Who Regulates Crypto in the US? CFTC and SEC Compared

Who sits on the advisory body: 43 members from Coinbase to Nasdaq

The membership list the CFTC keeps on the committee's page runs to 43 names. Less interesting than the number is the mix, because it shows whom the agency regards as an interlocutor.

From the crypto sector, Brian Armstrong (Coinbase), Arjun Sethi (Kraken), Tyler Winklevoss (Gemini), Brad Garlinghouse (Ripple), Hayden Adams (Uniswap Labs) and Anatoly Yakovenko (Solana Labs) are among those at the table. Vlad Tenev (Robinhood) and Haider Rafique (OKX) add two names that German users are likely to know from their own app. The second half comes from classic financial infrastructure, among them Terry Duffy (CME Group), Adena Friedman (Nasdaq) and Jeff Sprecher (Intercontinental Exchange), plus financiers such as Chris Dixon (a16z crypto).

That a supervisor takes advice from the supervised is the rule with advisory bodies of this kind. What is notable is the weighting: a body advising on crypto rules is staffed in the majority with people whose companies are affected by those rules. Consumer protection organisations do not appear on the list.

Prediction markets are on the agenda and are the hardest point of contention

The notice names three subject areas for the session: crypto assets, artificial intelligence and prediction markets, along with the agency's recent activity in those markets. The third point is likely to be the most contentious.

Prediction markets are venues where contracts on the outcome of future events can be bought, from elections to economic data. In the US these are event contracts and therefore derivatives, which is why the CFTC is responsible. With Tarek Mansour (Kalshi) and Shayne Coplan (Polymarket), the chief executives of the two best-known providers sit on the committee, alongside representatives of the sports betting industry such as Jason Robins (DraftKings) and Christian Genetski (FanDuel). How much difficulty the agency has with this field was already shown by the case in which the CFTC served Coinbase with a subpoena in the Polymarket proceedings.

For German users the field calls for caution: prediction markets do not fall under MiCA in Europe, and whether such an offering requires authorisation here depends on the individual case. No blanket statement can be made about it.

An advisory body writes no rules, it delivers recommendations

Sobriety is called for at this point. The IAC is an advisory committee under the Federal Advisory Committee Act: it can issue recommendations, adopt reports and put topics on the agenda. Legally binding rules do not arise there; that would require formal rulemaking by the commission or an act of Congress. The predecessor committee produced two reports, both position papers without legal effect. What the session delivers is a signal about which topics the agency regards as pressing and whose arguments it listens to.

The SEC, meanwhile, is stuck on its own crypto rule

The contrast with the second agency is striking. While the CFTC convenes an advisory body, the SEC is making no progress: as CryptoTicker reported on 15 August 2026, the agency cancelled a vote scheduled for 14 August on a bespoke issuance regime for crypto investment contracts on the eve of the meeting and has so far named no replacement date. The details are in the analysis of why US regulation is currently stuck on two fronts.

The juxtaposition describes the situation fairly precisely: one agency gathers advice, the other postpones a vote. No coordinated roadmap for the US crypto market can be read from it. For you that means announcements from Washington will keep making headlines without anything changing in your legal position.

MiCA applies to you, and your supervisor is called the BaFin

This is where most misunderstandings arise. If you live in Germany and buy from a provider authorised in the EU, protection of your assets follows the regulation on markets in crypto-assets, MiCA for short. For crypto-asset service providers it has applied since 30 December 2024 and governs, among other things, the separation of client assets from own holdings, custody and information duties.

Responsible for supervising providers authorised in Germany is the Federal Financial Supervisory Authority. Neither the SEC nor the CFTC owes you any duty of protection. If a provider is based outside the EU and accepts you as a German customer, foreign law with a foreign place of jurisdiction applies in the event of a dispute.

How to tell whether your trading platform is under EU supervision

The check takes a few minutes.

Four points you can look up

• The contracting party. What matters is not the brand name but which company appears in the terms of use and where it is based. Many providers run several group companies alongside one another.
• The authorisation status. MiCA authorisations are granted by the national supervisors and kept in public registers. Anyone advertising European regulation should be able to name the competent authority and the type of authorisation.
• The scope of the permission. An authorisation as a custodian does not automatically cover the operation of a trading platform. An analysis by CryptoTicker of 6 August 2026 on the MiCA register found that of 329 authorisations counted, only 21 went to trading platforms.
• The protection in the event of insolvency. Statutory deposit protection does not apply to crypto assets as it does to bank balances. Anyone expecting it is mistaken about their own risk.

Anyone wanting to hold their balance independently of a provider's authorisation cannot avoid self-custody. Which devices come into question for that is shown in the hardware wallet comparison.

What US decisions set off in your portfolio all the same

It would be wrong to conclude from this that the American debate is of no relevance to you. The influence is indirect and runs along three routes.

First through the products: whether a provider launches a staking offering, an exchange-traded product or a new type of derivative is often decided first in the largest market, and what becomes permissible there surfaces with a delay in European variants. Second through the listings: if the classification of a token is disputed in the US, trading platforms take it on less often or remove it again, which feeds through to liquidity and shows up in the spread.

Third through the price. Regulatory news from Washington moves prices regardless of where you buy. Anyone trading frequently should keep an eye on the tax side; which tools help with that is shown in the comparison of crypto tax software.

Making sense of US crypto regulation: what to take away

1. Place the reports correctly. The CFTC and the SEC are two agencies with two statutes and an unsettled border. The advisory session on 20 August 2026 produces a recommendation, not a rule; you can follow the livestream from 7 p.m. German time.
2. Check whose supervision you are under. Look in the terms to see which company your counterpart is and what authorisation it holds. The comparison of regulated crypto exchanges is the quickest way in.
3. Separate custody and trading. Holdings you want to keep for longer do not belong on a trading platform permanently. Suitable devices are in the hardware wallet comparison, and the tax documentation is handled by a tool from the comparison of crypto tax software.

Primary sources: the CFTC announcement of the first IAC session of 10 August 2026 and the official notice in the Federal Register of 11 August 2026.

(As of August 16, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)