Foreign trades are not illegal abroad! But there is no longer a guarantee that you can withdraw.

Recently, there have been more occasions to hear about topics such as "online casino regulation" and "stricter regulation of remittance providers." Do you think it doesn’t concern you? For FX traders, ongoing environmental changes that cannot be ignored are advancing.

What’s important is not that you will be arrested like with online casinos or that foreign accounts suddenly become illegal. The issue is more subtle, and by the time you notice, you might face a situation where you cannot withdraw.

In this article, we will sort out what happens under the Payment Services Act, the Act on Punishment of Violations, and cross-border fund transfers, focusing on the risks of keeping funds in overseas accounts.

?Is the regulator's true aim not “withdrawal prohibition” but the disappearance of the way back?

The essence of the current change is not that “overseas trades are banned.” What is being clarified isthe mechanisms used for remittance and payment collection for overseas operators. The underlying background isthe strengthened operation of the Payment Services Act and the Act on Punishment of Violations (anti-money laundering measures) as of July 2025.

Rather than the law itself suddenly changing, it is becoming clear that the entities mediating overseas remittances domestically, and the cross-border transfers whose practices are hard to understand, are being treated astargets that cannot be left gray. Until now, many overseas operators achieved domestic bank transfers by routing through domestic remittance providers and payment processors.

However, due to this amendment,the remittance business may no longer be usable, resulting in the inability to withdraw from overseas accounts to Japanese banks.Withdrawals will not be illegal; rather, the remittance providers that were usable may suddenly disappear. That is the key point.

?Funds deposited via bank transfer cannot be withdrawn!

Particularly noteworthy arefunds deposited by bank transfer (domestic payment processing). Many overseas operators require “withdrawal via the same method as the deposit” from the perspective of anti-money laundering. In other words, money deposited by bank transfer is assumed to be returned via the same bank route. If that route itself becomes unusable,the operator will also be unable to withdraw even if they want to.

Some discuss extracting only the profit via cryptocurrency withdrawals as a solution, but in reality, the steps and costs increase. For example, the flow often becomes: withdraw to a wallet via stablecoins like USDT, transfer to a domestic crypto exchange, convert to yen, and finally withdraw to a bank…In principle, it can be treated as close to dollar-denominated, but in reality there are factors that erode value such as spreads, remittance fees, and settlement times.

Also, Japan’s crypto exchanges enforce strict customer verification and deposit/withdrawal checks under the AML law. When deposits and withdrawals become large or frequent,additional verifications and purpose checks may be required.There are cases where cryptocurrency is the only option.

?The government's real stance is not “prohibition” but “natural reduction”

Online casinos are clearly a NO, but offshore trading occupies a legal gray area. However, from the perspective of financial infrastructure, they are treated asthe same risk category.

• Unregistered overseas operators
• High-gambling-type trades (high leverage, binary options, etc.)
• Cannot be rescued domestically in case of trouble

What’s important here is that,at present, there is not a large amount of actual harm circulating online. It is natural that many people feel “still okay” or “no substantive regulation yet.” In practice, however, regulation progresses not by addressing problems once they surface, but by stopping operators that are likely to cause problems one by one.

The government and banks’ stance is not to say outright “Do not use.” In other words,“Use is a personal freedom, but the remittance infrastructure for it may become unusable overnight.”Under this premise, overseas accountswill become inconvenient one day without warning. You need to factor that possibility in.

?What matters is how to protect the funds you currently have

Whether to engage in overseas trading is ultimately a personal decision. However, keeping funds in overseas accounts for a long period and leaving withdrawal routes unexplained inevitablyincreases risk. The important thing is not whether it is illegal.Whether you can withdraw while you still can—this is the key. Rather than panicking after a prohibition,organize your funds in overseas accounts now. It is the stage to calmly consider that decision.

And as another realistic option,it is far safer in terms of fund management and withdrawals to use domestic FX accounts under the Financial Services Agency's supervision rather than continuing to use overseas accounts with increasing risk. Regardless of trading conditions, the reassurance that “you can always move money back to a Japanese bank” will become increasingly important.

After all, if you worry about non-trading issues, you will not be able to trade successfully. If you are anxious about whether you can actually withdraw after a win, you cannot make calm judgments. That would be a complete misstep in trading.It would be a fundamental failure of trading.

That’s why the first thing to organize should be your environment rather than your method.Create an environment where you can move funds with confidence and focus on trading itself,which is the first step toward lasting success.