The Hyperliquid Policy Center and Multicoin Capital have filed a joint comment supporting the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s proposed prediction-market framework.
Summary
- Hyperliquid Policy Center and Multicoin support clear federal standards for regulated prediction market contract reviews.
- They want settlement terms to determine whether contracts involve gaming, war, assassination, or restricted activities.
- The groups seek published reasoning whenever the CFTC approves or rejects reviewed event contracts publicly.
The groups said written federal standards would help operators design event contracts and reduce policy swings between administrations.
The filing arrived on July 27, the proposal’s comment deadline. The rule would explain how the CFTC reviews contracts tied to gaming, war, terrorism, assassination and conduct that violates federal or state law.
Joint filing supports the CFTC proposal
The CFTC proposed amendments to Regulation 40.11 in June after an earlier consultation. Its three-step test would ask whether a product is an event contract, whether it involves a listed activity and whether trading would conflict with the public interest.
The plan does not ban every contract connected to those subjects. The CFTC would review products case by case during a process lasting up to 90 days. Chairman Michael Selig called it a “durable, transparent framework,” although the Commission may change the text before adopting a final rule.
Hyperliquid Policy Center and Multicoin said “clear rules beat guesswork.” They argued that standards written into regulations would offer more certainty than policies based mainly on staff interpretation. Their filing presents an industry position and does not resolve current legal disputes.
Groups seek one federal regulator
The joint comment argues that the CFTC should remain the single federal regulator for exchange-traded prediction contracts. It distinguished those products from bookmaker wagers. Exchange participants trade with one another at market prices, while the venue matches orders and charges fees.
Several states have challenged prediction-market operators under gambling laws. Platforms and the CFTC argue that the Commodity Exchange Act gives federal authorities exclusive control over contracts listed on registered derivatives exchanges. Courts have not produced one final nationwide answer.
As crypto.news previously reported, North Carolina approved access for CFTC-regulated prediction markets in July, while disputes continued elsewhere. Separate coverage described lawsuits involving Kentucky, Kalshi and Polymarket. Those cases test whether federal derivatives rules override state gaming requirements.
Filing seeks settlement-based tests and public reasons
The comment recommends that the CFTC decide whether a contract “involves” a restricted activity by examining the event that controls settlement. A passing link to war or gaming would not automatically trigger review. The payout condition would determine whether the contract enters a listed category.
The CFTC proposal follows a similar reading. It focuses on the underlying settlement event rather than treating trading itself as gaming. The agency also gives examples separating a contract on an unlawful act from one that settles on a lawful court decision.
The groups asked the Commission to publish more examples for difficult cases. They also want it to explain every completed review, including approvals. The proposal requires reasoning when the CFTC blocks a product, but approval decisions could guide later filings.
That request comes as the regulator demands more product-specific detail. On July 24, the CFTC issued its second 2026 warning against broad, template-style self-certifications. It said venues must provide contract terms, settlement methods, data sources and compliance analysis for each proposed variation.
Hyperliquid’s markets shape its policy interest
Hyperliquid introduced HIP-4 outcome contracts on mainnet in May. The fully collateralised products settle at zero or one and do not use leverage or liquidations. Validators approve and settle canonical markets using defined information sources within Hyperliquid’s network.
As crypto.news reported, Hyperliquid’s first offchain market covered the U.S. consumer price index. The platform later expanded its outcome-market system as part of a move beyond perpetual futures. The Policy Center has also asked regulators to account for non-custodial blockchain markets.
The group said Hyperliquid’s products support its case for technology-neutral rules. However, the onchain venue does not currently operate as a CFTC-registered U.S. exchange. A final event-contract rule would not alone create a legal route for decentralized platforms or U.S. users.
The filing also cited fast market growth. Hyperliquid Policy Center said major venues passed $50 billion in June volume. A crypto.news analysis placed combined June volume for Polymarket and Kalshi at $44.8 billion, showing that totals vary by platform and product coverage.
The CFTC will review the comments before deciding whether to revise or adopt the proposal. The process may clarify how registered venues list event contracts, while questions about decentralized access, state authority and registration remain open. National regulators, courts and lawmakers may still shape which firms can serve U.S. customers and which contracts may legally reach them in practice.
News,CFTC,Hyperledger,Prediction#Hyperliquid #Multicoin #CFTC #prediction #market #rules1785158672
