Key Insights
- CFTC News centers on equity perpetual futures gaining access to qualifying U.S. exchanges.
- Perpetual Futures on individual equities fall under the security futures framework.
- CME opposed the CFTC’s effort to dismiss its lawsuit over Kalshi’s Bitcoin contract.
CFTC News today focused on equity perpetual futures entering U.S. markets on Tuesday, November 3. CFTC Chairman Michael S. Selig said contracts tied to individual equity securities can begin trading for the first time.
In this CFTC news, the Commission deemed the contracts approved as security futures products under the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000. The rule applies to designated contract markets.
They must also register with the Securities and Exchange Commission as national securities exchanges for security futures products.
CFTC News Details Qualification Requirements
To qualify, the CFTC news details that venues must hold CFTC registration as designated contract markets and SEC notice registration as national securities exchanges for security futures products.
The contracts remain subject to the Commodity Exchange Act, federal securities laws, and both agencies’ regulatory frameworks. This registration structure defines where the new Perpetual Futures can trade.
Selig described the decision as extending perpetual futures beyond digital commodities and into traditional securities. He identified risk management and price discovery as functions associated with the contracts.
He also said U.S. participants could access them within the CFTC’s regulatory framework. That framework, he said, would provide protections for traders using regulated venues instead of offshore platforms. His statement described perpetual futures as widely sought tools.
CFTC News: Perpetual Futures Build on CFTC-SEC Coordination
The regulatory framework draws on the CFMA and a CFTC-SEC memorandum of understanding. The CFMA established joint oversight of security futures products. The memorandum covers coordination and information sharing between the agencies.
Selig said equity perpetual futures build on both measures. He also linked the two agencies’ cooperation to the path for these products to reach U.S. markets.
Selig also addressed earlier regulatory uncertainty surrounding products overseen by both agencies. He referenced SEC Chairman Paul S. Atkins’ description of security futures as left in a regulatory gap.
Selig attributed that gap to a lack of harmonization between the CFTC and SEC. He said the agencies had turned toward regulatory clarity and a clearer path to market. His statement also pointed to their commitment to reducing jurisdictional disputes.
Crypto Rulemaking and CME’s Perpetual Futures Case
In previous CFTC news, Selig discussed whether the commission could advance crypto rules without new legislation. In an August 20 interview ahead of the Innovation Advisory Committee’s inaugural meeting, he said the agency could pursue rules if Congress failed to pass the CLARITY Act.
The meeting took place in Washington that Thursday. Its agenda included crypto regulation and opportunities to modernize rules using existing statutory authority.
The chronology matters: those August remarks preceded the Senate’s September vote on the bill. On August 19, Selig said the CFTC would use available tools while Congress advanced the legislation.
The Senate failed to advance the CLARITY Act on September 15. Selig had framed agency rulemaking as a fallback if lawmakers did not complete the bill. The legislative debate involved exchange registration, token treatment, and developer obligations.
Meanwhile, in other CFTC news, CME opposed the CFTC’s attempt to dismiss a separate lawsuit over U.S. crypto perpetual futures. The exchange filed its response on October 2 in federal court in Washington.
The dispute concerned the Commission’s May approval of Kalshi’s Bitcoin perpetual futures contract. CME’s filing concerned crypto contracts.
