US Commodity Futures Trading Commission Acting Chairman Caroline Pham has eliminated “outdated guidance” concerning crypto delivery, a move that has been praised for providing exchanges with greater flexibility.
“Abolishing outdated and unnecessarily complex guidance that penalizes the crypto sector and hampers innovation aligns perfectly with the Administration’s goals this year,” Pham stated on Thursday.
This guidance, initially finalized in March 2020, focused on determining when the “actual delivery” of crypto occurred in a commodity transaction. However, the CFTC mentioned in a notice that it needed to “reevaluate such guidance in light of further developments over the past 5 years.”
Under Pham’s leadership, the CFTC has pursued a more crypto-friendly strategy, with the guidance being withdrawn based on recommendations from the president’s crypto working group, which advised the CFTC to issue guidance on the classification of crypto as commodities and expand on previous guidance regarding the actual delivery of virtual assets.
More flexibility for exchanges with guidance gone
StarkWare general counsel Katherine Kirkpatrick Bos celebrated the change, noting that the guidance made it challenging for exchanges to offer margin or leverage unless actual delivery was made within 28 days.
“This provides significantly more flexibility for exchanges,” she remarked. “But PSA — this isn’t law! Just guidance. All of this can change again if leadership changes.”
The CFTC can offer guidance to clarify its legislative interpretation and provide insights on rule enforcement in specific cases; nonetheless, it is generally not legally binding like formal regulations.
Garry Krugljakow, head of Bitcoin (BTC) strategy at the Berlin-based crypto treasury firm aifinyo AG, speculated in an X post on Thursday that this is a “major tell” of what lies ahead.
“This move indicates two things: a clearer jurisdiction for the CFTC and a regulatory approach designed for scalability, not hesitation,” he said.
Related: CFTC pilot opens path for crypto as collateral in derivative markets
“Actual delivery made sense in 2020. It doesn’t in a landscape of genuine custody, collateralization, and Bitcoin-backed credit,” Krugljakow stated.
No guidance leaves uncertainty
Meanwhile, Todd Phillips, a fellow at the American think tank Roosevelt Institute, commented that the definition of actual delivery remains crucial, “as it determines which exchanges are required to register with the CFTC and which are not.”
“The CFTC replaced the previous guidance with nothing,” he declared. “Currently, we have no clarity on what the CFTC believes actual delivery entails, or who must register.”
Magazine: When privacy and AML laws conflict: Crypto projects’ impossible choice
