US Approves High-Leverage Bitcoin Trading as Crypto Founders Face Fundraising Hurdles

On May 29, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) approved a Bitcoin perpetual contract for a regulated US exchange. Nearly three months later, on August 18, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) proposed a legal pathway through which crypto projects could eventually raise capital from the public under rules tailored for token networks.

This sequence is unusual for Washington’s efforts to rebuild the American crypto market. Rules governing the trading and hedging of an established asset are already generating live products, while the regulations that would allow founders to finance new assets must still pass through public comment periods and a subsequent SEC vote.

Bitcoin traded around $77,000 on August 21, marking a 22% increase over seven days. CoinGlass recorded approximately $154.6 billion in 24-hour Bitcoin futures volume and $56.2 billion in open interest. The latest rolling window also showed about $840 million in Bitcoin futures liquidations, while the previous day’s snapshot captured $3.1 billion in bearish crypto liquidations as BTC broke through $72,000. These overlapping windows describe stages of the same rally rather than separate totals.

Both datasets cover global platforms, including offshore markets, but they illustrate how heavily a rapid Bitcoin repricing travels through derivatives while the domestic true-perpetual market is still being established.

Kalshi’s approval of BTCPERP established that a US platform can list a true crypto perpetual under existing derivatives law, and Bitnomial now offers a similar product.

The SEC’s Regulation Crypto Assets remains a proposal that no issuer can currently utilize. For now, a regulated institution has a clearer route to trade a crypto derivative in the United States than a founder has to fund the token that might one day trade alongside it.

Perpetuals fit through an old regulatory door

A standard futures contract expires on a specific date, meaning a trader who wants to maintain the position must close it or roll it into a later contract. A perpetual contract has no expiry. Instead, regular payments between long and short traders help keep its price close to the underlying market, allowing the position to remain open as long as the trader maintains sufficient collateral.

Crypto exchanges outside the United States turned this design into the industry’s primary derivatives product because it provides traders with continuous exposure without repeated contract rolls. US exchanges spent years using dated futures, including contracts with very long expiries that behaved somewhat like perpetuals but still ended on a fixed date. The legal category for a true perpetual within the domestic market essentially did not exist.

The CFTC resolved this issue through a framework it already uses for new futures products. Kalshi filed BTCPERP under Regulation 40.3, which allows the commission to review a contract’s terms and determine whether it complies with the rules for a designated contract market. Once approved, Kalshi’s perpetuals platform could offer a Bitcoin contract with exposure of up to six times the collateral posted by a trader.

Alongside the individual approval, the CFTC published a policy statement for perpetual contracts explaining how its existing core principles apply. Exchanges now have clearer guidance on contract design and funding systems, but each exchange must still file its own application and meet the usual rules for margin, surveillance, customer protection, and clearing. One approved product therefore provides a route for others to follow without granting automatic permission to list every perpetual.

The commission briefly offered another route on June 12, when it granted no-action relief to Bitnomial and Coinbase Derivatives. This relief allowed the two exchanges to remove expiration dates from specified existing contracts without treating the amendment as a completely new listing. The relief expired on June 30, making it a short conversion window rather than a standing option that exchanges can use today.

Bitnomial states it has launched US perpetual futures, including a live Bitcoin contract. Coinbase’s public materials still describe its domestic perpetual-style products as long-dated futures with five-year expiries, and a May update indicates that eligible US customers will receive access to Deribit perpetuals at a later stage. In the absence of a newer public contract specification, Coinbase should not be counted as a verified true-perpetual launch.

The CFTC’s Innovation Advisory Committee met on August 20 and discussed crypto regulation alongside artificial intelligence and prediction markets. The committee advises the commission, and the official recap announced no new perpetual approval, leaving the product status unchanged while extending an agency process that has already moved from one contract filing to live US markets at Kalshi and Bitnomial.

Live products and proposals aren’t the same thing

Regulatory announcements can sound equally final in a headline even when they are at very different stages. The current situation is easier to understand when approved products, expired relief, open comment periods, and proposed rules are separated:

Initiative	Regulator	Status on Aug. 21	What it permits or explores
Kalshi BTCPERP	CFTC	Approved and live	True Bitcoin perpetual on a designated contract market
Bitnomial crypto perpetuals	CFTC	Live	US-regulated perpetual futures, including Bitcoin
Coinbase domestic perpetual-style futures	CFTC-regulated venue	Publicly described with five-year expiries	Long-dated contracts; true-perpetual conversion is unverified publicly
June no-action relief	CFTC	Expired June 30	Temporary route for Bitnomial and Coinbase to amend specified contracts
Energy 24/7 trading and perpetuals inquiry	CFTC	Comment period open through Aug. 26	Possible use of around-the-clock and perpetual design in energy markets
Regulation Crypto Assets	SEC	Proposed; comments due Oct. 20	Token-specific offerings up to $75 million and a safe-harbor exit
CLARITY Act	Congress	Senate process pending	Statutory division of crypto market authority between the SEC and CFTC

Derivatives moved first because the CFTC could place them inside an established exchange system. A designated contract market already has requirements covering capital and customer protection, along with systems for clearing and trade surveillance. The commission needed to decide whether a particular contract complied with those duties; it did not have to invent a new kind of company or a complete legal framework for every issuer that might use it.

Token fundraising requires the SEC to resolve a broader set of issues. The agency needs rules for what issuers disclose, how much they can raise, which financial statements they must provide, and how buyers can resell the token. It must also decide when a token can separate from the investment contract used to finance it and whether federal rules override state registration requirements.

The proposal entered the Federal Register on August 21, giving the public until October 20 to comment before the agency considers revisions and votes on a final version.

Congress is operating on a separate, third schedule. The Senate Banking Committee advanced the CLARITY Act in May, and a cloture motion is scheduled to ripen on September 15. Senate Banking Chair Tim Scott stated on August 20 that he still sees a viable route to a September vote, while CryptoSlate’s review of the final draft explained how the bill would define the SEC-CFTC boundary in federal law and make that allocation harder for a future commission to rewrite.

These different timetables already affect who can use the American market. A regulated institution can take a Bitcoin position larger than its posted collateral and hold a contract with no expiry, while a founder seeking to sell tokens under crypto-specific public disclosures has no active SEC route.

Trading companies can move more of their business onto domestic venues without waiting for the next token issuer, while projects still rely on conventional securities exemptions, private funding, or offshore structures.

Crypto sends its market design back to Wall Street

Perpetuals are also moving beyond the asset class that made them popular. On July 23, the CFTC extended through August 26 its request for comment on 24/7 trading and perpetual contracts in US energy derivatives, bringing a format refined on offshore crypto exchanges into a discussion about oil, gas, and power markets.

The appeal is evident. Traders using a perpetual do not have to choose a maturity date or keep rolling a position, while the exchange replaces expiry with continuous funding and liquidation systems that keep the contract tied to its reference price. This can make exposure more convenient and use capital more efficiently, although the systems must operate continuously and manage risk without a scheduled reset.

Energy also demonstrates why crypto’s design cannot be copied into every market. Bitcoin has no warehouse, delivery schedule, or seasonal production cycle, while a barrel of oil is connected to storage costs and physical supply. The CFTC’s case-by-case approach allows regulated exchanges to test perpetual mechanics while accounting for those differences, and its policy statement does not create a right to list every asset with any margin setting.

The SEC is trying to build something broader and more reusable on the fundraising side. Regulation Crypto Assets would provide a $5 million startup exemption, $20 million and $75 million public tiers, and a safe harbor through which a token could separate from the original investment contract once the issuer’s essential work ends.

Because that system would cover many projects and several stages of their lives, it has more legal ground to define before anyone can use it.

Building the trading layer first has a practical benefit if the SEC eventually finalizes its proposal. Newly financed tokens could enter a domestic market with regulated hedging and better price discovery already in place.

The drawback is that sophisticated trading capacity can expand while the supply of projects legally financed through public token sales stays limited, leaving the United States better prepared to trade assets than to create them.

The current market therefore reflects the order in which the rules arrived: Kalshi and Bitnomial have live true perpetuals, the June conversion window has closed, and the CFTC is considering whether crypto’s around-the-clock design can work in energy. The SEC has only opened the process for token fundraising, so bringing creation home will depend on whether the commission turns that proposal into a usable final rule.