Why the Question Over How to Regulate Perps Has Turned Into a Fight

Summary

This panel discusses the regulatory fight over whether perpetual futures should be classified as swaps or futures, following CFTC approvals for Coinbase and Kalshi and CME's lawsuit against the CFTC. The speakers argue that perps fit the futures category because they are standardized, liquid, and accessible via smart contracts, and they explore the implications for US retail access. The discussion also covers Hyperliquid's reported onshoring path and the CFTC's asset-by-asset approach to commodity perps.

• CME is suing the CFTC over the classification of perpetual futures.
• CFTC approved true Bitcoin perpetual futures for Coinbase and Kalshi.
• Panelists argue perps are more like futures than swaps because they are standardized and priced like futures.
• Perps are described as offering deeper liquidity and continuous 24/7 exposure.
• The CFTC is taking an asset-by-asset approach to approving perps on commodities like oil, gold, and silver.
• Hyperliquid is characterized as neutral infrastructure rather than an exchange.
• SEC and CFTC may both regulate perps depending on whether the underlying asset is a security or commodity.