The @CFTC’s latest ANPRM (Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking) is the agency’s attempt to build a crypto market structure framework for spot transactions using the authority it already has.

It would build on existing DCM, DCO and FCM registrations and create a new category for “crypto asset markets.”

One notable difference from the Clarity Act here is that the CFTC proposal is exploring a voluntary federal pathway for exchange registration where spot exchanges could opt out of the framework if they are not offering leverage, choosing to retain state money transmitter licenses instead.

Former CFTC Chair @giancarloMKTS told me the approach gives exchanges a “clear, voluntary path to operate under one federal rulebook when customers trade with borrowed money.” He says the CFTC is “acting within the authority Congress gave it in 2010, backed by court decisions recognizing bitcoin and similar assets as commodities.”

A handful of lawyers I’ve spoken with or have seen weigh in publicly are calling the ANPRM a “clever” or “creative” reading of Section 2(c)(2)(D) of the Commodity Exchange Act. It could cover retail crypto spot trades where leverage, margin or financing is offered, even if the customer doesn’t take it. That builds on the Bitnomial precedent @CarolineDPham’s CFTC established in 2025 use Section 2(c)(2)(D) to bring spot crypto trades offered with leverage onto a CFTC regulated exchange, even when the customer doesn’t borrow.

The ANPRM also addresses “actual delivery” under Section 2(c)(2)(D). It appears to focus on whether the customer has possession/control of the asset, rather than just relying on a book-entry claim to an omnibus account.

However, I’m told the proposal still leaves significant questions about how customer assets would be protected in bankruptcy, and whether those protections would compare to those in the Clarity Act.

Comments are due within 60 days after the proposal is published in the Federal Register.