CFTC outlines crypto regulatory initiatives at New York blockchain symposium

Traders Union
All News
Regulators
CFTC crypto regulatory initiatives

Highlights

CFTC official Selig told the Fordham Law Blockchain Regulatory Symposium the agency is developing regulatory initiatives to provide balanced oversight of crypto assets.
Selig highlighted that current state-level licensing pushes exchanges to comply with money transmission laws in up to 50 states but lacks federal-style market protections such as anti-manipulation rules.
Selig warned that state frameworks do not address distinct roles like brokering, dealing, and clearing, leaving key gaps as regulators consider appropriate federal oversight for U.S. digital asset markets.

CFTC frames oversight push for crypto markets

As outlined in remarks published by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Selig tells the Fordham Law Blockchain Regulatory Symposium in New York that the agency is working on regulatory initiatives meant to show the CFTC is taking a thoughtful and balanced approach to crypto assets.

Selig presents blockchain development as part of a longer technological cycle in which new systems attract capital, trigger periods of excess and then move toward institutional adjustment and safeguards. He says that dynamic is now shaping the need for clearer rules around digital assets and related market activity.

In his remarks, Selig traces the sector from Bitcoin's launch by Satoshi Nakamoto to the rise of Ethereum and smart-contract platforms, arguing that blockchain technology enables ownership and transfer of value on the internet without relying on a centralized intermediary. He says that shift opens the way for decentralized applications and a broad range of crypto assets, including tokens designed to support network functions and tokenized versions of real-world assets.

State licensing gaps leave federal market questions

He says centralized exchanges and brokerages emerged quickly to meet demand for access to the crypto economy, even though many early offshore operators later collapsed after cyber-attacks and fraud. Others, he says, tried to operate within a complicated U.S. regulatory framework.

Selig says state banking regulators responded after the collapse of a major offshore exchange by treating crypto assets as a form of money or currency under money transmission laws, pushing exchanges and brokerages to obtain licenses across as many as 50 states and territories. He says those rules require functions such as know-your-customer and anti-money laundering checks, but do not impose the market protections common in federal regimes, including orderly trading requirements, anti-manipulation rules and conflict-of-interest safeguards.

He also says the state frameworks do not contemplate separate licensing and compliance standards for brokering, dealing, executing and clearing trades. That gap leaves a key policy question for the U.S. digital asset sector, as regulators weigh how to apply market oversight to businesses that increasingly resemble financial infrastructure rather than simple payment intermediaries.

In our earlier coverage of the SEC’s quorum rule change, we explained how the agency amended its internal procedures to keep making decisions despite having only two sitting commissioners. We also noted that allowing two—or even one—commissioner to constitute a quorum in certain disqualification cases could reduce dissenting views and reshape how U.S. market oversight debates play out amid prolonged vacancies.

This material may contain third-party opinions, none of the data and information on this webpage constitutes investment advice according to our Disclaimer. While we adhere to strict Editorial Integrity, this post may contain references to products from our partners.