{"id":3990,"date":"2026-06-16T00:28:58","date_gmt":"2026-06-15T23:28:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kriptoblog.hu\/?p=3990"},"modified":"2026-06-16T10:35:15","modified_gmt":"2026-06-16T09:35:15","slug":"cftc-perps-engedely-selig-vedekezesre-kenyszerul","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/kriptoblog.hu\/en\/cftc-perps-engedely-selig-vedekezesre-kenyszerul\/","title":{"rendered":"CFTC Chair Selig Defends US Perps Approval on CNBC"},"content":{"rendered":"

\nA magyar olvas\u00f3nak k\u00f6nny\u0171 elsiklani egy CNBC-szerepl\u00e9s f\u00f6l\u00f6tt, de a j\u00fanius 15-i Fast Money ad\u00e1sban valami szokatlan t\u00f6rt\u00e9nt. A CFTC eln\u00f6ke, Michael Selig nem bejelentett egy d\u00f6nt\u00e9st, nem \u00fcnnepelte, hanem megv\u00e9dte<\/strong> azt. Pontosan ez az igev\u00e1laszt\u00e1s \u2014 a ‘defends’ \u2014 az, amelyen \u00e9rdemes elid\u0151zni, mert ez \u00e1rulja el a legink\u00e1bb, hogy mi zajlik az amerikai kripto-szab\u00e1lyoz\u00e1s sz\u00ednfalai m\u00f6g\u00f6tt.\n<\/p>\n

\nIt would be easy to scroll past another CNBC appearance, but something unusual happened on the June 15 *Fast Money* segment. CFTC Chair Michael Selig didn't announce a decision, didn't celebrate one \u2014 he **defended** one. That verb choice \u2014 'defends' \u2014 is worth lingering on, because it tells us more about what's happening behind the scenes of US crypto regulation than any press release would.\n<\/p>\n

Perpetual futures (perps) \u2014 non-expiring derivative contracts that let traders take leveraged positions well beyond spot exposure \u2014 have until now been firmly off-limits under US regulators. Now they're not only authorized, but the agency's own chair is being forced to explain the authorization on live television. Meanwhile, the market is conspicuously calm: Bitcoin sits near $66,363, up roughly 1.0% on the day, while total crypto market capitalization has expanded to $2.35 trillion and BTC dominance holds at 56.5%. Quiet numbers under a loud political conversation.<\/h2>\n

\nSelig on CNBC: Who Was He Actually Talking To?\n<\/p>\n

\nAccording to CNBC's coverage and Crypto Briefing's summary, Selig wasn't speaking in generalities about the elegance of derivatives \u2014 he was defending a specific decision. Point by point, he argued that a regulated onshore market is safer for the US investor than the current environment of offshore exchanges.\n<\/p>\n

Anyone tracking the CFTC's messaging will notice the shift. Back on March 3 \u2014 also per Crypto Briefing \u2014 Selig confidently announced that a US perps market could launch within a month. That was announcement, not defense. By June, the tone had changed. In my experience this is rarely accidental: when a regulatory agency's chair has to argue in a live business broadcast for his own previously-stated decision, it signals institutional headwinds. The only question is where they're blowing from.<\/h2>\n

\nThe $2.35 Trillion Question: Will Liquidity Come Home?\n<\/p>\n

\nThis is where the story gets genuinely interesting. Perps are by far the largest slice of global crypto derivative volume \u2014 market-data trackers consistently show them exceeding spot daily volume \u2014 and most of that pie has so far been served by Binance, Bybit, and a handful of smaller offshore exchanges. American traders accessed these venues through VPNs and offshore entities, while officially they were served by Kraken Futures or CME's mini contracts \u2014 in stripped-down, capital-intensive form.\n<\/p>\n

\n\u00c9s itt j\u00f6n a saj\u00e1t, \u00f3vatos \u00e9rt\u00e9kel\u00e9sem. A piac nem az\u00e9rt ment offshore-ra, mert nem szerette Amerik\u00e1t. Hanem mert offshore kisebbek a margek\u00f6vetelm\u00e9nyek, laz\u00e1bb a KYC, \u00e9s a likvid\u00e1l\u00e1si mechanizmusok keresked\u0151-bar\u00e1tabbak. Ha az amerikai onshore perps-piac magasabb t\u0151kek\u00f6vetelm\u00e9nnyel \u00e9s szigor\u00fabb fel\u00fcgyelettel indul \u2014 m\u00e1rpedig a CFTC nem viccb\u0151l nevezik szigor\u00fa fel\u00fcgyeletnek \u2014, k\u00f6nnyen el\u0151\u00e1llhat, hogy a profi keresked\u0151k egy r\u00e9sze tov\u00e1bbra is offshore marad, \u00e9s csak az int\u00e9zm\u00e9nyi p\u00e9nz, valamint a kisbefektet\u0151k ker\u00fclnek be a hazai keretbe. Ez nem felt\u00e9tlen\u00fcl baj; az viszont re\u00e1lis, hogy a ‘hazat\u00e9r\u00e9s’ lassabb \u00e9s r\u00e9szlegesebb lesz, mint a politikailag cseng\u0151 narrat\u00edva sugallja. A mi megk\u00f6zel\u00edt\u00e9s\u00fcnk: a derivat\u00edv\u00e1k nem helyettes\u00edtik a t\u00fcrelmes szpot-\u00e9p\u00edtkez\u00e9st \u2014 ha bele is m\u00e9sz, fogd vissza az \u00e1tt\u00e9tet, \u00e9s sose tedd kock\u00e1ra azt, amit nem engedhetsz meg magadnak elvesz\u00edteni.\n<\/p>\n

A ‘lone chair’ probl\u00e9ma: egy ember a derivat\u00edv piac f\u00f6l\u00f6tt<\/h2>\n

\nA Blockonomi j\u00fanius 12-i elemz\u00e9se egy k\u00e9nyelmetlen k\u00e9rd\u00e9st tett fel: Selig jelenleg az egyetlen meger\u0151s\u00edtett biztos a CFTC \u00e9l\u00e9n. A ‘lone chair’ st\u00e1tusz azt jelenti, hogy a norm\u00e1l esetben t\u00f6bb biztosb\u00f3l \u00e1ll\u00f3 test\u00fclet d\u00f6nt\u00e9sei egyetlen ember kez\u00e9ben koncentr\u00e1l\u00f3dnak \u2014 k\u00fcl\u00f6n\u00f6sen a kripto \u00e9s a prediction market (el\u0151rejelz\u00e9si piacok) ter\u00fclet\u00e9n, ahol Selig ny\u00edltan v\u00e1llalt napirenddel \u00e9rkezett.\n<\/p>\n

\nA Blockonomi analysis from June 12 raised an uncomfortable question: Selig is currently the only confirmed commissioner at the head of the CFTC. The 'lone chair' status means that decisions normally made by a multi-commissioner panel are concentrated in a single pair of hands \u2014 particularly in crypto and prediction markets, where Selig has arrived with an openly stated agenda.\n<\/p>\n

This isn't a political question in the classical sense, and I'll stick to my line of not focusing on partisan politics here. It's institutional: can one person decide the future of the entire US derivative crypto market? Technically yes \u2014 the CFTC's operating rules permit it \u2014 but from market participants' perspective, that concentration creates risk. A decision made by one person can be reversed by one person. The perps approval may be legally solid; institutionally, it's only as solid as Selig's position. And it's hardly accidental that he has to keep defending it.<\/h2>\n

\nCFTC and SEC: The End of Parallel Regulation?\n<\/p>\n

\nThe CFTC's official communications (cftc.gov) also indicate that the agency is working in close coordination with the SEC on a shared regulatory framework, explicitly aimed at reducing duplicated oversight. This matters: the most exasperating problem in US crypto regulation has been that a given token or service sometimes fell under the CFTC, sometimes the SEC, sometimes both \u2014 or neither, which is the worst combination of all.\n<\/p>\n

If that coordination works, it could be a breakthrough for Coinbase, Kraken, and every domestic (read: US) exchange: finally clear ground rules about what they can offer. If, however, the coordination collapses alongside any weakening of Selig's position, the industry returns to its prior unpredictable state. From experience: the crypto market has never loved regulation as much as it loves predictability. The two are not the same.<\/h2>\n

\nMit \u00fczennek egy\u00fctt ezek a h\u00edrek? El\u0151sz\u00f6r is azt, hogy a hivatalos amerikai \u00e1ll\u00e1spont a kripto-derivat\u00edv\u00e1kr\u00f3l jelent\u0151sen elmozdult \u2014 \u00e9s ez objekt\u00edven kedvez\u0151 a glob\u00e1lis piacnak. M\u00e1sodszor azt, hogy ez az elmozdul\u00e1s t\u00f6r\u00e9keny: ha a CFTC eln\u00f6k\u00e9nek \u00e9l\u0151 t\u00e9v\u00e9ben kell v\u00e9denie a d\u00f6nt\u00e9s\u00e9t, akkor a d\u00f6nt\u00e9s nincs biztons\u00e1gban. Harmadszor pedig azt, hogy a piac pszichol\u00f3gi\u00e1ja \u00e9ppen most rendk\u00edv\u00fcl \u00e1rulkod\u00f3. A Bitcoin egy sz\u00e1zal\u00e9kos napi mozg\u00e1sa egy ilyen szab\u00e1lyoz\u00e1si h\u00edr mellett azt mutatja: a befektet\u0151k megtanultak nem hib\u00e1zni a ‘regulation FUD’ fel\u00e9. Sem p\u00e1nikot, sem euf\u00f3ri\u00e1t nem l\u00e1tunk. Ez \u00e9retts\u00e9g \u2014 vagy f\u00e1radts\u00e1g, att\u00f3l f\u00fcgg, honnan n\u00e9zed.\n<\/p>\n

\nAz ‘ez\u00fattal m\u00e1s lesz’ \u00e9rz\u00e9s, amely a 2017-es \u00e9s 2021-es ciklusokban annyi sebet hagyott, most furcsam\u00f3d halkabban sz\u00f3l. Tal\u00e1n mert t\u00e9nyleg m\u00e1s \u2014 szab\u00e1lyozott derivat\u00edv\u00e1k, ETF-ek, int\u00e9zm\u00e9nyi r\u00e9szv\u00e9tel \u2014, tal\u00e1n mert a piac kif\u00e1radt a saj\u00e1t narrat\u00edv\u00e1iban. A kett\u0151 k\u00f6z\u00f6tti k\u00fcl\u00f6nbs\u00e9get nem lehet el\u0151re megmondani; csak ut\u00f3lag, \u00e9s csak f\u00e1j.\n<\/p>\n

The 'this time it's different' feeling that left so many scars in the 2017 and 2021 cycles is, oddly, quieter this time. Maybe because it really is different \u2014 regulated derivatives, ETFs, institutional participation \u2014 and maybe because the market has worn itself out on its own narratives. You can't tell the difference in advance; only in hindsight, and only painfully.<\/h2>\n

\nA k\u00f6vetkez\u0151 hetek figyelend\u0151 pontjai: indul-e t\u00e9nylegesen az amerikai onshore perps-piac, \u00e9s milyen t\u0151kek\u00f6vetelm\u00e9nyekkel; meddig marad Selig egyed\u00fcli eln\u00f6k; \u00e9s hogyan reag\u00e1l a Coinbase, illetve a Kraken \u2014 mindk\u00e9t t\u0151zsde r\u00e9g\u00f3ta dolgozik saj\u00e1t perpetual term\u00e9keken. Ha az indul\u00e1s konkr\u00e9t forgalmi adatokkal \u00e9s \u00e1tl\u00e1that\u00f3 kock\u00e1zatkezel\u00e9ssel \u00e9rkezik, az amerikai piacnak val\u00f3di es\u00e9lye lehet a glob\u00e1lis likvidit\u00e1s egy r\u00e9sz\u00e9nek visszahozatal\u00e1ra. Ha viszont az ellensz\u00e9l feler\u0151s\u00f6dik, akkor a ‘hazat\u00e9r\u00e9s’ ink\u00e1bb sz\u00e1nd\u00e9knyilatkozat marad, mint m\u00e9rhet\u0151 p\u00e9nzmozg\u00e1s.\n<\/p>\n

\nThings to watch over the coming weeks: whether the US onshore perps market actually launches, and at what capital requirements; how long Selig remains the sole chair; and how Coinbase and Kraken respond \u2014 both exchanges have been working on their own perpetual products for years. If the launch arrives with concrete volume data and transparent risk management, the US market has a real shot at clawing back some of the global liquidity. If, however, the headwinds intensify, 'coming home' will remain more a statement of intent than measurable capital flow.\n<\/p>\n

Sources<\/h2>\n