Coinbase Files with SEC to List 24/7 Equity Perpetuals
Coinbase has taken a formal regulatory step toward offering equity perpetual futures to US investors, filing a notice registration form with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The filing, confirmed by Coinbase Chief Policy Officer Faryar Shirzad on 3 September 2026, is the opening move in what would be a two-regulator approval process, with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission also required to sign off before any listing can go live. For accounting firms, CFOs, and auditors tracking the frontier of digital asset market structure, this development is worth watching closely: it could bring a large and largely unregulated offshore market into a framework that demands proper classification, reporting, and audit trails.
What Equity Perpetuals Are and Why They Matter
Perpetual futures, commonly called "perps," are derivatives contracts that carry no expiration date. Unlike traditional futures, they do not settle on a fixed date. Instead, holders can maintain a position indefinitely, with the contract price kept close to the underlying asset's spot price through a periodic funding mechanism between long and short holders.
Equity perpetuals apply this structure to individual company stocks rather than commodities or crypto tokens. A trader holding an equity perp on, say, a major technology company is not buying the stock itself. The person is taking a leveraged directional bet on the share price, with no ownership rights, no dividends, and no settlement into the underlying security.
The offshore precedent
Coinbase launched equity perpetuals for non-US users in March 2026, listing contracts referencing shares of several major US technology companies. The product attracted meaningful volume, reflecting a pattern that regulators and exchange operators have both noted: these instruments already have deep, proven demand globally. The vast majority of that activity, however, flows through offshore platforms that are not registered with or supervised by US regulators.
The US regulatory gap
The absence of a domestic regulated venue for equity perps has not suppressed demand; it has simply pushed it elsewhere. Shirzad's public statement was direct on this point, describing "proven demand internationally" and framing the SEC filing as an attempt to create a regulated US pathway. The implicit argument is a familiar one in market structure discussions: when a product exists and is in demand, a supervised domestic market is preferable to an unsupervised offshore one, both for investor protection and for systemic risk management.
The Two-Regulator Hurdle
The SEC filing is a necessary first step, but it is not the final one. Shirzad confirmed that CFTC approval would also be required. This two-regulator sequence reflects a genuine jurisdictional question that sits at the heart of the proposal: are equity perpetual futures securities derivatives, commodity derivatives, or something that demands a hybrid treatment?
The CFTC's parallel moves
The CFTC has been moving in a compatible direction. In May 2026, the commission allowed bitcoin perpetual futures contracts to be listed in the US when its staff issued guidance permitting the products. A month later, the CFTC published a request for comment covering crude oil perpetual contracts and the broader concept of 24/7 trading. These steps suggest the commission is actively building the conceptual and legal framework needed to accommodate perpetual-style contracts across different underlying assets, not just crypto.
Hyperliquid and the broader context
The offshore platform Hyperliquid has become something of a reference point in this regulatory conversation. The platform drew mainstream attention in recent weeks when President Donald Trump publicly noted that CFTC Chair Michael Selig was working to bring it into the US market in a "fully compliant and legal fashion." Separately, reporting from Bloomberg indicated that Hyperliquid Labs is exploring a US onshore structure through a deal involving the parent company of crypto exchange Kraken. Whether or not that specific arrangement proceeds, it underscores the momentum behind bringing perpetual trading infrastructure within the US regulatory perimeter.
Accounting and Reporting Implications for Firms
If the SEC and CFTC both grant approval, equity perpetuals would represent a novel instrument class for US-domiciled entities to account for and audit. The classification question is not trivial, and firms should begin thinking through it now rather than after the first client exposure lands on a set of books.
Derivatives accounting under US GAAP
Under ASC 815, derivative instruments must be recognised at fair value on the balance sheet, with changes in fair value flowing through profit or loss unless specific hedge accounting criteria are met. Equity perpetuals, as contracts whose value derives from an underlying equity price and that carry no fixed expiration, would almost certainly fall within the ASC 815 definition of a derivative. This means mark-to-market accounting at each reporting date, continuous fair value disclosure, and, where hedge accounting is elected, rigorous documentation of hedging relationships, effectiveness testing, and ongoing assessments.
The funding payments exchanged between long and short holders in a perpetual contract add another layer. Depending on their frequency, direction, and materiality, these cash flows may require separate classification in the statement of cash flows, and their tax treatment is unlikely to be straightforward. Accounting teams using robust crypto accounting software will be better placed to capture these flows accurately as they accumulate across reporting periods, particularly for clients running high-frequency or leveraged positions.
Balance sheet classification
Because perpetuals have no maturity date, the standard current versus non-current distinction used for dated derivatives does not map cleanly onto them. Firms will need to develop a policy position, likely treating open perpetual positions as current given that they can be closed at any time, but this should be documented and applied consistently. Auditors reviewing digital asset disclosures will want to see that policy stated explicitly in accounting policy notes.
Leverage, margin, and collateral
Perpetual futures are almost always margined products. Collateral posted to support open positions, whether in cash, stablecoins, or other digital assets, must be tracked and disclosed separately from trading positions. If a client is posting crypto collateral, the collateral itself may be subject to fair value measurement under ASC 820, adding another valuation workstream. CFOs and finance teams should ensure their digital asset accounting software infrastructure can handle the interplay between position fair values and collateral balances without manual workarounds that introduce error risk.
Tax treatment: an open question
The Internal Revenue Service has not issued specific guidance on equity perpetual futures. At present, the closest analogy for US tax purposes would be the treatment of section 1256 contracts, which covers regulated futures contracts and certain foreign currency contracts, and which currently receives 60/40 long-term/short-term capital gains treatment with mandatory mark-to-market at year end. Whether equity perps on a regulated US venue would qualify as section 1256 contracts would depend on how they are designated by the relevant exchange and recognised by the IRS. Firms advising clients on these instruments should track any IRS guidance that emerges from the regulatory approval process and avoid assuming section 1256 treatment applies until it is confirmed.
For context on how US regulators are approaching the broader question of digital asset instrument classification, the SEC proposed overhaul of transfer agent rules for tokenized securities offers a useful parallel: regulators are actively trying to fit novel instruments into existing frameworks, and the interpretive choices they make will have cascading accounting and tax consequences.
What Compliance and Audit Teams Should Do Now
The filing is at an early stage. Approval from both the SEC and CFTC is required, and neither agency operates on a fixed or predictable timeline. That said, waiting for final approval before beginning preparation is a poor strategy for firms with clients already active in offshore perpetual markets or likely to participate once a domestic venue exists.
Steps worth taking before approval arrives
First, identify existing client exposure. If any client is already trading equity perps through offshore venues, those positions may already be on balance sheets and tax returns without a clear policy basis. Reviewing that exposure now, using reliable crypto bookkeeping software that can pull transaction data across venues, gives firms a head start on remediation and policy development.
Second, draft an accounting policy memo. The key questions, whether equity perps are derivatives under ASC 815, how funding payments are classified, how collateral is presented, and what the disclosure requirements are, should be answered in a written policy before the first domestic trade is booked. Having that memo in place makes the audit process significantly more straightforward.
Third, engage on the tax question early. The section 1256 question will likely be resolved through IRS guidance or a formal ruling request. Firms advising high-volume clients should consider whether a private letter ruling is warranted, and should in any case document their interpretive position clearly.
The FASB's ongoing work on digital asset accounting standards is also directly relevant here. The FASB proposals on stablecoin cash-equivalent classification illustrate how standard-setters are progressively building out the GAAP framework for digital assets, and equity perp accounting guidance may follow a similar path once the market exists domestically.
Market Structure Significance
Taken together, Coinbase's SEC filing, the CFTC's prior guidance on bitcoin perps, the crude oil perpetuals request for comment, and the reported efforts to onshore Hyperliquid all point in the same direction. US regulators appear to be moving, deliberately if not rapidly, toward a market structure that accommodates perpetual futures across multiple asset classes under domestic supervision.
For accounting and compliance professionals, this is not just a market story. It is a signal to begin building the technical and policy infrastructure needed to handle a class of instruments that combines the continuous fair value requirements of derivatives accounting with the operational complexity of digital asset markets. Firms that treat this as a distant regulatory possibility rather than a near-term planning priority risk being caught unprepared when the first client asks how to book a domestic equity perp position.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is an equity perpetual future?
An equity perpetual future is a derivatives contract that references the price of an equity, typically a stock, without a fixed expiration date. The contract value tracks the underlying share price, and positions are maintained through periodic funding payments between buyers and sellers rather than physical or cash settlement on a set date.
Why does Coinbase need both SEC and CFTC approval?
Equity perpetuals sit at the intersection of securities and derivatives regulation in the US. The SEC oversees securities markets, while the CFTC has jurisdiction over commodity and derivatives markets. Because an equity perp derives its value from a security but functions like a futures contract, approval from both agencies is required before a US-regulated listing can proceed.
How would equity perps be accounted for under US GAAP?
These instruments would almost certainly be treated as derivatives under ASC 815, requiring recognition at fair value on the balance sheet with changes flowing through profit or loss each reporting period. Hedge accounting may be available in limited circumstances but requires strict documentation and ongoing effectiveness testing. Funding payments would need separate classification analysis.
What is the likely US tax treatment?
No IRS guidance specific to equity perpetual futures has been issued. The closest existing framework is section 1256, which applies to regulated futures contracts and provides 60/40 long-term/short-term capital gains treatment with mandatory year-end mark-to-market. Whether equity perps qualify as section 1256 contracts will depend on how they are structured on any approved domestic venue and any subsequent IRS ruling. Firms should not assume section 1256 treatment applies until confirmed.
What should accounting firms do now if clients are already trading equity perps offshore?
Firms should identify and review existing offshore perpetual positions, assess whether those positions have been accounted for and reported correctly under current guidance, and begin drafting formal accounting policy documentation. Ensuring that transaction data is captured accurately through reliable crypto bookkeeping software is a practical first step before any domestic regulatory framework is finalised.
Source: The Block