On Friday, July 10, 2026, Law360 reported that cryptocurrency industry groups and firms are pressing the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission to adjust its regulatory approach so blockchain-based financial products aren’t forced into traditional registration categories that don’t fit their structure. At the same time, some traditional finance players warned the agency against moving too quickly toward deregulation for fintech businesses.
The comments came in response to the CFTC’s June request for public feedback aimed at identifying ways to “facilitate innovation and competition for fintech firms.” That request followed President Donald Trump’s May executive order directing financial regulators to review existing rules with an eye toward easing fintech innovation.
Crypto-aligned commenters, including the Blockchain Association, Coinbase, the Solana Policy Institute, and wallet provider Phantom, broadly argued that the CFTC should judge blockchain-based businesses by whether they achieve the same regulatory outcomes as traditional market participants, rather than requiring them to mirror the exact infrastructure of legacy firms.
The Blockchain Association said that when a regulated entity uses blockchain technology to meet the same statutory objectives as conventional systems, the commission should evaluate that infrastructure based on results rather than resemblance to older models.
Several fintech commenters specifically asked the CFTC to build on its March no-action letter to Phantom, which shields the wallet software provider from introducing broker registration requirements on the grounds that its product merely enables users to control their own crypto transactions.
Phantom, in a joint filing with the Hyperliquid Policy Center, urged the commission to codify that relief through formal rulemaking and extend similar flexibility to other companies in comparable positions. The Solana Policy Institute made a related request, arguing that software enabling users to prepare and submit their own transactions should not be classified as an intermediary requiring registration.
Coinbase’s comment focused on what it called “integrated models,” in which a single company combines functions such as trade surveillance, risk management, audit trails, and settlement. The exchange asked the CFTC to clarify that such combined arrangements are not disfavored simply because those functions have traditionally been handled by separate entities.
Other requests from crypto-focused commenters included adjusting CFTC rules to reflect the continuous, 24-hour nature of crypto trading and formally recognizing blockchain-based records as valid for satisfying reporting and audit-trail obligations.
However, not all industry input favored a lighter touch. The Chicago Mercantile Exchange and CCP Global, a group representing central counterparties, pushed back against giving fintech firms an easier regulatory path when performing functions equivalent to those of traditional registered entities. CCP Global stated that fintech companies should not receive exemptions from rules that apply to traditional firms performing the same economic role.
CME’s comment specifically challenged the premise that current regulations are unduly restrictive, saying that firms have long been able to innovate under existing rules while maintaining risk management standards. The exchange expressed concern that regulatory scrutiny has weakened in the name of innovation, pointing to the CFTC’s March no-action letter to Phantom as an example.
CME is also currently suing the CFTC over its approval of a perpetual futures-style contract listed by Kalshi, which the agency said was narrowly limited to digital commodities referencing bitcoin.
It remains unclear whether the CFTC will take specific regulatory action based on the feedback it received, though the agency has previously signaled it may address issues such as round-the-clock trading and tokenized collateral.
Source: Law360
Be the first to comment