MCAP$2.76T-0.92%
BTC$82,136+1.10%ETH$2,407+1.53%SOL$104.40+1.97%XRP$1.30+2.31%
GOLD$4,166-0.37%
OIL$110.19+0.30%
STOCKTSLA$367.90+3.72%STOCKNVDA$217.39+1.52%STOCKAAPL$343.47+0.00%STOCKCOIN$169.87-1.90%STOCKMSTR$137.28+0.33%
BTC DOM59.6%
FEAR & GREED59Greed
Updated
Breaking crypto news, seconds after it happens

Whale alerts, listings and market-moving headlines on Telegram.

Join Telegram
Regulation

CFTC Rebuffs CME Legal Stance on Perpetual Futures

The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission has rejected the legal stance of CME in an ongoing dispute over perpetual futures contracts.

CFTC Rebuffs CME Legal Stance on Perpetual Futures
Image: BullishMarketCap

The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has rejected the legal stance of CME Group in a consequential dispute regarding perpetual futures, according to CoinDesk.

The disagreement centers on regulatory approaches to perpetual futures products, which have become a cornerstone of modern digital asset trading volumes. The regulatory body's formal pushback marks a notable development in how derivatives markets and traditional exchanges interface with emerging crypto-linked instruments.

Get whale alerts first

Instant Telegram notifications for large on-chain moves.

Join Telegram

Regulatory Standpoint

The CFTC's decision highlights the intensifying jurisdictional and supervisory debates surrounding perpetual swap contracts within the United States regulatory framework. As traditional financial institutions seek pathways to offer digital asset derivatives, regulators continue to establish firm positions on compliance and product structures.

Key facts

  • The U.S. CFTC rejected the legal stance of CME.
  • The dispute involves perpetual futures contracts.
  • The disagreement is reported by CoinDesk.
#CFTC#CME#Regulation

Source: coindesk.com

This article is for information only and is not investment advice. BullishMarketCap news is produced with AI assistance from public sources and reviewed by our editors; see our editorial policy. Spotted an error? Tell us.

More Regulation

View all →