CURRENT / Regulatory register
In Force
What currently governs US onshore digital-asset derivatives.
Last verified:
A dated register of relief, orders, litigation and policy advocacy affecting derivatives and event contracts. Expired positions stay visible alongside current ones.
Two short windows. Different asset classes.
Letter 26-19’s digital-commodity conversion relief expired on 30 June. Letter 26-29 covers broad-based security indices and expires on Tuesday, 20 October 2026. The October letter does not extend the June letter’s digital-commodity relief.
These are observations about two published staff positions. They do not establish that no other authority applies or determine what any venue may lawfully do.
01 / Relief, orders and policy statements
| Date | Action | Issuer | Scope | Status | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13 May 2026 | Letter 26-14 — no-action on swap-reporting rules: 17 CFR 38.8(b), 38.10, part of 38.951, 39.20(b)(2), Parts 43 and 45. | CFTC, DMO + DCR | Fully collateralized event contracts listed on a DCM. Nineteen requesters; 25 beneficiary entities in the updated appendix. | IN FORCEExpires upon the compliance date of final Commission action on this matter. | Letter 26-14 |
| 29 May 2026 | Order for Approval — KalshiEX BTCPERP under CEA §5c(c)(4) and Regulation 40.3. | CFTC (Commission) | A perpetual contract on spot bitcoin, listed as a future. Approval, not self-certification. | IN FORCEUnder challenge; see litigation below. | Approval order · Release 9240-26 |
| 29 May 2026 | Policy Statement Concerning the Listing of Perpetual Contracts. | CFTC (Commission) | Invites Commission review and approval under Regulation 40.3 for perpetual contracts on assets not contemplated in the order. | IN FORCE | Policy statement (published 3 June) |
| 12 June 2026 | Letter 26-19 — no-action on the ten-business-day waits in Regulations 40.6(a)(3) and 40.6(b)(1). | CFTC, DMO | Removing expiration dates from existing digital commodity perpetual-style futures. Eight conditions. | EXPIRED 30 JUNE 2026 | Letter 26-19 · Release 9252-26 |
| 3 October 2026 | Letter 26-29 — comparable relief for a different asset class. | CFTC, DMO | Removing expiration dates from existing broad-based security index perpetual-style futures. Eight conditions. | EXPIRES 20 OCTOBER 2026 | Letter 26-29 |
Status vocabulary: IN FORCE · EXPIRES <date> · EXPIRED <date> · PENDING · IN LITIGATION. A pending comment is advocacy, not governing relief.
Release 9242-26 is referenced by the CFTC’s 9252-26 announcement. It is held out of this edition pending review of the underlying action.
02 / CME v CFTC litigation
Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc. v. Michael S. Selig and Commodity Futures Trading Commission, No. 1:26-cv-02157 — US District Court for the District of Columbia, Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly.
IN LITIGATION
The motion to dismiss is fully briefed. No ruling on that motion appears in the docket reviewed on 17 October 2026; the archive’s last update is 16 October. A decision may issue at any time. The case also has later merits-briefing deadlines: “fully briefed” here refers only to the dismissal motion.
| Date | Step | Source |
|---|---|---|
| 18 June 2026 | CME files suit, challenging the 29 May BTCPERP approval order and related policy statement. | Court docket |
| 27 August 2026 | Court denies the request to excuse compliance with Local Civil Rule 7(n). | Court docket |
| 2 September 2026 | CFTC moves to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. | Court docket |
| 8 September 2026 | Court sets a combined briefing schedule. | Court docket |
| 2 October 2026 | CME files its opposition. | Court docket |
| 16 October 2026 | CFTC files its reply in support of dismissal. | Court docket |
| As reviewed 17 October 2026 | No ruling on the dismissal motion recorded in the reviewed docket. | Court docket |
CME’s argument: BTCPERP is a swap rather than a future, given its lack of expiry and delivery obligation and its funding payments. CME challenges the Commission’s departure from earlier treatment of crypto perpetuals.
The CFTC’s argument: CME lacks standing and redressability, may list similar contracts itself, and falls outside the CEA’s zone of interests. The CFTC also disputes claimed competitive harm.
The parties’ positions are arguments, not findings. The challenge concerns the perpetual-contract approval and policy statement; it does not make every event-contract reporting position in this register contingent on the same issue. Read the court record.
04 / Event-contract DCMs, as named by the CFTC
Taken from the appendix to CFTC Letter 26-14, issued 13 May 2026. The appendix reviewed is dated 30 September 2026 and names 25 beneficiary entities. Seventeen DCM-side entities are listed below; clearing-only entities are omitted. This is a list of beneficiaries, not a claim about current launches, trading volumes or market share.
| Legal entity | Identification shown | Source |
|---|---|---|
| KalshiEX LLC | Kalshi | Letter 26-14 appendix |
| QCX LLC | Polymarket US | Letter 26-14 appendix |
| North American Derivatives Exchange, Inc. | Crypto.com Derivatives North America | Letter 26-14 appendix |
| ForecastEx LLC | Interactive Brokers | Letter 26-14 appendix |
| Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc. | — | Letter 26-14 appendix |
| Rothera Exchange and Clearing, LLC | Formerly LedgerX | Letter 26-14 appendix |
| FMX Futures Exchange, L.P. | Formerly Cantor Futures Exchange | Letter 26-14 appendix |
| Bitnomial Exchange, LLC | — | Letter 26-14 appendix |
| Gemini Titan, LLC | — | Letter 26-14 appendix |
| Aristotle Exchange DCM, Inc. | — | Letter 26-14 appendix |
| Electron Exchange DCM, LLC | — | Letter 26-14 appendix |
| Railbird Exchange, Inc. | — | Letter 26-14 appendix |
| ProphetX LLC | — | Letter 26-14 appendix |
| Ludlow Exchange, LLC | — | Letter 26-14 appendix |
| Juice Exchange, LLC | — | Letter 26-14 appendix |
| Water Street Labs, LLC | — | Letter 26-14 appendix |
| Quanta Exchange, Inc. | — | Letter 26-14 appendix |
What this register is
A dated record of published regulatory actions affecting US onshore digital-asset derivatives and event contracts. Every entry links to the primary document or court record. Status reflects the position as published, on the verification date shown above.
What it is not
It is not legal advice, and it is not a view on what any venue or participant may lawfully do. Staff no-action positions represent the issuing Division’s position and are not binding on the Commission. Relief that has expired is shown as expired; whether other authority applies in its place is a question for counsel. Where something is reported but not independently verified, it is marked as such or left out.
Corrections are welcome and will be dated. dennis@currentcrypto.io
Scheduled expiry labels advance from the date stated in the cited letter. That date-based change does not mean the source was reverified or that a replacement action has been checked. This register is reviewed monthly at minimum and within 48 hours of a tracked regulatory or litigation change.
03 / Comment letters and policy advocacy
Submitted by Brad Bourque, Senior Counsel.
Addressed to Christopher Kirkpatrick, Secretary, CFTC; and Vanessa A. Countryman, Secretary, SEC.
Comment in the joint SEC/CFTC request-for-comment docket on further definition of “Swap” and “Security-Based Swap” and alternative compliance: RIN 3038-AF71; File No. S7-2026-21.
HPC proposes interpretive guidance, policy statements or staff-level action without waiting for formal rulemaking.
Reported HPC–TradeXYZ and HPC–Phantom letters are held out of v1. A shorter table is preferable to treating an unread letter as verified.