EFTA00844780.pdf
dataset_9 pdf 254.0 KB • Feb 3, 2026 • 5 pages
From: Boris Nikolic
To: jeffrey E. <jeevacation@gmail.com>
Subject: FW: CFTC Asserts Jurisdiction in Bitcoin Markets (Attorney Advertising)
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 06:03:56 +0000
You like alterative currency issues.
Interesting.
See you Sunday!
B
From: Skadden, Arps et al. [mailto:
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 11:42 PM
To: Nikolic, Boris
Subject: CFTC Asserts Jurisdiction in Bitcoin Markets (Attorney Advertising)
September 30,
2015
CFTC Asserts Jurisdiction in Bitcoin Markets
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission
(CFTC) recently took a series of actions
confirming views expressed late last year by
CFTC Chairman Timothy Massad that
(d)erivatives contracts based on a virtual
currency represent one area within (the
CFTC's) responsibilifies.-1
With very limited exceptions, the Commodity
Exchange Act (CEA) grants the CFTC
exclusive jurisdiction over the trading of
futures, options and swaps on 'commodities.'
The CEA contains an expansive definition of
'commodity" to include "goods and articles ...
and all services, rights and interests ... ."2 On
September 17. 2015, the CFTC issued a
EFTA00844780
settlement order (the CFTC Order) in an
enforcement action finding for the first time
that "Bitcoin and other virtual currencies are
encompassed in the definition and properly
defined as commodities."3
In what the CFTC described as its first action
against an unregistered Bitcoin options trading
platform, the CFTC charged Coinflip, Inc. and
its founder and chief executive officer with
failures to comply with the CEA or CFTC
regulations for operating a facility for trading or
processing "commodity options." Among other
findings, the CFTC Order found that from at
least March 2014 through July 2014, Coinflip
operated a facility for the trading of swaps
without registering as a swap execution facility
(SEF)4 or a designated contract market"
Albeit in footnotes, but perhaps most
significantly, the Coinflip case put the CFTC on
record as concluding that Bitcoin, while a
commodity, is not a currency.8 In summarizing
the facts of the case, the CFTC explained that
Bitcoin is "distinct from 'real currencies- of the
Unites States or another country.? In addition,
the CFTC Order in the Coinflip settlement
specifically noted that the Bitcoin options were
not eligible for the CFTC's "trade option
exemption" in CFTC Rule 32.3.8 Since the
CFTC's trade option exemption can only be
claimed for an option that would result in
delivery of an "exempt" or agricultural
commodity, this violation in effect serves as the
CFTC's finding that it will not treat Bitcoin as a
currency. This is because the term "exempt"
commodity includes metals, energy, weather
events and certain other commodities, but
explicitly excludes currency,
The CFTC finding that Bitcoin is an exempt
commodity and not a currency will have
regulatory consequences as more Bitcoin
issues come before the CFTC. For example, if
Bitcoin is not a currency, then Bitcoin forwards
and Bitcoin swaps that involve the exchange of
Bitcoin for another currency will not fall under
the statutory definitions of the more lightly
regulated foreign exchange forwards or foreign
exchange swaps.I8 Likewise, retail trading of
Bitcoin derivatives will be limited to designated
contract markets, rather than subject to the
retail foreign exchange dealer regulations."
Treating Bitcoin as a commodity that is not a
currency dovetails with the stances taken by
other U.S. regulators such as the Financial
Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) (virtual
currency does not have all of the attributes of
real currency)12, the Securities and Exchange
EFTA00844781
Commission (Bitcoin investments are
investment contracts because Bitcoin is a form
of money)13 and the Internal Revenue Service
(treating Bitcoin as property for tax
purposes).14
By treating Bitcoin as a commodity, but not a
currency, the CFTC has opened the door to
greater CFTC regulation of Bitcoin derivatives
in certain, but not all, respects. For example,
as an exempt commodity, forward contracts on
Bitcoin between commercial market
participants could be excluded from the CEA.
A large retailer could enter into Bitcoin
forwards with a Bitcoin merchant (i.e., a
financial institution) — where one party pays a
fixed U.S. dollar amount and the other pays in
Bitcoin — and be excluded from the CEA.
Likewise, if the trade is structured like a typical
FX swap (the merchant pays a fixed U.S.
dollar amount and the retailer pays a floating
Bitcoin amount, for example), arguably the
swap would be an excluded forward as long as
Bitcoin was physically delivered.
Continuing its entry into Bitcoin regulation, one
week after the Coinflip action, on September
24, 2015, the CFTC again brought and settled
charges related to Bitcoin, this time against
TeraExchange LLC (Tera), a provisionally
registered SEF, for failing to enforce its
prohibition on wash trading and prearranged
trading.15 At issue was a U.S. dollar — Bitcoin
swap transaction from October 2014 between
the only two market participants then
authorized to trade on Tera. The CFTC
focused on the Tera employees, which
facilitated the alleged prearranged wash trade
between the only two authorized traders on the
Tera SEF. The Tera employees allegedly
suggested a transaction would be used to test
the SEF systems and would immediately be
unwound at the same price and volume. After
the transaction was executed, Tera issued a
press release that the swap *was the first
Bitcoin derivative transaction to be executed
on a regulated exchange" without disclosing
that the Bitcoin swap transaction did not
represent actual liquidity. Although the Tera
action sends a message to any SEF that the
CFTC expects SEFs to enforce SEF rules
against illegal trading practices, this CFTC
action is yet another signal to the Bitcoin
industry that the CFTC is poised to regulate
Bitcoin derivatives.15
I Testimony of CFTC Chairman Timothy Massed before the
U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition end
EFTA00844782
Forestry (Dec. 10. 2014).
2 Only onions and motion picture box office receipts are
excluded from the definition of "commodity.' See CEA
Section 1(a)(9).
S In re Coinfhp. Inc.. Dkt. No. 15-29 (C.F.T.C. Sept. 17.
2015)
4 A SEF is a trading system or platform (other than a futures
exchange) in which multiple participants have the ability to
execute or trade swaps by accepting bids and offers made
by multiple participants on the facility. See CEA la(50).
5 Under the terms of settlement. the defendants agreed to
cease and desist from violating the CEA and CFTC
regulations. however. no financial penalty was imposed
6 The CFTC Order came a week after the CFTC granted
Ledger X LLC. an institutional trading and clearing platform
for options on Bitcom, temporary registration as a SEF. The
only product subject to the LedgerX SEF application is
options on Sitcom. The CFTC's grant of temporary
registration will be (Viewed by a CFTC review of the
Ledger% submission for listing options on Bacoin as a
product for trading on the SEF. which also requires CFTC
approval. In addition. LedgerX has filed an application for
registration as a Derivatives Clearing Organization (OCO) to
clear options on &mom. which remains pending with the
CFTC
7 CFTC Order at fn 2 stating'Sitcom and other virtual
currencies are distinct from 'real' currencies. which are the
can and paper money of the Unites States or another
country that are designated as legal tender, circulate, and
are customarily used and accepted as a medium of
exchange in the country of issuance.'
8 The CFTC Order appears to be based on a failure to meet
the conditions in CFTC Rule 32.3 that limit who can be an
offeror and offeree to the option. See Order at fn. 5.
9 See CEA Sections la(19) and 1a(20).
10 See CEA Sections la(24). 1a(25). and 1a(47)(E)-(F).
11 See CFTC Part 5. 17 CFR Pad 5.
12 See FinCEN Guidance. Application of FinCEN's
Regulations to Persons Aaministenng. Exchanging or Using
Virtual Currencies. FIN-2013-G001 (March 18. 2013).
13 SEC v Shavers. No. 4:13-CV-00416 ( Texas. Aug. 6.
2013)
14 See IRS Notice 2014-21 (March 25, 2014).
15 In re TeraExchange LLC. Okt. No 15-33 (C.F.T.C. Sept.
24. 2015). Similar to the Coinftip settlement, under the Tera
settlement. the defendants agreed to cease and desist from
violating the CEA and CFTC regulations. Like the Coinflip
EFTA00844783
settlement. no financial penalty was imposed. causing one
CFTC commissioner to dissent.
16 The CFTC also granted Ledger X LLC temporary
registration as a SEF one week before the Coinflip
settlement. The only product subject to the Ledger X SEF
application is options on Sitcom. The CFTC's grant of
temporary registration will be followed by a CFTC review of
the LedgerX submission for listing options on BitCO.11 as a
product for trading on the SEF. which also requires CFTC
approval. In addrtion. LedgerX has filed an application for
registration as a DCO to clear options on Sitcom. which
remains pending with the CFTC.
Contacts
Mark D. Maureen A. Theodore M.
Young Donley Kneller
Washington, Washington, Washington,
202.371.7680 202.371.7570 202.371.7264
vcard f email vcard / email vcard f email
Trevor A.
Levine
Washington.
202.371.7577
vcard f email
This memorandum is provided by Skadden. Arps, Slate. Meagher & Flom LLP and its affiliates for educational
and informational purposes only and is not intended and should not be construed as legal advice. This
memorandum is considered advertising under applicable state laws.
Skadden. Arps. Slate. Meagher & Flom LLP and Affiliates I Four Times Square / New York. NY 10036
unsubscribe review/edit
preferences
EFTA00844784
Entities
0 total entities mentioned
No entities found in this document
Document Metadata
- Document ID
- 05ae6644-6192-4f7f-bc26-f5c137aef2c9
- Storage Key
- dataset_9/EFTA00844780.pdf
- Content Hash
- 9e155b3cf5a8afedde23374bc1db20b7
- Created
- Feb 3, 2026