CFTC tells exchanges to end US geographic access limits

Last updated: 7 Nov 2026, 08:03 CET

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission has issued an interpretation saying designated contract markets (DCMs) should not restrict access based on where an otherwise eligible trader is located within the United States. According to the CFTC's 5 November press release (9323-26), DCMs must end domestic geographic restrictions that violate its impartial access requirements within 30 days, or submit to the Division of Market Oversight an explanation of why compliance is not feasible.

The interpretation concerns Commission Regulation 38.151(b), which requires DCMs to provide "competitive, open, fair, and impartial access" to their members and persons with trading privileges. "Derivatives markets must operate on a uniform basis at a national scale in order to achieve the purposes set out in the Commodity Exchange Act," Chairman Michael S. Selig said in the release. "Geographic access restrictions are inconsistent with those purposes and the Act's impartial access requirements."

What the CFTC asks of exchanges

The release does not say from what date the 30 days run, and the guidance does not restate the deadline. The guidance document is marked "As approved by the Commission (subject to pre-publication technical corrections)", with its effective date set as the date of publication. It names no exchange or intermediary.

The Commission's reasoning

In the guidance, the Commission argues that location-based limits can leave a trader who travels into a restricted area unable to manage a position or meet margin calls, fragment a national pool of liquidity, and weaken price discovery. It cites sports-related contracts with regional interest, such as whether a home team reaches its playoffs, and says election markets "may be particularly sensitive" to such restrictions. It concludes that "geographic access restrictions are inconsistent with the CEA and Commission rules and regulations".

How this sits alongside state and tribal action

The interpretation states the agency's view of its own rule. It is not a court ruling, and it does not modify or set aside any court order. Exchanges have been limiting access in some places in response to state regulators and litigation. RG reports that Ohio's casino regulator sent cease-and-desist letters to prediction markets in October and that Polymarket US said it would halt new sports contracts in Michigan. In California, a federal judge on 4 November barred Kalshi from offering sports contracts on the Indian lands of three tribes suing it, and RG reports Kalshi had told that court it geofenced those lands.

The release does not say how the 30-day expectation applies where an exchange restricts access because of a court order, and the guidance does not address that case. The release's "not feasible" route and its facts-and-circumstances language are the only qualifications it states.

Updates

• 7 Nov 2026: first published.