The SEC and CFTC have opened a 60-day comment period on a unified framework for Bitcoin, Ether and XRP futures that could end years of jurisdictional conflict between the two agencies.
Back
SEC and CFTC seek comment on 3-asset crypto futures framework
The SEC and CFTC have opened a 60-day comment period on a unified framework for Bitcoin, Ether and XRP futures that could end years of jurisdictional conflict between the two agencies.
The SEC and CFTC on June 26 jointly requested public comment on a harmonized regulatory framework for Bitcoin, Ether and XRP futures, the most concrete step yet toward unified oversight of digital asset derivatives.
"The agencies are exploring whether compliance with one agency's regulatory framework could satisfy substantially similar requirements of the other," the Joint RFC said, according to a June 18 statement from the CFTC and SEC.
The request covers futures and perpetual contracts tied to Bitcoin, Ether and XRP — the three largest digital assets by market capitalization — and asks whether cash-settled perpetual contracts referencing equity securities could be treated as security futures. The comment period runs 60 days from publication in the Federal Register.
A unified framework would resolve years of jurisdictional conflict between the two agencies, potentially unlocking institutional capital currently sidelined by regulatory uncertainty. The proposal arrives as Kalshi's Bitcoin perpetual contract, approved by the CFTC on May 29, has generated more than $8.5 billion in trading volume within weeks of launch, according to a report cited by CoinDesk.
A Fractured Regulatory Landscape
The joint request follows the CFTC's May 29 approval of KalshiEX's Bitcoin perpetual contract — the first time the agency formally classified a perpetual as a futures product. The CFTC simultaneously issued a policy statement that certain perpetuals referencing digital commodities could be accommodated within existing futures market frameworks, while cautioning that contracts referencing other asset classes would require separate review.
The Chicago Mercantile Exchange challenged that decision on June 18, filing suit in the US District Court for the District of Columbia. CME argued that perpetuals fit the statutory definition of a "swap" under the Commodity Exchange Act because they transfer financial risk between parties without conveying ownership and lack any fixed expiration date. The exchange contended that the CFTC's approval circumvented the stricter regulatory regime Congress established for swaps under the Dodd-Frank Act.
What the Joint RFC Seeks to Clarify
The SEC-CFTC request specifically asks whether there is a need for "greater clarity regarding whether a cash-settled 'perpetual' contract referencing an equity security could be treated as a security future." It also contemplates potential "alternative compliance" regimes where trading in economically related product classes implicates both agencies' regulatory interests.
Including XRP alongside Bitcoin and Ether in the framework suggests a potential de-escalation in the SEC's long-running legal battle with Ripple Labs. A harmonized approach would reduce compliance costs for exchanges and trading platforms that currently navigate overlapping enforcement from both agencies.
The CLARITY Act, which would codify a similar jurisdictional split between the CFTC and SEC for digital asset spot markets, has advanced through the Senate Banking Committee and is scheduled for a House Financial Services Committee hearing on July 17. Galaxy Research estimates a 60% to 75% probability the bill becomes law in 2026.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.
[1] SEC, CFTC Seeks Public Comment On Harmonized Framework For BTC, ETH, XRP Futures[2] CFTC signals regulation shift as CME challenges classification of perpetuals as futures[3] CBOE weighs converting BTC, ETH continuous futures into perpetual futures: Report[4] Congress Schedules CLARITY Act Hearing for July 17 in New York[5] Trump Signs Quantum Executive Orders: What Do They Mean for Crypto Security?
