Source time Edition date
Coinbase, Kalshi and Payward backs CFTC in lawsuit over single-stock perp futures
Coinbase、Kalshi和Payward在单一股票永续期货诉讼中支持CFTC
Coinbase, Kalshi and Payward are backing the CFTC against a lawsuit over single-stock perpetual futures, so the judge must decide whether federal derivatives oversight extends to these hybrid crypto-equity products.
Judgment
The federal judge hearing the Capital Markets Alliance's challenge must decide whether equity perpetuals are futures or security-based swaps — a call that determines if Coinbase, Kalshi and Payward's Nov. 2 approvals stand and whether these products can be listed onshore.
Basis
Six firms — Coinbase, Kalshi, Kraken parent Payward, DRW Holdings, Jump Trading and Paradigm — moved Monday for leave to file an amicus brief supporting the CFTC. The filing says Coinbase, Kalshi and Payward have applications to list equity perps tied to U.S. stocks that were deemed approved on Nov. 2. The CMA, whose members include Cboe and Citadel Securities, argues equity perps have no set expiry and so are "security-based swaps" that cannot list on CFTC-regulated exchanges, meaning the CFTC overstepped the SEC. The firms counter that the SEC was "at the table from the very start" and that the agencies jointly sought comment on whether perpetual contracts should be classified as security futures. Coinbase general counsel Molly Abraham wrote on X that under the Commodity Exchange Act and the 2000 security futures framework, security futures products are not swaps. Vice Chairman Ryan VanGrack said global markets already trade equity perps and that U.S. investors deserve access under joint CFTC-SEC oversight.
- Equity perp applicationsapproved Nov. 2
- Deemed approved Nov. 2CMA lawsuit
- CMA sues to overturnamicus brief
- Firms seek amicus leave
Unclear The source does not say which court is hearing the case, when it will rule on the motion for leave, or how it is expected to treat the security-based swap classification.
Next Check the court docket for an order granting or denying leave to file the amicus brief and for any briefing schedule on the CMA's underlying challenge to the Nov. 2 approvals.