# CFTC Letter No. 25-14: The Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s Market Participants Division and Division of Market Oversight issued interpretative guidance confirming the application of certain cross-border definitions to SBC Limited

> Federal · Agency guidance · In force

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/CFTC_L25_14

## Section

- **Citation:** CFTC Letter No. 25-14
- **Heading:** The Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s Market Participants Division and Division of Market Oversight issued interpretative guidance confirming the application of certain cross-border definitions to SBC Limited
- **Jurisdiction:** Federal
- **Kind:** Agency guidance
- **Status:** In force
- **Text as of:** August 14, 2026
- **Source:** Compiled text
- **Location:** CFTC Staff Letters (2008-present) / The Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s Market Participants Division and Division of Market Oversight issued interpretative guidance confirming the application of certain cross-border definitions to SBC Limited.

## Text

Summary: The Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s Market Participants Division and Division of Market Oversight issued interpretative guidance confirming the application of certain cross-border definitions to SBC Limited.

CFTC Letter No. 25-14 Interpretative May 21, 2025
1

RE: Staff Interpretation Regarding Certain Cross-Border Definitions
Ladies and Gentlemen:
The Market Participants Division (“MPD”) and the Division of Market Oversight (“DMO” and
together with MPD, the “Divisions”) of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”
or “Commission”) are issuing this letter in response to a request from SCB Limited (“SCB” or
“Susquehanna Crypto”) that the Divisions issue an interpretative letter pursuant to 17 CFR
140.99 providing guidance confirming that, under the facts and circumstances summarized below,
SCB would qualify as a “non-U.S. person” as defined by Commission regulation 23.23(a)(10), not
a “U.S. person” as defined by the 2013 Guidance (as defined below), a “foreign located person”
as defined by Commission regulation 3.10(c)(1)(ii), not a “person located in the United States” for
purposes of Commission regulation 30.1(c), and not a “participant located in the United States”
for purposes of Commission regulation 48.2(c) (the “Request for Interpretation”).1
I.
Regulatory Background
Section 4(b) of the Commodity Exchange Act (“CEA”)2 grants the Commission the authority to
regulate the foreign futures activity of persons “located in the United States.”3 The Commission
has implemented this statutory authority with respect to foreign brokers who provide domestic
customers access to foreign futures through its Part 30 regulations and with respect to foreign
exchanges who provide direct access to domestic customers through its Part 48 regulations.4

1 Commission regulations referred to herein may be found at 17 CFR CH I (2024).
2 7 U.S.C. 1 et. seq.
3 7 U.S.C. 6(b)
lemented this statutory authority with respect to foreign brokers who provide domestic
customers access to foreign futures through its Part 30 regulations and with respect to foreign
exchanges who provide direct access to domestic customers through its Part 48 regulations.4

1 Commission regulations referred to herein may be found at 17 CFR CH I (2024).
2 7 U.S.C. 1 et. seq.
3 7 U.S.C. 6(b).
4 17 CFR Part 30, 17 CFR Part 48.
U.S. COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION
Three Lafayette Centre
1155 21st Street, NW, Washington, DC 20581
Telephone: (202) 418-5000
www.cftc.gov

Market Participants
Division
Thomas J. Smith
Acting Director

Division of Market
Oversight
Rahul Varma
Acting Director

CFTC Letter No. 25-14 Interpretative May 21, 2025
2

Commission regulation 30.4(a) establishes the requirement that any foreign broker that solicits or
accepts orders from a foreign futures or foreign options customer and, in connection therewith,
accepts any money, securities or property (or extends credit in lieu thereof) to margin, guarantee
or secure any trades or contracts that may result therefrom, must register with the Commission as
a futures commission merchant (“FCM”).5 For purposes of this requirement, Commission
regulation 30.1(c) defines “foreign futures or foreign options customer” to mean, in relevant part,
“any person located in the United States, its territories or possessions who trades in foreign futures
or foreign options.”6 This registration requirement is subject to limited exemptions.7
With respect to foreign exchanges, Commission regulation 48.3(a) provides that any foreign board
of trade (“FBOT”) that permits direct access to its electronic trading and order matching system
must register with the Commission as an FBOT.8 Similarly, for purposes of this requirement,
Commission regulation 48.2(c) defines “direct access” to mean, in relevant part, “an explicit grant
of authority by a foreign board of trade to an identified member or other participant locat
foreign board
of trade (“FBOT”) that permits direct access to its electronic trading and order matching system
must register with the Commission as an FBOT.8 Similarly, for purposes of this requirement,
Commission regulation 48.2(c) defines “direct access” to mean, in relevant part, “an explicit grant
of authority by a foreign board of trade to an identified member or other participant located in the
United States to enter trades directly into the trade matching system of the foreign board of trade.”9
Relatedly, the Commission has expressed its view that customer protection efforts be left to local
authorities in areas where neither domestic customers or intermediaries are involved.10
Specifically, pursuant to Commission regulation 3.10(c)(2)(ii), a foreign located person engaging
in the activity of an FCM only on behalf of foreign located persons is not required to register with
the Commission as an FCM.11 For purposes of this regulation, the Commission defines “foreign
located person” as “a person located outside the United States, its territories, or possessions.”12
This exemption is afforded regardless of whether the transactions engaged in are executed on a
registered designated contract market or swap execution facility (“SEF”), FBOT, or executed

5 17 CFR 30.4(a).
6 See 17 CFR 30.1 (defining “foreign futures or foreign options customer”).
7 See 17 CFR 30.4(a) (providing exemptions from registration as an FCM for a foreign futures and options broker
(“FFOB”) who (1) accepts orders from or carries a U.S. futures commission merchant's foreign futures and options
customer omnibus account; (2) accepts orders from or carries a U.S. futures commission merchant’s proprietary
account; or (3) accepts orders from or carries a U.S
tomer”).
7 See 17 CFR 30.4(a) (providing exemptions from registration as an FCM for a foreign futures and options broker
(“FFOB”) who (1) accepts orders from or carries a U.S. futures commission merchant's foreign futures and options
customer omnibus account; (2) accepts orders from or carries a U.S. futures commission merchant’s proprietary
account; or (3) accepts orders from or carries a U.S. affiliate account which is proprietary to the FFOB ); see also 17
CFR 30.10 (providing any person adversely affected by any Part 30 requirement the ability to petition the
Commission for an exemption that the Commission may, in its discretion, grant according to regulation 30.10).
8 17 CFR 48.3(a).
9 See 17 CFR 48.2(c) (defining “direct access”).
10 See Exemption From Registration for Certain Foreign Persons: Notice of proposed rulemaking, 72 FR 15637 at
15638 (April 2, 2007) (proposing the formalization of the “foreign broker exemption,” discussing the Commission’s
historical approach, and quoting Administrative Determination No. 51 (March 17, 1938)).
11 17 CFR 3.10(c)(2)(ii).
12 See 17 CFR 3.10(c)(1)(ii) (defining “foreign located person”).

CFTC Letter No. 25-14 Interpretative May 21, 2025
3

over-the-counter, provided that all transactions required to be cleared on a registered derivatives
clearing organization are submitted for clearing through a registered FCM.13
Parts 30 and 48 of the Commission’s regulations do not expressly define what it means for an
individual or entity who trades in foreign futures contracts to be “located in the United States” or
“located outside the United States” for purposes of Commission regulations 30.1(c), 48.2(c), and
3.10(c)(1)(ii)
derivatives
clearing organization are submitted for clearing through a registered FCM.13
Parts 30 and 48 of the Commission’s regulations do not expressly define what it means for an
individual or entity who trades in foreign futures contracts to be “located in the United States” or
“located outside the United States” for purposes of Commission regulations 30.1(c), 48.2(c), and
3.10(c)(1)(ii). However, the Commission has equated “location” with the customer’s domicile.14
In the case of a legal person, such as a proprietary trading firm, the Divisions have taken the view
that domicile is ascertained by looking to an entity’s place of formation, as well as its principal
place of business.15 Further, the Commission has determined in other contexts that, consistent
with the view of the Securities and Exchange Commission and federal case law, “principal place
of business” means “the location from which the officers, partners, or managers of the legal person
primarily direct, control, and coordinate the activities of the legal person.”16
While the Commission’s extraterritorial jurisdiction over futures activities focuses on physical
location, its extraterritorial jurisdiction over swaps activity implements a different framework that
focuses on whether foreign swaps activity has a connection to U.S. commerce. Specifically,
section 2(i) of the CEA, as amended by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”), grants the Commission extraterritorial jurisdiction over
swaps activity outside of the U.S. when, “those activities… have a direct and significant
connection with activities in, or effect on, commerce of the United States…”17
In 2013, the Commission issued its Interpretive Guidance and Policy Statement Regarding
Compliance With Certain Swap Regulations (the “2013 Guidance”) to further clarify the
Commission’s cross-border swaps jurisdiction.18 Specifically, for purposes of applicable

13 17 CFR 3.10(c)(2)(ii)
a direct and significant
connection with activities in, or effect on, commerce of the United States…”17
In 2013, the Commission issued its Interpretive Guidance and Policy Statement Regarding
Compliance With Certain Swap Regulations (the “2013 Guidance”) to further clarify the
Commission’s cross-border swaps jurisdiction.18 Specifically, for purposes of applicable

13 17 CFR 3.10(c)(2)(ii).
14 See Foreign Futures and Foreign Options Transactions, 52 F.R. 28980 (August 5, 1987) (“With the development
of international futures markets, and increasing public awareness of such markets, these regulations will add to the
Commission’s existing customer protection regulatory scheme coverage of foreign futures and options transactions
undertaken by U.S. domiciliaries”).
15 See, e.g., CFTC Staff Letter 05-02, Comm. Fut. L. Rep. (CCH) ¶ 30,016 (Dec. 10, 2005) (citing 17 CFR 4.7,
which defines the term “non-United States person” to include, in part, a “corporation . . . organized under the laws of
a foreign jurisdiction which has its principal place of business in a foreign jurisdiction”).
16 See Cross-Border Application of the Registration Thresholds and Certain Requirements Applicable to Swap
Dealers and Major Swap Participants (“Swap Dealer Cross-Border Rule”) 85 FR 56924, 56936-37 (September
14, 2020) (citing the interpretation’s consistency with Hertz Corp. v. Friend and the SEC in its rule addressing the
regulation of cross-border securities-based swap activities). See also Hertz Corp. v. Friend, 559 U.S. 77, 80 (2010);
Application of “Security-Based Swap Dealer” and “Major Security-Based Swap Participant” Definitions to Cross-
Border Security-Based Swap Activities; Republication, 79 FR 47278 at 47310-47311 (Aug. 12, 2014).
17 7 U.S.C. 2(i)
18 Interpretive Guidance and Policy Statement Regarding Compliance With Certain Swap Regulations (the “2013
Guidance”), 78 FR 45292 (July 26, 2013)
559 U.S. 77, 80 (2010);
Application of “Security-Based Swap Dealer” and “Major Security-Based Swap Participant” Definitions to Cross-
Border Security-Based Swap Activities; Republication, 79 FR 47278 at 47310-47311 (Aug. 12, 2014).
17 7 U.S.C. 2(i)
18 Interpretive Guidance and Policy Statement Regarding Compliance With Certain Swap Regulations (the “2013
Guidance”), 78 FR 45292 (July 26, 2013). The 2013 Guidance provided the Commission’s interpretation of the
application of CEA section 2(i) to many of the Commission’s swap regulations, including ones related to calculating

CFTC Letter No. 25-14 Interpretative May 21, 2025
4

Commission regulations, the 2013 Guidance defined a “U.S. person” as including but not limited
to, in relevant part, “any corporation, partnership, limited liability company, business or other
trust, association, joint-stock company, fund or any form of enterprise similar to any of the
foregoing … in each case that is organized or incorporated under the laws of a state or other
jurisdiction in the United States or having its principal place of business in the United States.”19
The 2013 Guidance also interpreted the phrase “principal place of business” to generally include
entities that are organized outside the United States but have the “center of direction, control, and
coordination” of their business activities in the United States, i.e., the “nerve center.”20 The
Commission also provided clarity regarding its interpretation of “principal place of business” by
providing a non-comprehensive list of hypothetical examples of particularly structured entities
whereby the Commission provided its analysis.21
In 2020, the Commission subsequently adopted Commission regulation 23.23, which supersedes
the 2013 Guidance with respect to the extraterritoriality application of the swap dealer (“SD”) de
minimis threshold calculation.22 Similar to the definition of “U.S. person” in the 2013 Guidance,
Commission regulation 23.23 defines “U.S
ructured entities
whereby the Commission provided its analysis.21
In 2020, the Commission subsequently adopted Commission regulation 23.23, which supersedes
the 2013 Guidance with respect to the extraterritoriality application of the swap dealer (“SD”) de
minimis threshold calculation.22 Similar to the definition of “U.S. person” in the 2013 Guidance,
Commission regulation 23.23 defines “U.S. person,” in relevant part, as “a partnership,
corporation, trust, investment vehicle, or other legal person organized, incorporated, or established
under the laws of the United States or having its principal place of business in the United States.”23
Commission regulation 23.23 further defines “principal place of business” in part as “the location
from which the officers, partners, or managers of the legal person primarily direct, control, and

the notional amounts of swap transactions for purposes of the de minimis threshold, SD registration requirements,
real-time public reporting, swap data repository reporting, large trader reporting, mandatory clearing, and mandatory
execution.
19 Id. at 45316.
20 Id. at 45309.
21 Id. at 45310-45311. Of particular relevance, the Commission provided the example of an asset management firm
located outside the United States that establishes a collective investment vehicle located outside the United States
whereby personnel of the asset management who are located outside the United States would be responsible for
implementing the investment and trading strategy but personnel located in the United States would be involved in
managing the investment portfolio. The Commission held that the collective investment vehicle would not be within
the interpretation of the term “U.S. person” even if personnel in the U.S. office may act autonomously on a day-to-
day basis because they would be under the direction of senior personnel in the non-U.S. office regarding how they
are implementing the investment objectives and would report to personnel in the non-U.S
. The Commission held that the collective investment vehicle would not be within
the interpretation of the term “U.S. person” even if personnel in the U.S. office may act autonomously on a day-to-
day basis because they would be under the direction of senior personnel in the non-U.S. office regarding how they
are implementing the investment objectives and would report to personnel in the non-U.S. office, who generally
hold higher positions within the firm.
22 17 CFR 23.23; see generally Swap Dealer Cross-Border Rule, see note 16, supra. In addition to superseding the
2013 Guidance with respect to the SD de minimis threshold calculation, Commission regulation 23.23 supersedes
the 2013 guidance with respect to many, but not all, of the requirements applicable to SDs under Title VII of the
Dodd-Frank Act. Several SD requirements (mandatory clearing, mandatory trade execution, real-time public
reporting, swap data repository reporting, large trader reporting) remain subject to the 2013 Guidance.
23 17 CFR 23.23(23)(i)(B).

CFTC Letter No. 25-14 Interpretative May 21, 2025
5

coordinate the activities of the legal person.”24 Commission regulation 23.23 also defines “non-
U.S. person” to mean “any person that is not a U.S. person.”25
II.
Summary of the Request for Interpretation
Based on the representations made in the Request for Interpretation, we understand the relevant
facts to be as follows. SCB is a digital assets proprietary trading firm organized in the Bahamas
and licensed as a digital assets business with the Securities Commission of the Bahamas. SCB
engages in market-making and other trading activity in spot and derivatives markets for virtual
currencies and other digital assets and trades both over-the-counter and on exchanges (either
directly or through brokers). SCB’s derivatives activity consists of futures, options, and perpetual
contracts, and SCB trades primarily using automated trading algorithms based on input from its
qualitative research staff
-making and other trading activity in spot and derivatives markets for virtual
currencies and other digital assets and trades both over-the-counter and on exchanges (either
directly or through brokers). SCB’s derivatives activity consists of futures, options, and perpetual
contracts, and SCB trades primarily using automated trading algorithms based on input from its
qualitative research staff. SCB’s algorithms are overseen by a team of traders, who may sometime
trade on a manual basis.
SCB’s main office and headquarters are in the Bahamas and its high-level officers (such as its
chief executive officer, chief operating officer, and chief compliance officer) primarily direct,
control, and coordinate activities from the Bahamas. SCB operates additional offices in other non-
U.S. locations and does not currently have offices in the United States. SCB is indirectly owned
by a small number of closely associated natural persons who are residents in the United States.
These persons are also co-owners and co-managers of a separate, U.S.-based proprietary trading
firm (the “related firm”). SCB contracts with the related firm to receive information technology,
legal, compliance, and administrative services but the related firm does not provide trading
services to SCB and SCB does not have access to the related firm’s trading algorithms.
SCB would like to expand its activities into the United States, particularly through the engagement
of U.S.-based traders, quantitative researchers and software developers, all of whom would be
employed by an affiliate, SCB Advisors Limited (“SCBA”), a company organized in the Bahamas.
SCB would also like to license trading technology from the related firm and host trading
technology on U.S.-located servers. In the event that SCB engages U.S.-based traders from SCBA
and invests resources in the growing U.S
ders, quantitative researchers and software developers, all of whom would be
employed by an affiliate, SCB Advisors Limited (“SCBA”), a company organized in the Bahamas.
SCB would also like to license trading technology from the related firm and host trading
technology on U.S.-located servers. In the event that SCB engages U.S.-based traders from SCBA
and invests resources in the growing U.S. digital assets market, it requests a determination that it
would nevertheless qualify as “located outside the United States” for purposes of the
Commission’s futures regulations and as a “non-U.S. person” for purposes of the Commission’s
swap regulations.
SCB trades in virtual currency futures contracts listed on non-U.S. exchanges both directly and
through the use of non-U.S. brokers, which constitute “foreign futures” for purposes of the CEA
and Commission regulations. As such, if SCB were deemed to be “located in the United States,”
the non-U.S. exchanges that provide direct access to SCB to transact in foreign futures would be

24 17 CFR 23.23(23)(ii).
25 17 CFR 23.23(10).

CFTC Letter No. 25-14 Interpretative May 21, 2025
6

required to register with the Commission as FBOTs pursuant to Commission regulation 48.3(a).26
Similarly, if SCB was considered to be “located in the United States,” the non-U.S. brokers that
SCB uses to transact in foreign futures on non-U.S. exchanges would be required to register with
the Commission as FCMs pursuant to Commission regulation 30.4(a).27
SCB also trades in virtual currency options and perpetual contracts, which SCB states the
Commission has determined are subject to regulation as swaps under the CEA and Commission
regulations.28 According to SCB, in the event SCB was considered a “U.S. person” for purposes
of swaps regulations, then SCB’s swap transactions would count towards the SD de minimis
threshold and could subject SCB to SD registration, pursuant to Commission regulation
23.23(b)(1).29 Further, any non-U.S
Commission has determined are subject to regulation as swaps under the CEA and Commission
regulations.28 According to SCB, in the event SCB was considered a “U.S. person” for purposes
of swaps regulations, then SCB’s swap transactions would count towards the SD de minimis
threshold and could subject SCB to SD registration, pursuant to Commission regulation
23.23(b)(1).29 Further, any non-U.S. exchanges on which SCB trades swaps would be subject to
registration as SEFs pursuant to Commission regulation 37.3(a)(1).30 Additionally, the non-U.S.
exchanges on which SCB transacts in swaps, as well as any non-U.S. brokers utilized by SCB to
engage in these transactions, would be subject to registration requirements as FCMs.31 Finally, if
SCB were considered a “U.S. person” for purposes of the Commission’s swaps regulations, SCB’s
swap transactions would be subject to the reporting requirements in Parts 43 and 45 of the
Commission’s regulations.32
III.
Staff Interpretation
As described above, SCB trades virtual currency futures contracts listed on non-U.S. exchanges
both directly and through the use of non-U.S. brokers. Based on the facts presented in the Request
for Interpretation, specifically that SCB’s place of organization and the location where its high-
level officers primarily direct, control, and coordinate SCB’s activities are outside the United
States, the Divisions confirm that:
(1)
SCB is not a “person located in the United States” for purposes of the “foreign futures or
foreign options customer” definition in Commission regulation 30.1(c);
Interpretation, specifically that SCB’s place of organization and the location where its high-
level officers primarily direct, control, and coordinate SCB’s activities are outside the United
States, the Divisions confirm that:
(1)
SCB is not a “person located in the United States” for purposes of the “foreign futures or
foreign options customer” definition in Commission regulation 30.1(c);
(2)
SCB is not a “participant located in the United States” for purposes of Commission
regulation 48.2(c); and

26 17 CFR 48.3(a).
27 17 CFR 30.4(a).
28 With respect to options, pursuant to section 4c(b) of the CEA, 7 U.S.C. 6c(b), and 17 CFR 32.2, options are
generally regulated by the Commission as swaps. With respect to perpetual contracts, see CFTC Staff Request for
Comment on the Trading and Clearing of “Perpetual” Style Derivatives, CFTC Release Number 9069-25 (Apr. 21,
2025), available on the Commission’s website, CFTC.gov.
29 17 CFR 23.23(b)(1).
30 17 CFR 37.3(a)(1).
31 7 U.S.C. 6d(a), 7 U.S.C. 6d(f), 7 U.S.C. 1a(28), 17 CFR 1.3, 17 CFR 3.10.
32 17 CFR Part 43, 17 CFR Part 45.

CFTC Letter No. 25-14 Interpretative May 21, 2025
7

(3)
SCB is a “foreign located person” for purposes of Commission regulation 3.10(c)(1)(ii).
Thus, any non-U.S. exchanges that provide direct access to SCB would not, solely on the basis of
the provision of such direct access to SCB, be required to register with the Commission as FBOTs
pursuant to Commission regulation 48.3(a). Similarly, any non-U.S. brokers through which SCB
engages in futures would, solely with respect to the provision of such services to SCB, be exempt
from registration as an FCM pursuant to Commission regulations 3.10(c)(2)(ii) and 30.4(a).
As described above, SCB also trades in virtual currency options and perpetual contracts, and states
that such transactions are subject to regulation as swaps33 under the CEA and Commission
regulations
SCB
engages in futures would, solely with respect to the provision of such services to SCB, be exempt
from registration as an FCM pursuant to Commission regulations 3.10(c)(2)(ii) and 30.4(a).
As described above, SCB also trades in virtual currency options and perpetual contracts, and states
that such transactions are subject to regulation as swaps33 under the CEA and Commission
regulations. Based upon the facts presented in the Request for Interpretation, specifically that
SCB’s place of organization and “principal place of business” (i.e., the location where its high-
level officers primarily direct, control, and coordinate SCB’s activities) are outside the United
States, the Divisions confirm that SCB is a “non-U.S. person” and not a “U.S. person” as defined
by Commission regulation 23.23(a) and the 2013 Guidance. Thus, in the context of SCB’s swaps
activity, (1) SCB’s swap dealing activity would not count towards the SD de minimis threshold
pursuant to Commission regulation 23.23(b)(1), and (2) SCB’s swap transactions would not be
subject to the reporting requirements in Parts 43 and 45 of the Commission’s regulations.
Additionally, by virtue of SCB being a “non-U.S. person:”
(1)
The non-U.S. exchanges on which SCB trades would not, solely on the basis of such
trading by SCB, be subject to registration as a SEF pursuant to CEA section 5h(a)(1) and
Commission regulation 37.3(a)(1); and
wap transactions would not be
subject to the reporting requirements in Parts 43 and 45 of the Commission’s regulations.
Additionally, by virtue of SCB being a “non-U.S. person:”
(1)
The non-U.S. exchanges on which SCB trades would not, solely on the basis of such
trading by SCB, be subject to registration as a SEF pursuant to CEA section 5h(a)(1) and
Commission regulation 37.3(a)(1); and
(2)
The non-U.S. exchanges and brokers through which SCB trades would not, solely on the
basis of the provision of such services to SCB, be subject to registration as an FCM
pursuant to CEA Section 4d.
Finally, the Divisions note that, as described in the Request for Interpretation, SCB’s desire to
expand its activities into the United States through: (1) the engagement of U.S.-based traders,
quantitative researchers and software developers employed by SCBA; (2) the licensing of certain
trading technology from the related firm; and (3) the hosting of trading technology on U.S.-located
servers, would not impact SCB’s status as a “non-U.S. person,” a person that is not “located in the
United States,” and a “foreign located person” for purposes of the related Commission regulations.
Regardless of SCB’s proposed expansion activities, the Divisions are of the view that, taking into
consideration the requirements in Parts 30 and 48 and Commission regulations 3.10(c), 23.23, and
the 2013 Guidance, SCB’s place of organization and principal place of business are the factors that
are of relevance in determining its cross-border status.
This interpretation represents the position of the Divisions and does not necessarily represent the
views of the Commission. This letter and the interpretation set forth herein, are based upon the

33 See supra note 28.
(c), 23.23, and
the 2013 Guidance, SCB’s place of organization and principal place of business are the factors that
are of relevance in determining its cross-border status.
This interpretation represents the position of the Divisions and does not necessarily represent the
views of the Commission. This letter and the interpretation set forth herein, are based upon the

33 See supra note 28.

CFTC Letter No. 25-14 Interpretative May 21, 2025
8

facts and circumstances represented to the staff of the Divisions. Any different, changed, or
omitted material facts or circumstances may require a different position or render this letter void.
As with all interpretative letters, the Divisions retain the authority to condition further, modify,
suspend, terminate, or otherwise restrict the interpretation provided herein, in their discretion.
If you have any questions concerning this correspondence, please contact Fern Simmons, Senior
Special Counsel, MPD, at fsimmons@cftc.gov; Matthew Boylan, Special Counsel, MPD, at
mboylan@cftc.gov; or Rahul Varma, DMO, at rvarma@cftc.gov.

Sincerely,

___________________________________
Thomas J. Smith
Acting Director
Market Participants Division

___________________________________
Rahul Varma
Acting Director
Division of Market Oversight

cc:
Kathleen Clapper, Compliance
National Futures Association, Chicago

Michael Otten, OTC Derivatives
National Futures Association, New York

## Nearby sections

- [CFTC Letter No. 08-03 Eurex Deutschlands Request for No-Action Relief in Connection with the Offer and Sale in the United States of Eight Futures Contracts Based on Security Indices Derived from the Dow Jones STOXX 600 Index.](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/CFTC_L08_03.md)
- [CFTC Letter No. 08-05 Eurex Deutschlands Request for No-Action Relief in Connection with the Offer and Sale in the United States of its Futures Contract Based on the RDXxt USD-RDX Extended Index.](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/CFTC_L08_05.md)
- [CFTC Letter No. 08-11 Euronext Paris SAs request for no-action relief in connection with the offer and sale in the United States of its futures contracts based on the FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Europe Index and the FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Euro Zone Index.](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/CFTC_L08_11.md)
- [CFTC Letter No. 08-13 Eurex Deutschlands Request for No-Action Relief in Connection with the Offer and Sale in the United States of its Futures Contracts Based on the SLI Swiss Leader Index, the Swiss Market Index Midcap, the Dow Jones Eur...](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/CFTC_L08_13.md)
- [CFTC Letter No. 08-15 The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight granted exemptive relief from certain of the Part 4 regulations to the registered CPO of a commodity pool, whose shares the CPO intended to publicly offer and to lis...](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/CFTC_L08_15.md)
- [CFTC Letter No. 08-17 DCIO received a request for guidance from the Joint Audit Committee concerning FCM regulatory reporting requirements for investments in a money market mutual fund. The fund had announced that its net asset value per s...](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/CFTC_L08_17.md)
- [CFTC Letter No. 08-18 The Division of Market Oversight issued a letter granting no-action relief to permit the Brazilian Derivatives Exchange, BM&F Bovespa S.A. – Bolsa de Valores, Mercadorias e Futuros (BM&F), to make its electronic tradi...](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/CFTC_L08_18.md)
- [CFTC Letter No. 08-19 Thailand Futures Exchange Pcls Request for No-Action Relief in Connection with the Offer and Sale in the United States of its Futures Contract Based on the SET50 Index Futures Contract.](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/CFTC_L08_19.md)
- [CFTC Letter No. 08-21 The Division of Market Oversight issued a no-action letter to BNP Paribas confirming that the Division will not recommend that the Commission initiate enforcement action against BNP Paribas or Fortis Bank S.A./N.V., o...](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/CFTC_L08_21.md)
- [CFTC Letter No. 09-02 The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight provided no-action relief to the general partner of a commodity pool from registering as a CPO under Section 4m(1) of the Commodity Exchange Act, and allowed an affi...](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/CFTC_L09_02.md)
- [CFTC Letter No. 09-06 The CPO of a commodity pool requested that DCIO agree to accept the Annual Report for the period from January 1, 2008 through October 31, 2008 as the Pool’s final annual report despite the fact that the Pool had not f...](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/CFTC_L09_06.md)
- [CFTC Letter No. 09-07 The CPO of a commodity pool with a de minimus amount of its assets embroiled in a bankruptcy requested relief from the ongoing reporting requirements under Part 4. The CPO filed an Annual Report for the Pool for the 2...](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/CFTC_L09_07.md)
- [CFTC Letter No. 09-11 The CPO of two commodity pools requested relief to use IFRS in lieu of US GAAP. DCIO granted relief pursuant to Commission Regulations 140.93 and 4.12(a).](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/CFTC_L09_11.md)
- [CFTC Letter No. 09-13 The CPO of commodity pool requested relief to use IFRS in lieu of US GAAP. DCIO granted relief pursuant to Commission Regulations 140.93 and 4.12(a).](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/CFTC_L09_13.md)

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/CFTC_L25_14. Check the current official text before relying on it. Not legal advice.