CFTC staff opens a conditional route for trust-company settlements

US derivatives clearinghouses have a clearer route to using trust companies for daily settlements after Commodity Futures Trading Commission staff issued conditional no-action relief on November 5, 2026. The position addresses a narrow regulatory wording problem that had complicated the use of firms active in digital-asset custody.

Under the letter, the Division of Clearing and Risk will not recommend enforcement action against a derivatives clearing organisation using a trust company for daily settlements with clearing members, provided it treats that institution as a settlement bank under the relevant safeguards.

A gap between custody and settlement language

The relief followed an October 29 request from Nodal Clear. Customer-protection provisions already refer to banks or trust companies as places where customer funds may be held. The settlement requirements in Regulation 39.14, however, define a settlement bank by reference to a bank and do not expressly mention trust companies.

That difference matters when assets must move through the clearinghouse's daily settlement process. A firm may be suitable for custody under one provision while its role in the next stage remains uncertain under another.

Nodal argued that state-regulated trust companies are important digital-asset custodians and that the clarification would help integrate eligible assets into existing collateral workflows. Those statements describe the applicant's rationale; the letter does not establish that every digital asset is acceptable margin.

The clearinghouse keeps its responsibilities

The condition is that the clearing organisation applies Regulations 39.14(c) and (d) as though the trust company were a settlement bank. That keeps the focus on the clearinghouse's selection, evaluation and monitoring responsibilities, rather than granting a blanket exemption for the settlement provider.

For institutions designing collateral systems, the practical consequence is a more defined compliance route for the choice of settlement counterparty. They still have to evaluate the provider and satisfy the other rules governing their business and the assets involved.

Staff relief can change

The position belongs to the Division of Clearing and Risk and is not binding on the full Commission. It concerns enforcement policy, rests on the facts presented and can be modified, suspended or withdrawn. The underlying regulation has not been rewritten.

The development may ease one operational obstacle for digital-asset collateral arrangements, but implementation still depends on the clearinghouse's controls and approvals. A conditional settlement route should be assessed on those terms, without treating it as evidence that new crypto collateral has already entered cleared markets.