��������

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) have entered into a new that sets out how they plan to coordinate in areas of overlapping jurisdiction. Signed March 11, 2026, the MOU sits alongside a broader CFTC–SEC harmonization effort underscoring a more integrated approach to supervising shared markets.

The MOU

The MOU is non‑binding and does not change either agency’s statutory authority. Instead, it describes principles and processes for how the agencies will work together. It emphasizes respect for each agency’s mandate, regulatory efficiency, good‑faith communication, and functional, risk‑based regulation that focuses on the economic reality of activities. It also expressly rejects a “turf war” mentality and emphasizes fair notice rather than regulation by enforcement.

The MOU identifies several priority areas for coordination:

• Clarifying product definitions through joint interpretations and rulemaking
• Modernizing clearing, margin, and collateral frameworks
• Reducing friction for dually registered exchanges, trading venues, and intermediaries
• Providing a fit-for-purpose regulatory framework for crypto assets and other emerging technologies
• Streamlining reporting requirements for trade data, funds, and intermediaries
• Coordinating cross-market examinations, economic analyses, risk monitoring, surveillance, and enforcement

The agencies describe their joint approach as a “minimum effective dose” regulatory strategy designed to foster innovation, preserve market integrity, and a rejection of regulation by enforcement.

Leadership Signals and the Harmonization Initiative

Recent public remarks by SEC Chair Paul Atkins and CFTC Chair Michael S. Selig frame the MOU in a broader policy context. Atkins stated that the SEC is revisiting its coordination protocols “with an eye toward ending ‘duplicative enforcement actions,’” and that “the regrettable era of duplicative enforcement actions and conflicting remedial obligations for the same conduct is over.” He also criticized past “regulatory turf wars” and overlapping registrations as factors that have discouraged activity in U.S. markets.

Selig described harmonization as already “well underway,” noting joint efforts in crypto markets and his regular meetings with Atkins as well as emphasizing that the agencies are now able to work with industry in ways that were not possible when they were “not in sync.”

The CFTC-SEC Harmonization Initiative is a joint effort focused on coordinating more seamlessly, reducing duplicative regulation, and providing clearer jurisdictional boundaries. Staff from both agencies are engaging with market participants to identify practical ways to remove overlapping or conflicting requirements, create more direct pathways for innovative products and services, and maintain robust investor and market protections.

Coordination on Examinations, Enforcement, and Risk

The MOU addresses examinations of “Covered Firms,” such as investment adviser/commodity pool operator combinations, broker‑dealer/futures commission merchants, clearing agency/derivatives clearing organization pairs, and swap dealer/security‑based swap dealer entities. The agencies commit to share exam‑related information, coordinate exam planning, and look for opportunities to avoid duplicative reviews (including joint or aligned examinations).

On enforcement, the agencies recognize that some investigations will implicate both regimes and state that they aim to “promote consistency, efficiency, and proportionality in enforcement outcomes while avoiding duplicative relief and conflicting remedial obligations.” They intend to identify overlapping jurisdiction early in an investigation, confer on areas of common interest, and coordinate when a matter presents issues of importance to both agencies. Where parallel actions are appropriate, they will consult on potential charges and remedies, sequencing of filings, litigation strategy, and public communications.

Lastly, the MOU addresses economic analysis, risk monitoring, and surveillance. The agencies will work toward “practical interoperability” by developing compatible data standards and analytical tools where feasible, enhancing each agency’s ability to detect market abuse and operational vulnerabilities.

Key Takeaways

The MOU and related harmonization efforts collectively point toward an effort at a more coordinated supervision of shared markets. Dually registered firms may see a more deliberate effort to reduce overlapping exam burdens through coordinated planning, shared information, and joint or aligned reviews. Enforcement matters that touch both regimes may be more likely to be coordinated from the outset. Over time, joint work on product definitions, clearing and margin treatment, and reporting should yield more consistent treatment of cross‑market products, including swaps, security‑based swaps, and crypto‑linked instruments. The emphasis on crypto assets and other novel products suggests a willingness to consider streamlined, integrated compliance models for firms operating across both regimes. While the MOU indicates a change in policy with respect to broader cooperation and harmonization, it does not modify the authority or jurisdiction of the agencies. The impact of the MOU on broader cooperation and harmonization efforts will ultimately depend on how such efforts are implemented by agencies through rule-making and written guidance.