How to Store Funds Generated through FX Trading
"Earned income is what your software is doing, so it is taxable.  So you can't really make it tax exempt. You can form a business and claim the revenues from that business as income and deduct expenses it costs you to earn that revenue.  If you buy a server to run your software, then that is an acceptable expense to deduct from your revenues.  Others can be more questionable and the best thing to do is to consult a CPA.   If you are still in the testing stage and the revenues will be small then it should not matter.  Worry about the important things, not if you paid the IRS a few hundred to much. Are you in a state/country that allows online gambling?  In most states here in the US you are operating on shaky legal ground.  Before ""Black Friday"" I used to earn a nice part-time income playing online poker."
The ruble was, is and will be very unstable because of unstable political situation in Russia and the economy strongly dependent of the export of raw resources. What you can do? I assume, you want to minimize risk. The best way to achieve that is to make your savings in some stable currency. Euro and Swiss Franc are currently very stable currencies, so storing your surpluses in them is a very good option if you want to keep your money safe. To prevent political risk, you should keep your money in countries with stable political regime, which are unlikely to 'nationalize' the savings of the citizens in predictable future. As for your existing savings in rubles, it's a hard deal. I assume, as the web developer, you have a plenty of money, which have lost a lot of value. If you convert them to euro or francs, you will preserver the current value (after the loss). You'll safe them agaist ruble falling down, but in case the ruble will return to previous value, you'll loose.  Keeping savings in instable currencies is, however, speculation, like investing in gold etc. So if you can mentally accept the loss and want to sleep good, convert them. You have also option to invest in properties, for example buy an extra appartment. It's a good way to deal with financial surplus in Europe in US, however you should be aware, in Russland it's connected with the political risk. The real estates can be confiscated in any moment by the state and you can't run away with it (the savings can also be confiscated, but there's a fair chance you'll manage to rescue them if you act quickly). How should we disregard leverage when it's the leverage that creates the 'wipe-out' potential? If you simply convert 100K EUR to USDollars, you dollars might then fluctuate a few thousand, maybe even 10K over a year, but the guy that only put up 1000 EUR to do this has a disproportionally higher risk. If you are a Russian citizen a much easier and common solution would be a USD or EUR withdrawal from your Webmoney account to your Cyprus bank account. You will need to create a Webmoney account (www.webmoney.ru), get a primary certificate in your local Webmoney office in Russia (The list is available at the website), create WMZ (for USD) and WME (for EURO) accounts in Webmoney (done online). Then you can easily top up your Webmoney WMR (Rubles) account (created automatically) with Rubles, convert the sum into USD (According to the Webmoney rate, which is only slightly different from the official central bank rate) and then withdraw the money from your USD Webmoney account to your Cyprus bank account. The money will be transfered to your Cyprus bank account from UK Webmoney dealer. The transaction description would say that this sum is transfered according to the contract of sale of securities. This method prevents any Russian regulatory authorities from seeing your transactions. And the best thig in Webmoney is that they have stable exchange rates and they use classic currencies such as USD, RUR, EUR, etc. Webmoney also has WMG accounts (Gold) and WMX accounts (Bitcoin). Non-Russian residents can also open a Webmoney accounts. You can get one even in Cyprus, by the way:) You can calculate your exposure intuitively, by calculating your 'fx sensitivity'. Take your total USD assets, let's assume $50k. Convert to EUR at the current rate, let's assume 1 EUR : 1.1 USD, resulting in 45.5k EUR . If the USD strengthens by 1%, this moves to a rate of ~1.09, resulting in 46k EUR value for the same 50k of USD investments. From this you can see that for every 1% the USD strengthens, you gain 500 EUR. For every 1% the USD weakens, you lose 500 EUR. The simplest way to reduce your exchange rate risk exposure, is to simply eliminate your foreign currency investments. ie: if you do not want to be exposed to fluctuations in the USD, invest in EUR only. This will align your assets with the currency of your future expenses [assuming you intend to continue living in Europe].This is not possible of course, if you would like to maintain investments in US assets.  One relatively simple method available to invest in the US, without gaining an exposure to the USD, is to invest in USD assets only with money borrowed in USD. ie: if you borrow $50k USD, and invest $50k in the US stock market, then your new investments will be in the same currency as your debt. Therefore if the USD strengthens, your assets increase in relative EUR value, and your debt becomes more expensive. These two impacts wash out, leaving you with no net exposure to the value of the USD. There is a risk to this option - you are investing with a higher 'financial leverage' ratio. Using borrowed money to invest increases your risk; if your investments fall in value, you still need to make the periodic interest payments. Many people view this increased risk as a reason to never invest with borrowed money. You are compensated for that risk, by increased returns [because you have the ability to earn investment income without contributing any additional money of your own]. Whether the risk is worth it to you will depend on many factors - you should search this site and others on the topic to learn more about what those risks mean. "I've considered simply moving my funds to an Australian bank to ""lock-in"" the current rate, but I worry that this will put me at risk of a substantial loss (due to exchange rates, transfer fees, etc) when I move my funds back into the US in 6 months.  Why move funds back?  If you want to lock in current exchange rates, figure out how much money you are likely to spend in Australia for the next six months.  Move just enough funds to cover that to an Australian bank.  Leave the remainder in the United States (US), as your future expenses will be in US dollars.   So long as you don't find some major, unanticipated purchase, this covers you.  You have enough money for the next six months with no exchange rate worries.   At the end of the six months, if you fall slightly short, cover with your credit card as you are doing now.  You'll take a loss, but on a small amount of money.  If you have a slight excess and you were right about the exchange rate, you'll make a little profit at the end.  If you were wrong, you'll take a small loss.   The key here is that you should be able to budget for your six months.  You can lock in current exchange rates just for that amount of money.   Moving all your funds to Australia is a gamble.  You can certainly do that if you want, but rather than gambling, it may be better to take the sure thing.  You know you need six months expenses, so just move that.  You will definitely be spending six months money in Australia, so you are immune to exchange rate fluctuations for that period.  The remainder of your money can stay in the US, as that's where you plan to spend it.   However, recent political events back in the States have me (and, I'm sure, every currency speculator and foreign investor) worried that this advantage will not last for much longer.  If currency speculators expect exchange rates to fall, then they'd have already bid down the rates.  I.e. they'd keep speculating until the rates did fall.  So the speculators expect the current rates are correct, otherwise they'd move them.   Donald Trump's state goal is to increase exports relative to imports.  If he's successful, this could cause the US dollar to fall to make exports cheaper and imports more expensive.  However, if his policies fail, then the opposite is likely to happen.  Most of his announced trade policies are more likely to increase the value of the dollar than to decrease it.  In particular, that is the likely result of increased tariffs.   If you are worried about Trump failing, then you should worry about a strong dollar.  That's more in line with actual speculation since the election.   I don't know that I'd make a strong bet in either direction.  Hedging makes more sense to me, as it simply locks in the current situation, which you apparently find favorable.  Not hedging at all might produce some profit if the dollar goes up.  Gambling all your funds might produce some profit if the dollar goes down.  The middle path of hedging just what you're spending is the safest if least likely to produce profit.   My recommendation is to hedge the six months expenses and enjoy your time abroad.  Why worry about political events that you can't control?  Enjoy your working (studying) vacation." If the account is not dollar-denominated, I would say it does not make sense at all to have dollar-denominated statements. Such a statement would not even be accurate for any reasonable amount of time (since FX rates constantly fluctuate). This would be a nightmare for accounting purposes. If you really need to know the statements in USD, I think the best practice would be to perform the conversion yourself using Excel or some similar software. "You might find some of the answers here helpful; the question is different, but has some similar concerns, such as a changing economic environment. What approach should I take to best protect my wealth against currency   devaluation & poor growth prospects. I want to avoid selling off any   more of my local index funds in a panic as I want to hold long term.   Does my portfolio balance make sense? Good question; I can't even get US banks to answer questions like this, such as ""What happens if they try to nationalize all bank accounts like in the Soviet Union?""  Response: it'll never happen. The question was what if! I think that your portfolio carries a lot of risk, but also offsets what you're worried about.  Outside of government confiscation of foreign accounts (if your foreign investments are held through a local brokerage), you should be good.  What to do about government confiscation?  Even the US government (in 1933) confiscated physical gold (and they made it illegal to own) - so even physical resources can be confiscated during hard times. Quite a large portion of my foreign investments have been bought at an   expensive time when our currency is already around historic lows,   which does concern me in the event that it strengthens in future. What   strategy should I take in the future if/when my local currency starts   the strengthen...do I hold my foreign investments through it and just   trust in cost averaging long term, or try sell them off to avoid the   devaluation? Are these foreign investments a hedge?  If so, then you shouldn't worry if your currency does strengthen; they serve the purpose of hedging the local environment.  If these investments are not a hedge, then timing will matter and you'll want to sell and buy your currency before it does strengthen.  The risk on this latter point is that your timing will be wrong." It can be zero or negative given the current market conditions. Any money parked with treasury bonds is 100% risk free. So if I have a large amount of USD, and need a safe place to keep, then in today's environment even the banks (large as well) are at risk. So if I park my money with some large bank and that bank goes bankrupt, my money is gone for good. After a long drawn bankruptcy procedure, I may get back all of it or some of it. Even if the bank does not go bankrupt, it may face liquidity crises and I may not be able to withdraw when I want.  Hence it's safer to keep it in Treasury bonds even though I may not gain any interest, or even lose a small amount of money. At least it will be very safe.   Today there are very few options for large investors (typically governments and institutional investors.) The Euro is facing uncertainty. The Yuan is still regulated. There is not enough gold to buy (or to store it.) Hence this leads towards the USD.  The very fact that USD is safe in today's environment is reflected in the Treasury rates. I'm sorry I guess what i meant to say was, what's the downside here? Why isn't everyone doing this, what am i missing? Someone clarified that i'm completely exposed to FX risk if I bring it back.   What if I am IN australia, how would I do this, short USD's? I prefer to use a Foreign Exchange transfer service.  You will get a good exchange rate (better than from Paypal or from your bank) and it is possible to set it up with no transfer fees on both ends.  You can use an ACH transfer from your US bank account to the FX's bank account and then a SEPA transfer in Europe to get the funds into your bank account.  Transfers can also go in the opposite direction (Europe to USA). I've used XE's service (www.xe.com) and US Forex's service (www.usforex.com).  Transferwise (www.transferwise.com) is another popular service. US Forex's service calls you to confirm each transfer.  They also charge a $5 fee on transfers under $1000. XE's service is more convenient: they do not charge fees for small transfers and do not call you to confirm the tramsfer.  However, they will not let you set up a free ACH transfer from US bank accounts if you set up your XE account outside the US. In both cases, the transfer takes a few business days to complete. EDIT: In my recent (Summer 2015) experience, US Forex has offered slightly better rates than XE.  I've also checked out Transferwise, and for transfers from the US it seems to be a bit of a gimmick with a fee added late in the process.  For reference, I just got quotes from the three sites for converting 5000 USD to EUR: "In essence the problem that the OP identified is not that the FX market itself has poor liquidity but that retail FX brokerage sometimes have poor counterparty risk management. The problem is the actual business model that many FX brokerages have. Most FX brokerages are themselves customers of much larger money center banks that are very well capitalized and provide ample liquidity. By liquidity I mean  the ability to put on a position of relatively decent size (long EURUSD say) at any particular time with a small price impact relative to where it is trading. For spot FX, intraday bid/ask spreads are extremely small, on the order of fractions of pips for majors (EUR/USD/GBP/JPY/CHF). Even in extremely volatile situations it rarely becomes much larger than a few pips for positions of 1 to 10 Million USD equivalent notional value in the institutional market. Given that retail traders rarely trade that large a position, the FX spot market is essentially very liquid in that respect. The problem is that there are retail brokerages whose business model is to encourage excessive trading in the hopes of capturing that spread, but not guaranteeing that it has enough capital to always meet all client obligations. What does get retail traders in trouble is that most are unaware that they are not actually trading on an exchange like with stocks. Every bid and ask they see on the screen the moment they execute a trade is done against that FX brokerage, and not some other trader in a transparent central limit order book. This has some deep implications. One is the nifty attribute that you rarely pay ""commission"" to do FX trades unlike in stock trading. Why? Because they build that cost into the quotes they give you. In sleepy markets, buyers and sellers cancel out, they just ""capture"" that spread which is the desired outcome when that business model functions well.  There are two situations where the brokerage's might lose money and capital becomes very important. In extremely volatile markets, every one of their clients may want to sell for some reason, this forces the FX brokers to accumulate a large position in the opposite side that they have to offload. They will trade in the institutional market with other brokerages to net out their positions so that they are as close to flat as possible. In the process, since bid/ask spreads in the institutional market is tighter than within their own brokerage by design, they should still make money while not taking much risk. However, if they are not fast enough, or if they do not have enough capital, the brokerage's position might move against them too quickly which may cause them lose all their capital and go belly up. The brokerage is net flat, but there are huge offsetting positions amongst its clients. In the example of the Swiss Franc revaluation in early 2015, a sudden pop of 10-20% would have effectively meant that money in client accounts that were on the wrong side of the trade could not cover those on the other side. When this happens, it is theoretically the brokerage's job to close out these positions before it wipes out the value of the client accounts, however it would have been impossible to do so since there were no prices in between the instantaneous pop in which the brokerage could have terminated their client's losing positions, and offload the risk in the institutional market. Since it's extremely hard to ask for more money than exist in the client accounts, those with strong capital positions simply ate the loss (such as Oanda), those that fared worse went belly up. The irony here is that the more leverage the brokerage gave to their clients, the less money would have been available to cover losses in such an event. Using an example to illustrate: say client A is long 1 contract at $100 and client B is short 1 contract at $100. The brokerage is thus net flat. If the brokerage had given 10:1 leverage, then there would be $10 in each client's account. Now instantaneously market moves down $10. Client A loses $10 and client B is up $10. Brokerage simply closes client A's position, gives $10 to client B. The brokerage is still long against client B however, so now it has to go into the institutional market to be short 1 contract at $90. The brokerage again is net flat, and no money actually goes in or out of the firm. Had the brokerage given 50:1 leverage however, client A only has $2 in the account. This would cause the brokerage close client A's position. The brokerage is still long against client B, but has only $2 and would have to ""eat the loss"" for $8 to honor client B's position, and if it could not do that, then it technically became insolvent since it owes more money to its clients than it has in assets. This is exactly the reason there have been regulations in the US to limit the amount of leverage FX brokerages are allowed to offer to clients, to assure the brokerage has enough capital to pay what is owed to clients." I've thought of the following ways to hedge against a collapsing dollar: Forex trading contracts are generally fairly short dated as you mention.  Months to weeks.  Professional forex traders often extend the length of their bet by rolling monthly or quarterly contracts.  Closing a contract out a few days before it would expire and reopening a new contract for the next quarter/month.  This process can be rather expensive and time consuming for a retail investor however. A more practical (but also not great) method would be to look into currency ETFs.  The ETFs generally do the above process for you and are significantly more convenient.  However, depending on the broker these may not be available and when available can be illiquid and/or expensive even in major currency pairs.  It's worth a bunch of research before you buy. Note, in both cases you are in a practical sense doubling your NOK exposure as your home currency is NOK as well.  This may be riskier than many people would care to be with their retirement money.  An adverse move would, at the same time you would lose money, make it much to buy foreign goods, which frankly is most goods in a small open country like Norway. The most simple solution would be to overweight local NOK stocks or if you believe stocks are overvalued as you mention NOK denominated bonds.  With this you keep your NOK exposure (a currency you believe will appreciate) without doubling it as well as add expected returns above inflation from the stock growth/dividends or bond real interest rates. "I've done exactly what you say at one of my brokers.  With the restriction that I have to deposit the money in the ""right"" way, and I don't do it too often.  The broker is meant to be a trading firm and not a currency exchange house after all.  I usually do the exchange the opposite of you, so I do USD -> GBP, but that shouldn't make any difference. I put ""right"" in quotes not to indicate there is anything illegal going on, but to indicate the broker does put restrictions on transferring out for some forms of deposits.    So the key is to not ACH the money in, nor send a check, nor bill pay it, but rather to wire it in.  A wire deposit with them has no holds and no time limits on withdrawal locations.  My US bank originates a wire, I trade at spot in the opposite direction of you (USD -> GBP), wait 2 days for the trade to settle, then wire the money out to my UK bank.  Commissions and fees for this process are low.  All told, I pay about $20 USD per xfer and get spot rates, though it does take approx 3 trading days for the whole process (assuming you don't try to wait for a target rate but rather take market rate.)" e.g. a European company has to pay 1 million USD exactly one year from now While that is theoretically possible, that is not a very common case. Mostly likely if they had to make a 1 million USD payment a year from now and they had the cash on hand they would be able to just make the payment today.  A more common scenario for currency forwards is for investment hedging.  Say that European company wants to buy into a mutual fund of some sort, say FUSEX. That is a USD based mutual fund. You can't buy into it directly with Euros. So if the company wants to buy into the fund they would need to convert their Euros to to USD. But now they have an extra risk parameter. They are not just exposed to the fluctuations of the fund, they are also exposed to the fluctuations of the currency market. Perhaps that fund will make a killing, but the exchange rate will tank and they will lose all their gains. By creating a forward to hedge their currency exposure risk they do not face this risk (flip side: if the exchange rate rises in a favorable rate they also don't get that benefit, unless they use an FX Option, but that is generally more expensive and complicated).