UP Fintech Holding(US:TIGR) 券商中国·2025-06-04 11:09Core Viewpoint - The article discusses allegations against Tiger Brokers regarding the use of forged documents to illegally acquire new clients from mainland China, amidst a backdrop of regulatory scrutiny on cross-border brokerage services [1][3]. Group 1: Allegations and Responses - Media reports claim that Tiger Brokers is engaging in fraudulent practices to onboard new clients from mainland China [1]. - Tiger International has denied these allegations, asserting that it has always adhered to legal and regulatory standards since its inception [2][3]. - The company has stated that it has ceased offering new account services to clients in mainland China and is only providing support to existing compliant clients [3]. Group 2: Regulatory Context - In January 2023, the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) issued new regulations to enhance oversight of illegal cross-border brokerage activities, leading to stricter requirements for proof of existing stock holdings [3]. - Various brokerage firms have implemented different levels of proof requirements, with some clients reportedly submitting falsified documents to meet these criteria [3][5]. Group 3: Issues with Proof of Holdings - The article highlights the challenges in verifying the authenticity of proof of holdings, as many documents are submitted as screenshots, making them difficult to authenticate [5][6]. - The main cross-border brokers, including Tiger Brokers and Futu, have the strictest requirements for proof of holdings, with deadlines set for compliance [5][6]. Group 4: Market Dynamics and Fraudulent Practices - The article notes that the recent profitability of the Hong Kong stock market has renewed interest in cross-border trading, leading to a rise in fraudulent activities related to account openings [7]. - There are reports of individuals profiting from assisting clients in falsifying documents for account openings, as well as selling forged proof of holdings [7]. - The article mentions that while there has been a decrease in blatant promotion of fraudulent practices online, some investors still share experiences of being denied account openings, indicating some level of enforcement [7].