Online Gold Trading
This issue is primarily problematic from the broker’s perspective, not the trader’s. In principle, a transaction is not prohibited merely because it is modern, digital, or non‑physical. What matters is whether the arrangement contains deception, unjust enrichment, or prohibited elements such as riba. If a transaction is free from these defects, and if industry norms eliminate the original reasons for earlier prohibitions, such as preventing fraud, then the transaction can be permissible. Application to the hybrid model • If the broker openly acts as the counterparty, and this is fully disclosed, with fair pricing and honest execution, then the arrangement is simply a bilateral trade between consenting parties. That, in itself, does not make it impermissible. • The real problem arises when the broker hides its role as counterparty, manipulates prices, front‑runs, or exploits client information to gain an unfair advantage. These practices introduce deception and unjust enrichment, making the arrangement impermissible. In such cases, the prohibition applies to the broker—unless the trader knowingly participates in the deceptive setup. • Gharar becomes a concern when essential terms, the subject matter, or the nature of execution are unclear or misrepresented. If the broker’s model creates genuine uncertainty about pricing, execution, or ownership, that is problematic. If the model is transparent and the trader clearly understands the nature of the contract, the level of gharar is significantly reduced.