The FAQ is narrower than that.
• It is staff FAQ language (“the Divisions would not object”), not a Commission rule, statute, or durable no-action position. The document itself says it creates no enforceable rights and does not bind the Commission. That can be withdrawn or reinterpreted.
• It only covers already-registered CFTC entities (FCMs, DCMs, DCOs, SEFs, swap dealers). It does not let an unregistered onchain protocol operate as a U.S. exchange or clearinghouse, and it does not answer the bigger July asks: developers not registering just for shipping protocol software, registered firms using public chains for matching/execution/clearing/settlement, or turning Phantom’s wallet no-action into a rule.
• Public permissionless chains are not a complete substitute. Staff said they would not object to skipping a separate offchain copy, but firms using a public network still must have systems that can produce the records if the chain or a block explorer is down. Tokenized customer-fund investments are only tokenized versions of assets already allowed under Regulation 1.25, with the same legal/economic rights plus existing liquidity, concentration, maturity, and custody limits—not a new green light for crypto as customer money.
The announcement also sits next to a stalled market-structure bill.
Today, the
@CFTC took an important step toward bringing regulated onchain markets to the United States: firms can now keep required records on a public blockchain without being required to maintain a separate offchain copy.
The CFTC also clarified that firms can invest customer funds in tokenized versions of investments that are already permitted.
That matters because a regulated firm can now use a public blockchain as its system of record, where every entry is transparent, tamper-evident, and verifiable by anyone. Those are the assurances the CFTC’s recordkeeping rules exist to provide, and public blockchains deliver them by design.
In July, HPC and
@phantom asked the CFTC to provide this clarity. Today, the CFTC delivered.