CFTC's Two October 9 Rules: One Proposed, One Already Final
October 15, 2026 · How we source this
The CFTC issued a proposed rule adding event contracts to the definition of swap and an interim final rule excluding casino-style gambling from it. They share a topic but carry very different legal weight and timelines.
Two rules, issued the same day
On October 9, 2026, the CFTC released two documents on the swap definition: Press Release 9310-26, a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, and Press Release 9309-26, an Interim Final Rule. Together they are the CFTC's most direct attempt to settle, by rule, a question that courts have answered inconsistently.
The two rules point in opposite directions on their face. One pulls event contracts into the swap definition, and the other pushes casino-style gambling out of it.
What the proposed rule does
The NPRM would expressly include certain event contracts in the definition of swap, among them contracts based on sports, politics, culture and weather. The CFTC says these contracts are commonly known to the trade as swaps and that the proposal resolves ambiguity.
Chairman Michael S. Selig described the products as commodity derivatives within the CFTC's remit under the Commodity Exchange Act. A proposal is not yet law, so the text can change after public comment.
What the interim final rule does
The interim final rule excludes casino-style gambling products, including wagers on sportsbooks and casino games, from the swap definition. The CFTC describes this as codifying its longstanding position, and Selig said casino-style gambling products are not derivatives.
Unlike the NPRM, an interim final rule takes effect on Federal Register publication, with comment accepted afterward. Operators should read it as operative, though subject to revision.
Why the pairing matters
Together the rules draw a line the CFTC wants to defend in court: event contracts sit inside its jurisdiction, while sportsbook-style products sit outside it. The exclusion gives the agency a ready answer to the argument that its position would federalize all betting.
The rules arrive as the Sixth and Eighth Circuits have treated sports contracts as outside swap jurisdiction. A rule does not bind a court on a statutory question, but it changes the record those courts and the Supreme Court will see.
What compliance teams should track
Both releases set a 30-day written comment window through Regulations.gov, running from Federal Register publication. The releases do not state the publication date or a docket number, so the exact deadline is unconfirmed and should be checked in the Federal Register.
Operators should watch the final text for how it treats single-game sports contracts, and for how the gambling exclusion is defined. The boundary between the two rules is where future state and operator disputes are likely to focus.