinese citizens from opening trading accounts, this does not mean that Chinese citizens can smoothly enjoy foreign exchange trading services within the EU's regulatory scope. In fact, due to the rigid requirements of regulatory compliance, the independent adjustments made by brokers in their business operations, and the combined effects of cross-border and geopolitical compliance risks, Chinese citizens face significant limitations in the forex account opening process and actual trading experience under the EU regulatory system. These limitations are not stemming from explicit legal prohibitions, but rather from the combined effect of multiple constraints.
From a regulatory application perspective, the EU MiFID II and ESMA regulations do not use client nationality as the core criterion. Their core application boundary lies in whether the broker providing forex trading services possesses legal authorization within the European Economic Area (EEA). This means that as long as a broker holds a legitimate investment company license from the EEA, regardless of where its clients are located globally, it must strictly adhere to the unified EU regulatory requirements. These requirements specifically include a leverage limit of up to 1:30 for retail clients, the establishment of a negative balance protection mechanism to prevent client losses exceeding actual account funds, a complete ban on all types of trading bonus incentives, and mandatory fulfillment of full risk disclosure obligations. For Chinese citizens choosing to open a forex trading account within the EU regulatory system, the issue is not essentially a legal obstacle of being "banned from opening an account," but rather an unconditional acceptance of the aforementioned regulatory rules. Their trading activities and account management must comply with the EU's unified compliance standards. It is worth noting that although the UK has formally left the EU, the regulatory rules established by the UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) are highly convergent with the ESMA regulatory framework, and equivalent regulatory standards for non-EU clients have been established through domestic legislation. Therefore, if Chinese citizens choose to open an account with a broker regulated by the UK FCA, the core regulatory constraints they face are essentially the same as those in the EU system.
In actual market operations, most brokers holding legitimate EU licenses proactively impose restrictions on account opening applications from Chinese citizens or direct them to specific channels. This proactive restriction is driven by multiple core factors. From a compliance cost control perspective, the stringent anti-money laundering (AML) regulations within the EU require brokers to conduct comprehensive and rigorous customer due diligence on non-resident clients. The processes for verifying the authenticity of cross-border identities of Chinese citizens, verifying the authenticity of valid domestic address certificates (such as utility bills, bank statements, etc.), and tracing the legality of the source of funds are not only cumbersome and time-consuming, but also require a significant investment of human and material resources, which significantly increases the compliance operating costs of brokers. Against this backdrop, in order to avoid cost pressures and potential risks, some brokers will directly choose to refuse account opening applications from Chinese citizens or suspend related services. From the perspective of cross-border regulatory risk avoidance, since mainland China has not yet officially opened retail forex margin trading, EU-licensed brokers are generally concerned that providing forex trading services to Chinese citizens may trigger conflicts between Chinese and EU regulatory rules, leading to compliance disputes and even regulatory penalties. Therefore, they tend to direct Chinese citizen clients to open accounts under their offshore regulatory entities, such as subsidiaries regulated by the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (CySEC) or branches in offshore islands. While these offshore entities may be affiliated with their EU parent companies, they are not directly regulated by the EU master license, thus circumventing some core EU regulatory constraints. From the perspective of brokerage business strategy adjustments, since ESMA significantly tightened leverage restrictions on retail forex trading in 2018, the attractiveness of forex accounts within the EU regulatory system to global investors has declined significantly. To balance operating profits and compliance risks, most brokers have gradually adjusted their customer service strategies, prioritizing clients in the EU and markets with lower compliance costs and controllable risks. For clients in non-EU regions such as China with high compliance costs and uncertain regulatory risks, they adopt differentiated service strategies such as limiting client numbers, discouraging clients from entering the market, or directing them to offshore sub-accounts.
Based on actual account opening scenarios, Chinese citizens mainly face three typical situations when applying for a foreign exchange account under the EU regulatory system. The first type is direct rejection of account opening. Some EU-licensed brokers that strictly enforce compliance policies, especially some platforms authorized by the UK's FCA, will explicitly state on their account opening pages that they do not accept applications from clients with Chinese nationality or mainland China residency. Other brokers, during the Know Your Customer (KYC) process, fail to complete the cross-border due diligence process for Chinese citizens, ultimately rejecting the account opening application. The second type is being directed to an offshore sub-account. This is a common practice among many large international brokers. These brokers will direct Chinese clients to their offshore subsidiaries regulated by CySEC, the Vanuatu Financial Services Commission (VFSC), etc., to open accounts. While these offshore accounts may have brand or equity ties to the EU parent company, they are not directly regulated by the EU master license. Therefore, they are relatively more flexible in terms of leverage settings and trading rules, but the corresponding investor protection and fund security standards are usually lower than those of EU master license accounts. The third option involves a rigorous KYC verification process. A few EU-licensed brokers willing to accept Chinese citizens require clients to provide a full set of qualification documents, including a valid passport, proof of a detailed address in mainland China, bank statements for the past six months, and proof of the source of funds (such as salary slips, investment income certificates, etc.). A video interview verification is also required. The entire process is cumbersome and the review standards are strict, resulting in a relatively low success rate for account opening.
When planning to open and trade foreign exchange accounts under the EU regulatory system, Chinese citizens should also pay close attention to relevant compliance requirements and potential risks. Regarding domestic regulatory risks, according to the "Measures for the Administration of Individual Foreign Exchange" and related implementation rules in mainland China, the annual foreign exchange purchase quota for individuals is US$50,000, and cross-border foreign exchange transactions must be conducted through domestic financial institutions that have obtained the corresponding business qualifications in accordance with the law. It is strictly prohibited to evade quota supervision or authenticity management requirements by splitting foreign exchange purchases or using false trade documents. Depositing funds into EU-regulated accounts through illegal means such as private transfers or cryptocurrency transfers may result in the freezing of funds, administrative penalties for individuals, and even criminal charges in serious cases. Regarding account security and protection, EU master-license accounts typically enjoy comprehensive investor compensation schemes; for example, the investor compensation cap under the UK FCA regulatory system is £85,000. However, most offshore sub-accounts in their respective jurisdictions lack similar investor compensation mechanisms or offer extremely low compensation amounts. Fund security in these sub-accounts relies entirely on the broker's own operational strength and reputation, posing a significantly higher potential risk. Regarding regulatory consistency verification, while some brokers' offshore subsidiaries claim to be "regulated by the EU," discrepancies in regulatory implementation may exist in actual operation. Therefore, before opening an account, investors should verify the broker's license validity, business scope, and participation in investor compensation schemes through the official websites of regulatory bodies (such as the FCA and CySEC's official inquiry systems) to avoid unauthorized or fraudulent platforms.
In summary, while the EU regulatory framework does not legally prohibit Chinese citizens from opening forex trading accounts, the proactive restrictions imposed by brokers based on compliance costs and risks, coupled with the rigid compliance thresholds of the EU regulatory system, make it difficult for Chinese citizens to open forex accounts under EU regulations. This results in fewer regulated platforms available, and in most cases, they are directed to offshore accounts with relatively weaker protection. Therefore, for Chinese citizens with such account opening needs, it is recommended to prioritize large, leading brokers that hold both a primary EU license (such as the UK's FCA or Germany's BaFin) and a legitimate offshore license. These institutions typically possess more robust compliance systems and risk control capabilities. During the account opening process, it is crucial to strictly follow the broker's KYC verification procedures, preparing complete and authentic identity documents, proof of address, and proof of funds in advance. Ensure that the source of funds complies with relevant compliance requirements in both mainland China and the EU, and resolutely prevent any illegal deposits. Furthermore, it is essential to verify the authenticity and validity of the platform's qualifications through the official website of the regulatory agency before opening an account, clarifying its regulatory scope and investor protection measures to effectively avoid the financial security risks associated with unregulated or cloned platforms.

Canadian regulations do not prohibit Chinese citizens from participating in forex margin trading, but they generally adopt a de facto policy of refusing to open accounts for mainland Chinese clients who do not have proof of Canadian residency.

---

In Canada, forex margin trading is uniformly regulated and subject to prudential supervision by the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada (IIROC). Neither federal nor provincial regulations impose any prohibitive or quantitative restrictions on Chinese citizens. However, licensed brokers, due to cross-border compliance costs, anti-money laundering responsibilities, and uncertainties regarding parallel regulations within China, generally impose their own "local" screening conditions on client onboarding, making it difficult for Chinese passport holders residing in mainland China to open accounts in practice. This restriction does not stem from explicit government prohibitions, but rather from a business choice made by brokers under multiple constraints, including Know Your Customer (KYC), Customer Due Diligence (CDD), and the coverage of the Consumer Indemnity Fund (CIPF).
IIROC's Membership Rules require member firms to apply the same suitability assessment, fund segregation, and daily risk reporting obligations to "non-resident" clients as they do to Canadian residents, but it does not provide a uniform standard for the definition of "non-resident." Based on this, most brokers have set a substantive threshold in their internal compliance manuals requiring proof of Canadian address or residency for at least six months, and use the Address Verification System (AVS) and credit bureau data for automated screening. If a mainland Chinese ID card, household registration booklet, or utility bills for the past three months are not in the AVS database, the system determines it as "high-risk and unverifiable," and the account opening process is automatically terminated. During the manual review stage, if the client cannot provide Canadian bank statements, a Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) tax number, or an employer's letter, they are still classified as an "unacceptable client." Therefore, applicants residing in mainland China, even with valid passports, are often rejected by the system at the first step, rather than facing an explicit regulation targeting nationality.
Anti-money laundering measures further increase the cost of entry. Under the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act (PCMLTFA), a single deposit exceeding CAD 10,000 triggers a large transaction report, requiring brokers to retain proof of the ultimate controller of the funds. For funds originating from mainland China, institutions must obtain notarized bank statements, tax payment certificates, and foreign exchange registration receipts for overseas investment. However, the latter are not permitted for retail forex margin trading under China's current foreign exchange management framework, resulting in an incomplete "legality of funds" documentation chain. To avoid being subsequently listed as "failing to fulfill due diligence obligations" by the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre (FINTRAC), brokers tend to directly block mainland China IP addresses at the client's entry point and include a clear statement in outsourced call center scripts that "we do not accept clients with only proof of residence in mainland China."
The parallel constraints of Chinese domestic regulations also affect business decisions in Canada. The "Detailed Rules for the Implementation of the Measures for the Administration of Individual Foreign Exchange" lists "overseas margin trading" as a prohibited purpose for foreign exchange purchases, and the State Administration of Foreign Exchange maintains a high-pressure stance against split foreign exchange purchases, underground banks, and over-the-counter virtual currency exchanges. If IIROC member firms actively market to clients in mainland China, whether through simplified Chinese websites or domestic social media, they may be deemed to be "operating without a license in China," triggering cross-border notification mechanisms from Chinese public security, cyberspace administration, and foreign exchange management departments. To mitigate potential reputational risks, most members choose to add clauses to their user agreements prohibiting services to residents of restricted jurisdictions and utilize geographic IP blocking and area code filtering to technically disrupt transactions.
The varying coverage of the China Investor Compensation Fund (CIPF) further diminishes brokers' incentive to accept non-residents. The CIPF bylaws explicitly provide bankruptcy protection of up to CAD 1 million only for "Canadian resident" accounts, determined by a dual standard of "principal residence" and "tax residence." Even if a client manages to open an account by providing a false address, the CIPF can refuse compensation after verification should the platform go bankrupt. The client can only enter bankruptcy proceedings as an ordinary creditor, with a recovery period of three to five years. For brokers, accepting non-residents not only increases compliance costs but also potentially leads to additional litigation due to compensation disputes. Therefore, their business strategy tends towards "refusing to open an account" rather than "adding one later."
For Chinese citizens already holding Canadian permanent resident cards (PR), work visas (WP), or student visas (SP), the compliance path is relatively clear: with proof of local address, Social Insurance Number (SIN), and CRA tax number, they can submit a standard account opening application to an IIROC member. Funds are segregated within the Canadian banking system, transaction reports are connected to the IIROC back-end in real time, and they enjoy full CIPF protection. Investors residing in mainland China who cannot meet the above-mentioned proof of residence can only turn to offshore entities within the same group (such as IBKR UK or Australian entities). However, the applicable law, fund custody location, and compensation mechanism all change, requiring a separate assessment of regulatory reliability and cross-border rights protection costs.
On the outbound capital transfer side, compliance with Chinese foreign exchange management regulations is still required. Even when opening an account through a licensed Canadian institution, the annual $50,000 foreign exchange purchase quota for individuals in mainland China and the restriction that it "cannot be used for overseas margin trading" remain in effect. If funds are injected into a Canadian account through split foreign exchange purchases, underground banks, or over-the-counter cryptocurrency exchanges, domestic banks can enforce foreign exchange settlement during anti-money laundering screenings and report to the State Administration of Foreign Exchange (SAFE), with administrative penalties simultaneously included in the central bank's credit system. Conversely, if funds are already held in Hong Kong or other overseas banks and tax payment certificates can be provided, they can be legally transferred to a Canadian investment account, but a large-scale international balance of payments declaration must be proactively submitted to the SAFE to avoid triggering subsequent investigations due to omissions.
In summary, while Canadian regulations do not prohibit Chinese citizens from participating in foreign exchange margin trading, IIROC member institutions generally adopt a de facto refusal strategy to open accounts with mainland clients who "do not have Canadian residency certificates" due to the four constraints of territorial identity verification, anti-money laundering document chains, the scope of CIPF compensation, and uncertainties in parallel supervision in China. For Chinese citizens with Canadian long-term residency or tax residency status, they can enter the IIROC fully regulated system through the standard KYC process. Investors residing in mainland China but lacking proof of residency must switch to an offshore licensed entity within the same group, simultaneously bearing the dual compliance costs of Chinese foreign exchange controls and offshore legal remedies.

The United States has not issued any prohibitive regulations targeting Chinese citizens opening foreign exchange trading accounts, but de facto barriers exist.

---

In the context of two-way trading in the US foreign exchange margin market, there are no federal-level prohibitive regulations targeting Chinese citizens; however, foreign exchange brokers, regulated concurrently by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the National Futures Association (NFA), generally establish "de facto barriers" at the client access stage due to cross-border compliance costs, anti-money laundering (AML) responsibilities, and uncertainties surrounding parallel regulation within China.
This barrier does not stem from explicit restrictions imposed by the US government, but rather from a rational choice made by brokers under the combined obligations of Know Your Customer (KYC), Customer Due Diligence (CDD), and the SIPC (Supported Indemnity Fund). This makes it virtually impossible for Chinese citizens holding only mainland Chinese identity documents and addresses, without long-term overseas residency or tax status, to open accounts through compliant channels.
The CFTC's Retail Forex Trading Rules and the NFA Member Rules set uniform requirements for leverage limits, segregation of funds, financial disclosure, and daily risk reporting, but do not prohibit account opening for "non-US residents." The problem lies in the fact that Section 2300 of the NFA Manual requires member firms to conduct suitability assessments and verify the source of funds for "non-resident" clients to the same standards, and to assume additional obligations to report suspicious transactions. For Chinese clients residing in mainland China, brokers need to obtain notarized proof of address, bank statements, and legal opinions on the source of funds. However, since retail forex margin trading is not yet open in mainland China, these supporting documents do not exist within the Chinese administrative system, making it impossible to close the chain of "legality of the source of funds." To mitigate the risk of administrative penalties or membership revocation from the NFA, most institutions choose to add clauses to their user agreements stipulating that services are only provided to U.S. tax residents or those holding long-term visas, and employ IP geo-blocking and area code filtering to technically block access.
During the identity verification process, the NFA accepts a passport as the only valid travel document, but requires supplementary verifiable proof of overseas address (such as utility bills or bank statements) and a tax residency declaration (W-8BEN). If utility bills from mainland China for the past three months are not in the U.S. credit bureau's database, the system immediately marks the application as "unverifiable." During manual review, if the customer cannot provide U.S. bank statements, Social Security Number (SSN), or Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN), the application is still classified as "high-risk and unacceptable." Some institutions further utilize mobile phone number location, credit card BIN codes, and device fingerprints for auxiliary screening, directly rejecting account opening applications from mainland China IP addresses or +86 mobile phone numbers, creating a double blockade of "technology + rules."
The parallel constraints of domestic Chinese regulations also influence business decisions in the US. The "Detailed Rules for the Implementation of the Measures for the Administration of Individual Foreign Exchange" lists "overseas margin trading" as a prohibited purpose for foreign exchange purchases, and the State Administration of Foreign Exchange maintains a high-pressure stance against splitting foreign exchange purchases, underground banks, and over-the-counter virtual currency exchanges. If CFTC-registered brokers actively market to clients in mainland China, whether through simplified Chinese websites or domestic social media, they may be deemed to be "operating without a license in China," thus triggering cross-border notification mechanisms from Chinese public security, cyberspace administration, and foreign exchange management departments. To mitigate potential reputational risks, most members choose to add a clause to their user agreements prohibiting services to residents of restricted jurisdictions and use geographic IP blocking and telephone area code filtering to achieve technical disconnection.
The varying coverage of the Investor Protection Fund (SIPC) further weakens brokers' incentive to accept non-residents. The SIPC bylaws explicitly provide bankruptcy protection of up to $500,000 only for "US resident" accounts, using a dual standard of "principal domicile" and "tax residence." Even if clients manage to open an account by providing a false address, once the platform goes bankrupt, SIPC can refuse to pay out after verification, leaving clients with only the option of entering bankruptcy proceedings as ordinary creditors, a process that can take three to five years. For brokers, accepting non-residents not only increases compliance costs but also risks additional litigation due to compensation disputes, thus their business strategy tends towards "refusing to open an account" rather than "addressing it later."
For Chinese citizens holding US green cards (PR), work visas (H1B/L1), or student visas (F1), the compliance path is relatively clear: with proof of local address, Social Security Number (SSN), and Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN), they can submit a standard account opening application to an NFA member. Funds are segregated within the US banking system, transaction reports are updated in real-time to the CFTC backend, and they enjoy full SIPC protection. Investors residing in mainland China who cannot meet the aforementioned residency requirements can only turn to offshore entities within the same group (such as IBKR UK or Australian entities). However, the applicable law, fund custody, and compensation mechanisms all change, requiring a separate assessment of regulatory reliability and cross-border litigation costs.
Funds leaving the country must still comply with China's foreign exchange management regulations. Even when opening an account through a licensed U.S. institution, the annual $50,000 foreign exchange purchase quota for domestic individuals and the restriction that it "cannot be used for overseas margin trading" remain in effect. If funds are injected into a U.S. account through split foreign exchange purchases, underground banks, or over-the-counter cryptocurrency exchanges, domestic banks can force the settlement of foreign exchange during anti-money laundering screenings and report to the State Administration of Foreign Exchange (SAFE), with administrative penalties simultaneously included in the central bank's credit system. Conversely, if funds are already held in Hong Kong or other overseas banks and tax payment certificates can be provided, they can be legally transferred to a U.S. investment account, but a large-scale international balance of payments declaration must be proactively submitted to the SAFE to avoid triggering subsequent investigations due to omissions.
In summary, while U.S. regulations do not prohibit Chinese citizens from participating in foreign exchange margin trading, NFA member institutions, under the constraints of territorial identity verification, anti-money laundering documentation chains, SIPC compensation scope, and uncertainties regarding parallel supervision in China, generally adopt a de facto refusal strategy for mainland clients without U.S. residency certificates. For Chinese citizens with long-term U.S. residency or tax residency status, they can enter the CFTC's full regulatory process through the standard KYC procedure. Investors residing in mainland China but lacking proof of residency must switch to an offshore licensed entity within the same group, simultaneously incurring the dual compliance costs of China's foreign exchange controls and offshore legal remedies.

---

• 
• 

---

13711580480@139.com

+86 137 1158 0480

+86 137 1158 0480

+86 137 1158 0480

z.x.n@139.com

Mr. Z-X-N

China · Guangzhou

---