CFTC Chair: Innovation Working Group Participates in Policy, Encourages Communication with the Crypto Community

Organized by Jinse Caijing

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) Chair Mike Selig said on Monday at the 2026 Las Vegas Bitcoin Conference that the CFTC has “opened a new chapter” in digital asset regulation, emphasizing the need to coordinate with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Mike Selig noted that for markets trading products that have both commodity and security characteristics, the two agencies need a coordinated and consistent framework—not overlapping or conflicting rules written separately by each agency.

In a discussion with the host, Mike Selig laid out the regulatory initiatives and guiding principles from his first 100 days in office. The core focus is to end the past era of “enforcement-style regulation” and to drive the crypto industry to develop in a compliant manner in the United States, while consolidating the U.S.’s global leading position. On cross-agency coordination, Mike Selig and SEC Chair Paul Atkins jointly restarted the “Project Crypto” initiative, signed a memorandum of understanding, and coordinated the CFTC and SEC’s regulatory approaches to reduce market friction and ensure consistency in areas such as decentralized finance and the use of crypto-asset collateral. They aim to avoid uncertainty caused to market participants by regulatory conflicts and to prevent a repeat of the situation in which regulators are “weaponized” against the industry.

Regarding the classification of crypto assets, the two sides issued joint guidance clarifying the distinction between security and non-security crypto assets. This resolved the controversy in which, in the past, the SEC broadly treated most crypto assets as securities, providing market participants with clearer compliance guidance and lowering companies’ compliance costs. They also clarified the regulatory boundaries for the listing and sale of new crypto assets. After assets are separated from promises made by the issuer, they can be traded according to their commodity attributes, improving industry liquidity.

Mike Selig particularly emphasized protecting the right to self-custody and the interests of software developers. He issued related guidance and “no-action letters,” providing a safe harbor for software developers of self-custody wallet applications, allowing them to provide services without registering. This supports the use of crypto assets as collateral in derivatives markets, enabling flexible transfer of self-custodied assets and the ability to move them between self-custody and exchanges, and putting into practice the core blockchain principle of “trust code, not intermediaries.”

At the legislative level, Mike Selig believes that market-structure legislation (such as the “Clear Act”) is crucial. It can enshrine today’s favorable regulatory policies into law, resist future reversals in government policy, and also centralize oversight of crypto intermediaries—from the fragmented licensing systems across 54 states—to the federal level under the CFTC. This avoids regulatory conflicts among states and provides a stable environment for industry development. He urged Congress to pass relevant legislation to clarify the legal status of crypto assets and consolidate the U.S.’s position as the “world’s crypto capital.”

Finally, Mike Selig said the CFTC has set up an innovation working group, inviting industry participants and leaders from the private sector to take part in policy-making. He encouraged the Bitcoin community to proactively communicate and report business frictions, and said the CFTC will actively provide support to help the industry take root and develop in the United States.

The following is the full transcript of the dialogue, organized by Jinse Caijing (AI-assisted).

I. Welcome — A New Era for the CFTC

Host: Good morning, everyone. I’m honored to welcome Mike Selig, the 16th Chair of the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Chairman, you just published a commentary marking your first 100 days in office. For Bitcoin enthusiasts who have been facing regulatory uncertainty—and sometimes even hostility—for more than a decade, please tell us what these past 100-plus days have meant to you.

Mike Selig: Well, we’re at a critical moment right now. We’ve seen the impact of the previous administration on the crypto industry, and now the U.S. has become the world’s crypto capital. We’ve brought an end to the era of “regulation through enforcement.” Gary Gensler is no longer in charge of the SEC. Our government departments now have leaders who support crypto and support innovation. You just heard remarks from Kash Patel and Todd Blanche. We are turning a new page. It’s essential to establish clear rules for this new asset class so it can thrive in the United States. That is exactly why we’re here. So, during my first 100 days as Chair, I made sure to work together with SEC Chair Paul Atkins to develop clear classification standards for crypto assets, clarifying which is a security and which is not. We’ve created a new system for introducing brokers. We allow digital wallet providers to provide their software to the U.S. without having to register with us as introducing brokers. We’re just getting started. We still have more work to do. And the CFTC has a special role with respect to Bitcoin itself.

II. How Bitcoin Became a Commodity in 2014

Host: Back in the years when other regulators either ignored this industry or sometimes treated it with hostility, the CFTC started studying Bitcoin in 2014, 2015, and 2016, saying: you know what, this is a commodity. It should be treated like all the other commodities in our framework. Did this history influence what you’re doing now? After all, you previously served at the CFTC and now you’ve become its Chair.

Mike Selig: Of course. Many years ago, I had the opportunity to work with Chris Giancarlo, who was then a Commissioner and later became Chair. The two of us were both very fascinated by Bitcoin. I read the Bitcoin white paper around 2011 and got deeply into it. In 2013 and 2014, I had the opportunity to come work at the CFTC, and we saw that Bitcoin really doesn’t look like a security. It’s a decentralized asset, a brand-new thing—something that looks a lot like the other commodities in our markets, like gold, silver, and oil. Unlike anything where an individual controls the price, its price is set based on supply and demand. So, many years later, the CFTC became the first agency to approve a federal regulatory framework for crypto, allowing Bitcoin futures contracts to be traded on the exchanges we regulate. I truly believe the CFTC has been a pioneer in the field of crypto. We’re very fortunate that Congress has pending legislation we hope will pass—this would expand our authority and ensure that, through clear rules and a regulatory framework, this asset class can withstand future changes in the U.S.

III. Project Crypto and the SEC–CFTC Memorandum of Understanding

Host: You previously mentioned your cooperation with Chair Atkins. Before you took over the CFTC, you served as his chief legal advisor, and you were also the chief legal counsel for the SEC’s crypto working group. While you were there, you helped launch “Project Crypto” and issued many important guidelines, including those related to proof-of-work mining. This year in January, after joining the CFTC, you jointly launched “Project Crypto” with the SEC and signed a memorandum of understanding to promote cross-industry, cross-agency coordination. That’s very exciting for lawyers and policy-makers. But for market participants and for you yourself, why is this coordination so important for the future of Bitcoin, crypto, and other regulated markets—and for how we build good government and good policies?

Mike Selig: We’ve seen that under the leadership of the previous administration, the SEC weaponized its enforcement arm and truly tried to push crypto overseas. Then we saw banking regulators strip people working in that industry of access to banking services, making it nearly impossible for them to get bank accounts. That’s “Operation Choke Point 2.0.” Of course, under the current administration, we ended that. But we need to make sure our agencies are not weaponized against this industry again in the future. That’s why Chair Atkins and I came together to create this new initiative called “Project Crypto.” It was originally launched by Chair Atkins at the SEC, and when I was there, I was also able to help. Now the two of our agencies are working together to strengthen the domestic crypto-asset industry in the United States and ensure that something like the previous administration’s war on crypto never happens again. But just as importantly, we need some legislation to help solidify this and to reinforce our leadership on crypto issues. The real purpose of “Project Crypto” and the memorandum of understanding between our agencies is to ensure that the SEC and the CFTC do not do completely different things when dealing with crypto issues. We need to coordinate our approaches. Ensuring that, in areas like decentralized finance, blockchain-based trading, and the use of stablecoins and Bitcoin as collateral, our approaches are similar. In just over 100 days since I took office, we’ve already coordinated our approaches—such as with similar capital requirements for using different stablecoins and crypto assets as collateral and margin. So what we’re doing together is ensuring that whether you’re trading in securities or trading in commodities, you don’t have to follow different types of rules and regulations that are truly inconsistent.

Host: That’s a subtle point. For those who aren’t familiar with legislation, it’s easy to overlook. Legislation has its specific purpose. The CFTC’s governing law is the Commodity Exchange Act, while the SEC’s is the Federal Securities Law. We probably have about 20 different banking laws and tax laws as well. So under different laws, Bitcoin could be treated as different things. This coordination makes it easier for market participants, for users, for intermediaries, and for everyone else.

Mike Selig: And if the Chairs can cooperate with each other, it also makes things much easier.

Host: Exactly.

Mike Selig: We want to reduce friction in the market. We don’t want you to face inconsistent standards just because you’re trading in a securities environment or a commodities environment. Sometimes that distinction is justified, but where we can coordinate—and where we can adopt alternative compliance approaches among the agencies—this is better for market participants and, ultimately, for the American people.

IV. Joint Crypto-Asset Classification Guidance

Host: Yes. You mentioned the classification guidance you issued earlier. Why is that important? And since it’s joint guidance, that’s great. What do you think this unlocks for the broader industry?

Mike Selig: Well, the CFTC stepped forward quite early, as we said, by announcing that Bitcoin is a commodity. But unfortunately, for many other assets, that is not the case. We’ve seen many novel crypto assets—like Ethereum, Solana, Zcash, and others. The SEC has historically considered many of these as securities. Of course, this has been challenged in court, and many of these cases were actually brought because the SEC sued exchanges such as Coinbase and Gemini. Now, we’re working together to ensure that both agencies take a unified position on what is a security and what is not. This creates more clarity for all market participants. Many companies are afraid to set up business in the U.S. because when they issue tokens, if those tokens are classified as securities, they have to register and provide disclosures—making compliance costs very high. So clarity is crucial for business certainty and for understanding your obligations. Of course, commodity law wasn’t designed for crypto assets—it was designed for assets like oil, natural gas, gold, and silver, which are not based on centralized issuers or companies. Many crypto assets, of course, are related to companies in some cases, but most operate more in decentralized environments, where you place your trust in the code and the networks. That’s why providing this clarity is so important. We also provide clarity regarding what happens when new crypto assets are listed for sale. Sometimes the act of selling itself is subject to securities laws because you are selling the asset while also selling certain promises and guarantees. But once the asset begins trading in the market and those promises are no longer attached to it, the asset itself can be traded in the commodity market without having to comply with disclosure obligations under securities law. This is very important for providing liquidity to the asset class and for certainty for the American people.

V. Protecting Self-Custody Rights and Software Developers

Host: You’ve also recently provided guidance for software developers. In your opening remarks, you mentioned the “no-action letter” for introducing brokers. Fundamentally, this is to protect developers. I know this is a question you’re particularly concerned about. But how do we create an environment in the United States that ensures software developers can build with confidence here, while maintaining protections for self-custody and non-custodial services?

Mike Selig: Well, self-custody and software development in the United States must be protected. Our country is built on the principle of private property. We have to guard against the government—or anyone else—seizing someone’s crypto assets, depriving them of banking services, or cutting off their access to the financial system. So creating safe harbors and clarity for software developers and for different types of self-custody software application providers has to be a priority for us as regulators in the United States. So one of the first things the Commission did after I took office was to issue a new enforcement position regarding software services in the self-custody wallet space. Typically, to access our derivatives markets, you go through a broker; the broker connects to the exchange, and everything is done in a custodial manner. You put up capital, put up margin, and trade derivatives in custody. We never had a mechanism that allowed self-custody—where you hold your own assets, and based on your trading activities, transfer those assets to the exchange, with margin able to move between your wallet and the exchange. Now we have this new regime: if you are a software developer providing a self-custody wallet product, and that software development company meets certain standards, the product and the software developer will not need to register with the Commission. This will allow Bitcoin and other crypto assets to be used as collateral in our derivatives markets. You’ll be able to self-custody these assets, unlike some current markets where you rely on custodial wallet providers tied to exchanges. Here, you can use your own self-custody wallet. We believe this will truly help demonstrate the use cases of crypto and blockchain, because the underlying idea is that you can hold your own assets and rely on on-chain technology—trust code rather than your intermediary.

VI. Why Market-Structure Legislation Matters Now

Host: This is the regulatory side. And in Washington, everything is focused on the “Clear Act” on the legislative side. I think it’s a very complex topic. But one point people should note is that it strengthens regulation of intermediaries while also protecting individuals’ rights to self-custody. It protects software developers; in practice, it should promote growth in the industry. The CFTC plays a very important role in all of this. Could you talk about how you view the “Clear Act” unlocking the CFTC’s role in Bitcoin and other crypto markets?

Mike Selig: Well, as I said at the start, I truly believe that under President Trump’s leadership, the U.S. is today the world’s crypto capital. But we need to maintain that position. It is essential to make legislation to protect software developers, protect this asset class, and set clear rules. Because if we don’t seize this opportunity to build real statutory guardrails, much of what we do as regulators could be undone by the next administration. You could see someone like Gary Gensler return to the SEC or the CFTC and overturn everything we’ve done, which is a real threat to this asset class. Of course, this asset class can operate outside government institutions; it is designed to operate based on code and similar mechanisms. But the reality is that governments have immense power—they can genuinely weaponize enforcement agencies and regulators to target people in this industry. We cannot allow that to happen again. I believe the best way for this asset class in the United States to withstand future changes is to enact legislation that explicitly declares crypto assets legal technology—something ordinary Americans can use in commerce and finance. This will truly lay the foundation for the asset class to flourish in the United States.

VII. Federal Clarity vs. the 54-State Licensing Regime

Host: The “Clear Act” elevates intermediary regulation from the state level—currently, there are 54 different licensing jurisdictions (if you want to do business across the U.S. and its territories)—and concentrates much of the power at the federal level under the CFTC. I think this will be a very welcome outcome for market participants.

Mike Selig: Exactly. If you think about the historical trajectory of crypto assets, it’s absolutely crucial. All of this began with the state-by-state system. You have New York’s BitLicense, and all those states’ money transmission laws are applied to crypto exchanges. So if they wanted to launch an exchange or a custody wallet—maybe even some non-custodial software providers—they ran into problems with the states. They had to comply with 50 different states and figure out their obligations. Now, as the federal government takes a more friendly approach to crypto, we’re seeing states turn around and sue many exchanges. We’ve just seen New York file lawsuits against the two largest U.S. crypto exchanges. In effect, they’re continuing the fight in the same place where Gary Gensler and the SEC stopped the legal battle. So establishing a federal system that protects you—where you hold a federal license and states don’t have the authority to regulate these exchanges and assets after the fact—will be extremely important for how the asset class operates in the United States.

VIII. How to Participate in the CFTC Innovation Working Group

Host: We don’t have much time left. For the Bitcoin enthusiasts, developers, and users here, you’ve set up an innovation working group. How should the Bitcoin community consider engaging with and interacting with the CFTC?

Mike Selig: Well, outreach is very important. We want to understand what you’re building, what you’re doing, the frictions you encounter in your business, and how we can provide help. In the past, as I said, you would come in and receive subpoenas, with the government trying to use the full force of the law against you. We’re not trying to do that. I’ve formed an innovation working group, with some leaders from the industry and the private sector coming into the government to study these issues from a policy perspective. We’ve also seconded some of the best and brightest people from within our own agency to help solve these problems. So we invite you to meet with the working group, tell us what you’re doing, and help us find a way to support your business so it can take root in the United States for the long term.

Host: Chairman, thank you for your public service and principled leadership. It’s an honor to sit down with you today, and it’s a pleasure to see your progress in Washington.

Mike Selig: Well, thank you. I’m glad to be here.