CoinDesk
CME Group has sued the CFTC and its chairman Mike Selig, challenging the agency's decision to let Kalshi and Coinbase list crypto perpetual futures, contracts that let traders take leveraged positions on an asset without an expiration date. The unusual filing puts the largest US derivatives operator in direct conflict with its own regulator over a product category that saw roughly $60 trillion in non-US trading volume last year.
The lawsuit argues the CFTC mislabeled perps as futures when they should be regulated as swaps, a distinction that carries different margin, registration, and tax obligations. CME Chairman Terry Duffy said the contracts require five-day margin and swap-market registration, neither of which the CFTC required before greenlighting Kalshi's product. Kalshi's debut offering hit more than $1 billion in volume within its first week.
Why it matters
The dispute is structural rather than ideological. CME has previously backed crypto adoption, helping bring Bitcoin futures to market, and Duffy said the exchange has the technical capability to launch perpetuals but has heard no customer demand for them. Jake Chervinsky, CEO of the Hyperliquid Policy Center, framed it as an incumbent using regulation to block challengers: "The issue with the CME isn't whether they're pro or anti-crypto. It's an incumbent using regulation to hold off competition."
The CFTC approved perps through a policy statement rather than formal rulemaking, and Selig is currently the agency's sole sitting commissioner, so his is the lone voice. Liz Davis, partner at Davis Wright Tremaine, noted that a single-member commission moves faster precisely because the counter-view is missing, and the CME suit is now providing that opposition from outside the agency.
Market impact
The court fight will shape whether US platforms can compete with offshore venues like Hyperliquid, where 24/7 oil perpetuals spiked during the opening of the Iran conflict. CME has its own bid in front of the CFTC to launch 24/7 West Texas Intermediate crude futures, a traditional expiring contract, but the agency has held it up. TD Cowen's Jaret Seiberg argued the CME may have the upper hand because the CFTC approved perps without first issuing a regulation despite seeking public comment in April 2025. Until the case resolves, US perpetuals policy sits on a bubble, with a single commissioner, an incumbent challenger, and offshore liquidity all pulling in different directions.
Frequently asked questions
-
Why is CME suing the CFTC over crypto perps?
CME argues the CFTC mislabeled perpetual futures as futures when they should be regulated as swaps, a distinction that carries different margin, registration, and tax obligations. The suit challenges the agency's approval of Kalshi and Coinbase to list crypto perps.
-
How large is the offshore perpetual futures market?
Non-US perps volume reportedly reached $60 trillion last year, with platforms like Hyperliquid seeing sharp spikes during events such as the Iran conflict, when traders rushed into 24/7 oil perpetual contracts.
-
What is the difference between a perpetual future and a swap?
Perpetual futures are leveraged contracts with no expiration date, while swaps require five-day margin and registration with the CFTC. CME Chairman Terry Duffy argues crypto perps meet the legal definition of a swap and should be regulated accordingly.
-
How did the CFTC approve crypto perps?
The CFTC used a policy statement and a case-by-case review process rather than formal rulemaking. Chair Mike Selig, currently the agency's sole sitting commissioner, signed off on Kalshi's product and approved customer activity at Coinbase.
-
What is the Hyperliquid Policy Center's stake in this fight?
The Hyperliquid Policy Center is a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit focused on compliant DeFi in the US, backed by a $28 million initiative from the Hyper Foundation. Its CEO Jake Chervinsky has argued CME is using regulation to block competition rather than opposing crypto itself.
TheBlock
CoinTelegraph
WuBlockchain
Crypto News