Kalshi Files for Stock Perpetual Futures in the US
Kalshi has submitted a proposed rule change to the Securities and Exchange Commission and a parallel filing with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to offer perpetual futures contracts tied to individual US stocks. The move puts the prediction-market operator alongside Coinbase and Bitnomial in a fast-moving race to transplant one of crypto's most liquid derivative structures into traditional equity markets, and it lands accounting firms and corporate finance teams squarely in new classification territory that their current crypto accounting software may not yet be equipped to handle.
What Kalshi Is Actually Proposing
The contracts Kalshi wants to offer share the core mechanics familiar to anyone who has traded perpetual swaps in crypto markets. There is no preset expiration date. Instead, funding payments flow periodically between long and short position holders, keeping the contract price tethered to the price of the underlying stock. Kalshi says the products would be classified as security futures products and cleared through Kalshi Klear, its CFTC-registered clearinghouse.
The Dual-Regulator Problem
Security futures products in the US sit under a joint CFTC and SEC jurisdiction established by the Commodity Futures Modernization Act. That means a filing with one regulator is not enough. Kalshi submitted its proposal to both on the same day. The CFTC has not yet approved the filing, and SEC review of proposed rule changes follows its own timeline. Firms should not treat this as a done deal; it is a proposal, and material modifications are possible before any approval is granted.
Kalshi's Existing Crypto Perpetuals Track Record
Kalshi is not starting from scratch. The platform already offers perpetual futures on Bitcoin, Ether, Solana, and XRP in the US market, having received CFTC approval for its Bitcoin perpetual contract in May. That operational experience matters: it means Kalshi has a functioning clearinghouse, margining infrastructure, and funding-rate calculation engine already in place. Extending those systems to equity underlyings is a product expansion, not a ground-up build.
A Crowded Field Taking Shape
The Kalshi filing landed on the same day Coinbase submitted its own proposal for perpetual futures on individual US stocks. Bitnomial, operating through Payward (Kraken's parent company), has also filed to offer the products, with plans to make them available directly to Kraken's US user base. Payward has indicated it intends to launch with perpetuals tied to ten US equities, including Tesla, Nvidia, Apple, Microsoft, and Amazon, targeting 24-hour-a-day, five-day-a-week trading.
Why the Timing Matters
These filings arrived just days after the CLARITY Act failed to advance in the US Senate on 15 September, falling short of the sixty votes needed to proceed to a floor vote. The day after that vote, SEC Chair Paul Atkins stated publicly that the agency would act decisively within its existing statutory authority to provide regulatory certainty for American investors and entrepreneurs, with or without legislation. That statement signals a more permissive regulatory posture at the SEC, and market participants are reading the filing surge as a direct response to it. Firms advising clients on derivatives structuring should factor that posture shift into their risk assessments.
For context on how the SEC's approach to novel equity-linked instruments has been evolving, see our analysis of how the SEC innovation exemption reshapes tokenized stock accounting.
Accounting Implications for Firms and CFOs
Perpetual futures on equities are a genuinely new instrument type from an accounting standpoint. They share characteristics with both derivative contracts under ASC 815 / IFRS 9 and with the crypto asset perpetuals that firms have been grappling with under the new ASC 350-60 framework. Getting the classification wrong at initial recognition has downstream consequences for hedge designation, fair value measurement, and disclosures.
Derivative Classification Under ASC 815 and IFRS 9
A perpetual futures contract with periodic funding payments will almost certainly meet the definition of a derivative under both US GAAP and IFRS: there is an underlying (the stock price), a notional amount, no or limited initial net investment, and net settlement is possible. That means the instrument would sit on the balance sheet at fair value through profit or loss unless a hedging designation is applied and documented from inception. The absence of an expiration date, which distinguishes these from standard futures, does not remove derivative accounting treatment; it simply means there is no contractual maturity to drive the effective interest method or time-value allocations that practitioners are used to seeing in vanilla options or term futures.
Funding Payments: Revenue, Expense, or Adjustment?
The periodic funding payments are the most operationally complex element. When a position holder receives a funding payment, that cash inflow needs to be classified. Is it income from a derivative, a reduction in the carrying cost of the position, or something else? Under ASC 815, the answer typically depends on whether the derivative is designated in a hedging relationship and how the entity's accounting policy treats settlement flows on open derivatives. For entities holding these as speculative positions, funding receipts and payments will likely flow through the income statement each settlement period. That creates a regular recognition event that needs to be captured in real time, which is exactly the kind of high-frequency transaction that digital asset accounting software must be configured to handle.
What Crypto Bookkeeping Software Needs to Handle
Most crypto bookkeeping software built for spot and simple derivatives positions was not designed with perpetual equity futures in mind. Firms should audit their current systems against three specific capabilities: the ability to recognise funding payments as discrete income or expense events on the correct settlement date, the ability to mark open positions to fair value at each reporting date using a reference price that may itself be a composite of the underlying stock's last traded price and the contract's basis, and the ability to produce the disclosures required under ASC 815-10-50 or IFRS 7 for derivative instruments. If the software cannot do all three, a manual workaround or a system upgrade will be needed before client volumes in these products become material. Our existing coverage of single-stock futures accounting after OG.com's SEC approval covers related ground that is directly applicable here.
Tax Treatment: Unresolved Questions
The tax treatment of these instruments in the US is not settled and will not be until the IRS issues specific guidance or the products are tested in litigation. That said, the existing framework provides some structure to work from.
Section 1256 Contracts and the 60/40 Rule
Standard futures contracts on broad-based indices qualify as Section 1256 contracts under the Internal Revenue Code, meaning gains and losses are taxed under the 60/40 rule regardless of holding period. However, single-stock futures are specifically excluded from Section 1256 treatment. If stock perpetual futures are classified as security futures products, as Kalshi's filing proposes, they would instead be governed by Section 1234B, which treats gains and losses as capital in character but without the 60/40 split. The holding period rules under Section 1234B are tied to whether the contract is held long enough to qualify for long-term treatment, but given that perpetuals have no fixed expiration, the practical holding period will be determined by when the position is closed or the contract is terminated by the exchange.
Mark-to-Market Elections and Wash Sale Rules
Traders who are classified as dealers or who make a Section 475(f) mark-to-market election will need to assess whether stock perpetual futures fall within the scope of that election. Separately, the wash sale rules under Section 1091 apply to securities and securities futures contracts. If these products are classified as security futures products, wash sale constraints could limit a client's ability to harvest losses and re-establish a similar position within thirty days. This is a material planning consideration for any firm advising active traders or hedge funds that plan to use these instruments.
Funding Payments as Ordinary Income
Funding payments received are likely to be treated as ordinary income in the year of receipt, rather than as an adjustment to the cost basis of the futures position. Firms should document that treatment explicitly in client engagement letters and tax workpapers before positions are opened, not after year-end when the volume of settlement records makes reconstruction difficult.
What Firms Should Do Before Approval Arrives
The CFTC has not yet approved Kalshi's proposal, and the SEC's review is ongoing. But regulatory approvals in the current environment can move faster than many practitioners expect, particularly given the SEC chair's public posture on acting within existing authority. Waiting for final approval before updating policies, systems, and client communications is a risk.
Practical Steps for Accounting Firms and CFOs
First, review your derivatives accounting policy. Confirm that it covers instruments with no fixed maturity and with periodic cash settlement flows that do not represent full contract termination. If the policy references "futures" in a way that assumes a delivery date, it needs updating. Second, assess your crypto accounting software and broader digital asset accounting software stack. Run a gap analysis against the three capabilities listed above: funding payment recognition, daily fair value marking, and derivative disclosure generation. Third, brief relevant client segments now. Any client already trading crypto perpetuals on platforms like Kalshi will likely transition into equity perpetuals quickly if and when the products launch. Getting ahead of the classification and tax treatment questions in client communications is far more efficient than answering them under time pressure at year-end. Finally, monitor the CFTC and SEC dockets. The comment period on the SEC filing is a legitimate opportunity to flag accounting and disclosure concerns directly with the regulator, and trade bodies representing accounting professionals have done so effectively on similar instruments in recent years.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a perpetual futures contract on a stock?
It is a derivative contract that tracks the price of an individual stock but has no expiration date. Periodic funding payments between long and short holders keep the contract price aligned with the underlying stock price. The mechanics are the same as crypto perpetual swaps, applied to equities.
Has the CFTC approved Kalshi's proposal yet?
No. As of the date of filing, the CFTC had not approved the proposal. Kalshi submitted a parallel filing to the SEC for a proposed rule change. Both reviews are ongoing.
How should funding payments be recognised in the accounts?
Under ASC 815 for entities holding the contracts as speculative positions, funding receipts and payments are most likely recognised as income or expense in the period of settlement. Firms should establish an explicit accounting policy before positions are opened and ensure their crypto bookkeeping software captures each settlement event with the correct date and amount.
Do Section 1256 tax rules apply to these contracts?
Probably not. Single-stock futures are specifically excluded from Section 1256 treatment. If the contracts are classified as security futures products, Section 1234B is the more likely applicable provision, which means capital gain or loss treatment without the 60/40 holding-period split that applies to regulated futures contracts.
Which other operators are filing for similar products?
Coinbase filed its own proposal for stock perpetual futures on the same day as Kalshi. Bitnomial, operating through Payward (Kraken's parent company), has also filed, with plans to initially offer perpetuals on ten US equities including Tesla, Nvidia, Apple, Microsoft, and Amazon.
Source: Cointelegraph