A panel of the BC Securities Commission (BCSC) has found that a Vancouver resident failed to comply with a demand to produce records during an investigation and obstructed justice. In June 2024, BCSC staff demanded that Lucas Christopher Birdsall produce certain records, as required by B.C.’s Securities Act. The BCSC served the demand by mail, email and by posting it on his front door after several unsuccessful attempts to serve him in person. Despite being granted two extensions to the deadline by the BCSC, Birdsall has not provided any records. The panel concluded that he failed or refused to comply with the demand and that he failed or refused to produce the records and things, or classes of records and things, in his custody, possession or control. His refusal to give a record that was reasonably required for a BCSC investigation was an obstruction of justice under the Act, the panel said.  “What is in the public interest here is for Birdsall to comply with the Demand so the investigation can continue,” the panel said. The Executive Director and the respondent have been directed to make submissions on sanctions.  The panel also dismissed eight applications made on behalf of Birdsall during the course of the proceedings.

A summary of Deutsche Börse Group's business indicators for November 2025 is now available on the Deutsche Börse website: Trading Statistics There you can also find the Excel file 'Major business figures' containing historic business indicators for the respective reporting segments.

Nasdaq (Nasdaq: NDAQ) announced today the results of the semi-annual review of the OMX Copenhagen 25™ Index, (Nasdaq Copenhagen: OMXC25), which will become effective at market open on Monday, December 22, 2025. The following security will be added to the Index: FLSmidth & Co. A/S (FLS). The OMX Copenhagen 25™ Index measures the performance of a selection of the largest and most traded securities listed on Nasdaq Copenhagen A/S. The Index is reviewed semi-annually in June and December. As a result of the semi-annual review, the following security will be removed from the Index: Nordea Bank Abp (NDA DK). For a list of current Index Securities please refer to Nasdaq's Global Index Watch. For more information, please refer to the Nasdaq Copenhagen 25 Index Methodology.

A total turnover of 4.373 billion shares worth N97.783 billion in 110,736 deals was traded this week by investors on the floor of the Exchange, in contrast to a total of 6.617 billion shares valued at N113.224 billion that exchanged hands last week in 109,590 deals. Click here for full details.

On 15 December 2025, the following updated constituents list for OFZ Zero Coupon Yield Curve will come into force. No. Name Registration number 1 OFZ 26245 SU26245RMFS9 2 OFZ 26219 SU26219RMFS4 3 OFZ 26226 SU26226RMFS9 4 OFZ 26207 SU26207RMFS9 5 OFZ 26232 SU26232RMFS7 6 OFZ 26212 SU26212RMFS9 7 OFZ 26242 SU26242RMFS6 8 OFZ 26228 SU26228RMFS5 9 OFZ 26218 SU26218RMFS6 10 OFZ 26241 SU26241RMFS8 11 OFZ 26221 SU26221RMFS0 12 OFZ 26244 SU26244RMFS2 13 OFZ 26225 SU26225RMFS1 14 OFZ 26233 SU26233RMFS5 15 OFZ 26240 SU26240RMFS0 16 OFZ 26243 SU26243RMFS4 17 OFZ 26230 SU26230RMFS1 18 OFZ 26238 SU26238RMFS4 19 OFZ 26239 SU26239RMFS2 20 OFZ 26247 SU26247RMFS5 21 OFZ 26236 SU26236RMFS8 22 OFZ 26237 SU26237RMFS6 23 OFZ 26248 SU26248RMFS3 24 OFZ 26235 SU26235RMFS0 25 OFZ 26224 SU26224RMFS4 26 OFZ 26246 SU26246RMFS7 27 OFZ 26249 SU26249RMFS1 28 OFZ 26250 SU26250RMFS9 29 OFZ 26252 SU26252RMFS5 Read more on the Moscow Exchange: https://www.moex.com/n96056

Exchange Data International (EDI) is proud to announce that it has been awarded Best Corporate Actions Data Provider at the A-Team Group Data Management Insight Awards Europe 2025, recognizing the company’s excellence and continued innovation in global corporate actions data solutions. The Data Management Insight Awards celebrate leading providers of data management solutions, services, and consultancy to Europe’s capital markets. Winners are determined by industry votes and independent assessment from A-Team Group. Angela Wilbraham, CEO at A-Team Group, and host of the 4th annual Data Management Insight Awards Europe 2025, commented:“We extend our sincere congratulations to Exchange Data International on securing the Best Corporate Actions Data Provider award at the A-Team Group Data Management Insight Awards Europe 2025. The data management landscape continues to evolve at pace, and these awards are a crucial recognition of the firms who are delivering truly impactful solutions, services, and consultancy to Europe’s capital markets.” This recognition underscores EDI’s commitment to delivering accurate, timely, and comprehensive corporate actions data to financial institutions, wealth managers, fintechs, and capital markets participants worldwide. Over the past year, the company has introduced new enhancements across its corporate actions offering, ensuring clients receive accurate, timely, and comprehensive data to support critical operational and regulatory needs. Jonathan Bloch, CEO of Exchange Data International, commented:“EDI has a strong focus on corporate actions. We have been extending the range of instruments for which we cover corporate actions to now include open ended funds as well as equity derivatives. In addition, we have added four feeds a day, up from three making a total of seven feeds a day. This means that our clients receive timely announcements of corporate actions from around the world. EDI remains the only niche provider of corporate actions. We are pleased that the industry has recognised our achievements.” To learn more about EDI’s award-winning corporate actions offering and how it can support your business, please visit the Worldwide Equity Corporate Actions product page.

Trading at the Deutsche Börse Frankfurt on December 5 yields €80,000 Donation check handed over to four charitable organizations with a Bell Ringing today With the help of the “Trading Charity – Trading and Helping” initiative, Deutsche Börse and the seven securities trading banks (specialists) on the Frankfurt trading floor raised a sum of €80,000. The donation amount comes from the transaction and trading fees collected on December 5. Investors who traded stocks, bonds, funds, ETFs, ETCs, or ETNs on the trading venue Deutsche Börse Frankfurt last Friday equally supported all organizations. This year, four charitable organizations are supported: Die Arche, Ambulanter Kinder- und Jugendhospizdienst Frankfurt/Rhein-Main (DKHV e.V.), Kinderhospiz Bärenherz Wiesbaden and Frankfurter Kältebus e.V.. The donation check was handed over today with a Bell Ringing event at Deutsche Börse Frankfurt.“Volunteering is an invaluable contribution to a strong and solidary community. It not only strengthens social cohesion but also provides hope where it is most needed. We are therefore delighted to donate 80,000 euros to this important cause as part of our Trading Charity. This success is a joint effort, and we would therefore like to express our gratitude to our dedicated specialists on the trading floor and to all investors who have made this possible by trading on the Deutsche Börse Frankfurt trading venue,” says Michael Krogmann, Head of Cash Market Business Development and Board Member of the Frankfurt Stock Exchange.The Trading Charity was established in 2015. It is a joint initiative of Deutsche Börse and the specialists operating on the trading floor. All market participants contribute to supporting charitable work and strengthening the local community. Since 2015, a total of more than €980,000 in donations has been collected on the event days. For more information and a list of participating specialists, visit https://live.deutsche-boerse.com/en/charity

Click here to download Malawi Stock Exchange's weekly summary report.

With the adoption of the 2024 EU hydrogen and gas decarbonisation package, ACER is tasked with carrying out a periodic cost comparison assessing the efficiency of gas transmission system operators (TSOs) across the EU. ACER has taken into account the previous (voluntary) benchmarking studies of gas TSOs, and has consulted stakeholders extensively, including an ACER public consultation, a workshop and engaged experts to conduct an independent assessment (Expert Review) of the proposed methodology.  The consultancy study, published today, provides general guidance for ACER in designing the methodology and procedures for phase II (data collection and validation) and phase III (modelling) of the ACER efficiency comparison. Some elements of the methodology have been adapted based on the input received from third parties.Why does the cost-efficiency of gas TSOs matter? Ultimately, gas consumers pay the costs of natural gas transmission networks through their bill. The TSOs’ allowed revenue is set by the national regulatory authority (NRA) and is recovered from network users through network tariffs, in line with the EU-wide Network Code on Harmonised Transmission Tariff structures. Benchmarking compares the costs of a TSO (a monopoly) to other operators in the EU. ACER’s efficiency comparison, which is mandatory for all EU TSOs, will help ensure that TSOs’ costs and the resulting tariffs across Europe are efficient.   What’s next? January 2026: The second phase of the ACER efficiency comparison will start. ACER will request TSOs to submit the data that will be used for modelling in the third phase, as well as carry out a validation process to remove any reporting errors and ensure a high data quality. As part of the validation, TSOs or NRAs are expected to audit the reported data. ACER will consult with TSOs on the data that will be requested and the overall process. Between late Q4 2026 – early Q1/2027: The third phase will be launched to focus on the modelling of the ACER efficiency comparison. Stakeholders will be consulted on the model specifications and process in the course of 2027. By 5 August 2027: Completion of the first ACER efficiency comparison. Following the first publication, ACER should repeat the calculation every four years. Further updates will be provided along these process steps. Read more.

KEY POINTS 265 listed companies qualified for SET ESG Ratings in 2025, up from 219 in 2024. Average scores improved across all ESG dimensions, with Environmental (E) scores surpassing 80 points for the first time. SET ESG Ratings will transition to FTSE Russell ESG Scores framework in 2026. The Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET) announced the 2025 SET ESG Ratings results, with 265 listed companies qualifying for the rating—up from 219 companies last year. Listed companies achieved higher average scores across all ESG dimensions this year, indicating their readiness for the upcoming transition to the global FTSE Russell ESG Scores framework in 2026. The ratings breakdown comprises 102 companies rated AAA, 80 companies rated AA, 67 companies rated A, and 16 companies rated BBB. These companies collectively account for 70 percent of the combined market capitalization of SET and Market for Alternative Investment (mai) as of December 11, 2025. SET Senior Executive Vice President Soraphol Tulayasathien stated that over the past 11 years, SET ESG Ratings has established itself as a crucial sustainability benchmark for Thailand's capital market, catalyzing the transformation of companies from conducting CSR activities to strategically embedding sustainability into their business operations. The widespread adoption of this assessment is reflected in the steady year-on-year growth in participation. Today, SET ESG Ratings serves multiple investment purposes: fund managers utilize the ratings to define the investment universe for Thailand ESG Funds (Thai ESG), which have reached THB 76 billion (approx. USD 2.38 billion) in assets under management (AUM); equity analysts incorporate the ratings into their research; and financial institutions reference them when offering sustainability-linked financial incentives. “Listed companies this year posted higher average scores across all ESG dimensions, with the Environmental score surpassing 80 points for the first time. This reflects the growing priority most companies are placing on establishing Net Zero greenhouse gas emission targets and mandating board and executive oversight of climate-related risks and performance tracking. However, certain challenges remain, especially for small and medium-sized listed companies, including the collection of GHG Emission Scope 3 data, linking sustainability performance to financial metrics, and demonstrating to investors the business opportunities arising from managing material sustainability issues," Soraphol added. SET ESG Ratings members are selected from listed companies that voluntarily participate in the assessment and achieve scores of at least 50 percent in each of the E, S, and G dimensions, and meet SET's qualification requirements. These criteria include: Receiving a Corporate Governance Report (CGR) rating of at least 3 stars. Having no company, directors, or executives accused of or convicted of ESG violations by authorities or relevant agencies. Not being subject to caution or suspension symbols (CB (Business), CC (Non-Compliance), CF (Free Float), and CS (Financial statements). SET continuously monitors members' qualifications and may remove companies from SET ESG Ratings if they subsequently fail to meet the criteria. A notation system accompanies the ratings to alert investors to relevant ESG news or developments that merit additional consideration. The 2025 SET ESG Ratings announcement marks the final year of this assessment framework. The 2025 ratings’ results will remain valid as eligibility criteria for the SET ESG Index during the December 2025 and June 2026 rebalancing periods and will continue to define the investment universe for Thai ESG through December 2026. Starting in 2026, SET will transition to announcing results under the FTSE Russell ESG Scores framework, representing a pivotal step towards aligning Thailand's capital market sustainability assessment with global standards. Interested parties can view the SET ESG Ratings 2025 and access the ESG Online Assessment at www.setsustainability.com/ESG-ratings.

The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) and the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) today published a report that reviews the implementation of margin requirements for non-centrally cleared derivatives. The report concludes that the framework has been effectively implemented and finds no evidence of material issues. No changes to the framework are proposed. The BCBS-IOSCO Working Group on Margining Requirements (WGMR) recommends ongoing monitoring through supervisory information exchange and the sharing of experiences among member authorities. The BCBS and IOSCO today published a report that reviews the implementation of margin requirements for non-centrally cleared derivatives. The assessment marks a milestone in the ongoing monitoring of the standard introduced in response to the 2011 G20 call to enhance the resilience of financial markets. The standard, first published in September 2013, establishes a framework for margin requirements for non-centrally cleared derivatives. The final phase of implementation occurred in September 2022, and implementation has now reached a steady state. The WGMR assessed the framework’s implementation, drawing on a 2024 quantitative impact study, a survey of WGMR members and recent international margin-related work. The assessment found no material issues with the framework. The amount of margin exchanged for non-centrally cleared derivatives has increased materially since 2012, contributing to greater financial system resilience. The framework has been effective in supporting the intended functioning of capital and centrally cleared margin frameworks, including during recent episodes of market stress. The BCBS and IOSCO do not propose changes to the framework, but recommend continued monitoring in the form of supervisory information exchange and the sharing of experiences among their members to address evolving market practices. The full report is available on the BCBS and IOSCO websites.

Nasdaq (Nasdaq: NDAQ) announces that trading in the shares of Viva Wine Group AB (ticker name: VIVA) will commence today on the Nasdaq Stockholm Main Market. The company was listed on the Nasdaq First North Premier Growth Market in 2021. Viva Wine Group is the 42nd company to be admitted to trading on Nasdaq’s Nordic and Baltic markets* in 2025, and the 148th company to transfer from Nasdaq First North Growth Markets to Nasdaq Main Markets in the Nordics over the years. Viva Wine Group AB is a leading European wine group offering a wide range of quality wines to monopoly markets, retailers, restaurants and consumers. Through a large number of operating companies with a strong entrepreneurial spirit, the Company develops, markets and sells wines under both its own and partner brands. Viva Wine Group values a decentralised business model that allows scope for innovation while creating a common platform for synergies and economies of scale that drive value creation. With a strong track record, the Company focuses on generating profitable growth through the continuous development of its customer offering, complemented by strategic acquisitions. "The move to Nasdaq Stockholm Main Market is an important milestone and a natural step for us as a company. I am proud that our organization and business model meet the Main Market’s high governance standards and the transfer of listing is a clear proof of that. By providing us with stronger opportunities for market visibility and increased liquidity, the listing will further support us in building Europe’s leading wine group," says Emil Sallnäs, CEO of Viva Wine Group. "We are delighted to welcome Viva Wine Group to Nasdaq Stockholm’s Main Market and celebrate this significant milestone together. Viva Wine Group’s position as a major player in the European wine industry is a testament to their strong track record and entrepreneurial spirit. We look forward to supporting Viva Wine Group as it continues to grow and thrive within Nasdaq Stockholm’s dynamic capital market," says Adam Kostyál, Head of European Listings at Nasdaq and President of Nasdaq Stockholm.*Main markets and Nasdaq First North at Nasdaq Copenhagen, Nasdaq Helsinki, Nasdaq Iceland and Nasdaq Stockholm as well as Nasdaq Baltic.

The FCA has fined Nationwide Building Society £44m for inadequate anti-financial crime systems and controls between October 2016 to July 2021. During this period, Nationwide had ineffective systems for keeping up-to-date due diligence and risk assessments for all its personal current account customers and for monitoring their transactions.  Nationwide was also aware that some of those customers were using their personal accounts for business activity, in breach of its terms. Nationwide did not offer business current accounts at this point, so did not have the right processes in place to manage the financial crime risks from business activity.    This meant Nationwide was unable to effectively identify, assess, monitor or manage the money laundering risks among its personal current account customers. It also meant Nationwide did not have an accurate picture of its customers who presented a higher risk of financial crime. In one serious case, Nationwide missed opportunities to identify a customer using personal current accounts to receive fraudulent Covid furlough payments. The customer received 24 payments totalling £27.3m over 13 months, with £26.01m of this deposited over 8 days. His Majesty’s Revenue & Customs (HMRC) recovered £26.5m, but approximately £800,000 remains unrecovered. Therese Chambers, joint executive director of enforcement and market oversight at the FCA, said: 'Nationwide failed to get a proper grip of the financial crime risks lurking within its customer base. It took too long to address its flawed systems and weak controls, meaning red flags were missed with serious consequences. 'Building societies and banks have a key role in the fight against financial crime. Firms must remain vigilant in this fight.' Nationwide was aware of weaknesses in its systems and controls and undertook work to make improvements. However, it failed to adequately address those weaknesses in a timely manner. Nationwide subsequently commenced a large-scale financial crime transformation programme in July 2021. Background Read the Final Notice: Nationwide Building society (PDF). Nationwide would have been fined £62,969,297, but it agreed to resolve these matters and so qualified for a 30% discount under the FCA's processes. The total fine is £44,078,500. The FCA continues to supervise firms to improve standards and ensure that they have the right systems and controls to manage financial crime risks. Since 2021, the FCA has imposed 13 fines – totalling £300,767,526 – on banks for anti-money laundering systems and controls failings. Fighting financial crime is a priority in the FCA’s 5-year strategy. The FCA enables a fair and thriving financial services market for the good of consumers and the economy. Find out more about the FCA.

LSEG announces it has Date of purchase: 11 December 2025 Aggregate number of ordinary shares purchased: 274,419 Lowest price paid per share: 8,286.00p Highest price paid per share: 8,462.00p Average price paid per share: 8,366.59p LSEG intends to cancel all of the purchased shares. Following the cancellation of the repurchased shares, LSEG has 511,560,218 ordinary shares of 679/86 pence each in issue (excluding treasury shares) and holds 24,051,599 of its ordinary shares of 679/86 pence each in treasury. Therefore, the total voting rights in the Company will be 511,560,218. This figure for the total number of voting rights may be used by shareholders (and others with notification obligations) as the denominator for the calculation by which they will determine if they are required to notify their interest in, or a change to their interest in, the Company under the FCA's Disclosure Guidance and Transparency Rules. In accordance with Article 5(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 (the Market Abuse Regulation) (as such legislation forms part of retained EU law as defined in the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, as implemented, retained, amended, extended, re-enacted or otherwise given effect in the United Kingdom from 1 January 2021 and as amended or supplemented in the United Kingdom thereafter), a full breakdown of the individual purchases by Citi on behalf of the Company as part of the buyback programme can be found at: http://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/2822L_1-2025-12-11.pdf This announcement does not constitute, or form part of, an offer or any solicitation of an offer for securities in any jurisdiction. Schedule of Purchases Shares purchased:       274,419 (ISIN: GB00B0SWJX34) Date of purchases:      11 December 2025 Investment firm:         Citi Aggregate information: Venue Volume-weighted average price Aggregated volume Lowest price per share Highest price per share Turquoise 8,360.09 19,886 8,286.00 8,460.00 London Stock Exchange 8,367.10 254,533 8,286.00 8,462.00

On Thursday, December 11, 2025 Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent presided over a meeting of the Financial Stability Oversight Council (Council) at the Treasury Department. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act requires the Council to convene no less than quarterly, but the Council has historically convened on a more frequent basis. The meetings bring Council members together to discuss and analyze emerging market developments and financial regulatory issues. The Council is committed to conducting its business as openly and transparently as practicable, given the confidential supervisory and sensitive information at the center of its work. Consistent with the Council's transparency policy, the Council opens its meetings to the public whenever possible. Open session Council meetings are made available to the public via live webcast and can also be viewed after they occur. Upcoming Council meeting dates and times are posted following the official notification to Council members of an upcoming meeting. Meeting minutes and readouts for past Council meetings are available below. Meeting minutes for the most recent Council meeting are generally approved at the next Council meeting and posted online soon afterwards.

What “tokenization” or “DeFi” is truly about In a sharing economy, crypto / Digital Ledger Technology (DLT) are like other shared services (e.g. Uber, Air B&B) that unleash tremendous "societal values by promoting access over ownership, which challenges traditional notions of property rights." We think the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) has an overly complicated definition or concept about “tokenization”. Tokenization to some extent may equate to Securitization, when it serves as an alternative or a poor person way for securities issuance and asset gathering processes. Putting it in layman terms, both “tokenization” and “securitization” aim to make assets tradable and liquid. We have no objection with the IOSCO’s statement, “Tokenization arrangements typically seek to achieve one or more of the following features: Fictionalization, Programmability, Composability, and Atomicity.” A nuance – fractional participation in a tokenized product that is otherwise framed as a risk management or treasury tool with no general solicitation or advertising, no emphasis on profit potential, offered as part of a broader banking relationship and is a direct bank obligation under “incidental banking service”, may be considered as investment activities under the current law. If the tokenized product meets the criteria of an “investment contract” under the Howey test or falls within the statutory definition of a security under the Securities Act of 1933, then one may use private placement (Reg D) and restrict access only to accredited investors. If it is structured as a commodity option, it may be offered only to Eligible Contract Participants (ECPs) via registered Futures Commission Merchant (FCM) / Retail Foreign Exchange Dealer (RFED). The current narrowly defined banking exemptions that community banks and credit unions are forced to handover business to a third-party or their larger counterparts with a brokerage / securities service arm. Clients suffer from bureaucracy and higher fees. When formal orders legitimize exploitations, informal sub-orders will emerge as a counter response. If policy-makers want tokenized activities in the above example to go away (without price control to curb the Elites, nor rule-by-enforcement that is a double-edged sword), we recommend granting a “break-bulk exemption” (e.g. shared representation of a claim < 35, aggregate < 110% cost if client was otherwise engaged in individual contract). We recognize that, for example, credit card reward points, frequent flyer programs and the like, if tokenized to allow easier transfer of these “reward tokens” to freely trade and exchange with other third-parties beyond family members may serve good community values. NOTE: “tokenized reward points” may have unlimited supply and program organizers may have “small-print” discretionary clauses to change or alter reward programs at any time (analogy to “hard fork” – a backward-incompatible upgrade to the blockchain). There is no single authoritative FASB standard under the US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles for how a recipient of reward points or tokens should be accounted for. Commercial practices vary – some treat them as a “freebie” and not keep any record of it in an accounting book, others consider it as a “rebate / discount” deducting them directly from expenses, also certain firms may consider it materiality and treat them as a “prepayment asset” on their balance sheet. Firms operating “reward programs” must choose between ASC 450-30 Gain Contingency Model and ASC 606 Vendor Rebate Model to develop a defensible and consistent policy. There are different valuation-of-rewards approaches – (i) direct cash-out value, (ii) estimated redemption value, or (iii) conservative average based on historical redemptions – timing of recognition varies depending on the policy – (a) at redemption, (b) when statement is issued, or (c) when qualify purchases are made. Additional nuances include but are not limited to: no purchase requirement, consolidation of reward programs, tax treatment, interest or yield bearing on these “reward tokens”, etc. Smart contracts are an oversimplified mechanism for delineating complex real-world rights and obligations. Challenges include: limited access to off-chain data; interoperability issues, where different chains operate in silos; immutability (which provides security but leads to inflexibility or difficulty capturing legal nuances when dealing with evolving circumstances, renegotiations, or unforeseen events). In turn, hybrid solutions are being created, resulting in DeFi convergence to TradFi with no necessary efficiency gain. Are commercial disputes or consumer protection mechanisms being insufficient that it calls for involvement of securities laws? Are many existing commercial reward programs being unsustainable and they seek tokenization as an exit or chance of revitalization? Would “rewards” be used as alternate means to raise funds cheaper than bank loans, Private Equity or Venture Capital funding? There are more questions than answers. The US Congress should refrain from laying an invisible hand of Government to regulate these private “reward program” activities. Regulatory agencies, the SEC and FINRA in particular, do NOT have the necessary capacity to practically review hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of applications to register these “reward tokens” as “securities”. Tokenized assets can be uncountable, i.e. unlimited supply. Uncapped supply creates inflationary pressure; hence value of such digital assets cannot be properly determined or quantified by the amount of outstanding inventory. The original Dodd-Frank Volcker rule’s securities Inventory RENTD provision has it merits. Uncountable "Funny money" is more akin to "non-cashable gambling chips". NOTE: there is no formal “certification body” for token classification in the US, but to rely on issuer’s initial representation in simple agreement for future tokens (SAFT) to “self-certified”, p.s. $BTC has no centralized issuer, no initial sale or fund raising. CFTC is in a better position than the SEC to regulate the trading of Spot Crypto Asset Contracts and Tokens sold via SAFT. CFTC authority under §2(c)(2)(D) of Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) and COMEX Rule 7 help curb and mitigate situations such as the Monex case, retail metal fraud cases, and Silver Thursday event. We recommend the CFTC to require Designated Contract Markets (DCMs) to set aside at least 1 to 2% of gross revenue allocated to risk education program for existing and prospective retail clients, on top of protection against abusive practices, and updating Core Principle 12 outlined in 5(d) of the CEA and Part 38 accordingly. We do NOT want the SEC to cross subsidize the cost to regulate crypto from equity trading. The SEC Chair suggested “digital commodities,” “network tokens,” “digital collectibles,” and “digital tools” are NOT securities. We agree with and support the SEC oversight on “Governance token with rights” and “Covered Liquidity Staking Receipt Tokens” and that fits squarely with the definition of “securities” as well as those involves “bundled services” that resemble an investment contract. We have no objection to the SEC establishing a safe harbor for certain airdrops from characterization as “sales” under Section 2(a)(3) of the Securities Act or an exemption from the corresponding registration requirements under Section 5 of the Securities Act. The SEC should also consider an exemption for distributions of digital assets by decentralized physical infrastructure (DePIN) providers in securities transactions for purposes of rewarding participation in DePIN networks, and distributions of certain NFT offerings. We are open minded about DePIN transformation to serve the US in the long-term.  We do appreciate the duo oversight setup under the “Responsible Financial Innovation Act proposal” (RFIA) regarding “Ancillary Assets,” – the SEC gatekeeping the primary sales and the CFTC be the secondary trading regulator. The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, oversighted by the SEC, should determine the proper ways in measuring, recording, and disclosing of “Ancillary Assets”. We look forward to the RFIA final bill formally introduced in the Senate that will address the asset classification protocols issue prompted by the CFTC v. Archegos Capital Management LP case. Meanwhile, the Senate Agriculture Committee released a bipartisan November 2025 draft. It aims to merge with the earlier RFIA draft that expands the CFTC’s authority over the spot market for digital commodities (e.g. requires digital commodity exchanges, brokers, and dealers to register with the CFTC), and overlines mechanisms (joint advisory committee, joint rulemaking, and innovation sandbox) for better coordination of the SEC and CFTC’s roles. Categories Primary Sale Regulator Secondary Trading Regulator Ancillary Asset Status Digital Collectibles, Non-Fungible Meme Coins for entertainment, social and cultural purposes NOT the SEC CFTC (if involve CEA regulated commodity options, futures, or leveraged OTC transactions) Not applicable Spot Crypto Asset Contracts, currently limited to Bitcoin (BTC) and Ether (ETH) that are widely treated as commodity Not applicable CFTC (DCM Listing, focuses on fungible, peer-to-peer digital assets, while excluding securities, stablecoins, and tokenized real-world assets) Not applicable Fungible Token sold via Simple Agreement for Future Tokens (SAFT) used by crypto developers to raise capital from accredited investors before a token is live or functional SEC CFTC (if ancillary asset)   Possible if self-certified Covered liquidity staking receipt tokens, Governance token with rights, Spot Crypto ETPs SEC SEC Not eligible   The SEC should refrain from regulating any “uncountable” digital asset that is more akin to “non-cashable gambling chips.” It should not be subjected to investor protection over securities trading activities. Wrapping money-market fund protections around this “funny money” does NOT make it any safer (lipstick on a pig is still a pig). The SEC does NOT need to reconsider its withdrawn Safeguarding rule proposal, which – if revived and modified to accommodate digital asset nuances—could be a detriment to the time-tested Exchange Act framework. A caveat – crypto Exchange Traded Products (ETPs), the underlying assets do NOT necessarily have to be “securities”. The SEC’s recent approved $DOJE is a crypto Exchange Traded Fund with underlying “assets” being MEME Coin. Recalling a statement by the SEC Division of Corporate Finance on Feb 27, 2025, it stated that “MEME Coins for entertainment and social cultural purposes are NOT securities.” Any “Digital Collectables” that do not involve CEA regulated commodity options, futures, or leveraged OTC transactions, it would be outside scope of CFTC’s oversight. Reliance on the regulated structure of the product and the transparent disclosures for the valuations and the regulatory controls may be an insurmountable reality. That guardrail may ONLY shuffle fraud and manipulation risk out the door of SEC regulated markets, but NOT stopping the risk spreading elsewhere. Bad actors / foreign adversaries play across markets and payment systems simultaneously. We have reservations with the SEC newly approved generic listing standards. Its first criteria – “The asset is listed on a market that is a member of the Intermarket Surveillance Group” (ISG), reminded me of AIG – notorious for engaging in credit enhancement and securitization that led to their financial distress during the 2008 financial crisis. Most members of ISG are stock exchanges. An ISG can be bought and sold easily (Kraken acquired Small Exchange). KalshiEX is facing regulatory scrutiny and litigation. Some ISG members domicile outside of the US may have close ties with their respective governments (HKEX’s subsidiary LME involved in a notorious futures contracts cancellation case). We certainly welcome our friendly foreign regulators (CIRO and ASIC) as members of the ISG. UK Prime Minister Winston Churchill once said “We have no lasting friends, no lasting enemies, only lasting interests.” Can the US rely on foreign organizations to act in America’s best interest without being taken for granted? Would the US retreat from global governance be exploited by other powers?  The US cannot call for an outright ban of crypto like China. Foreign nations promoting their own Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) while pushing other digital assets out their doors or allegedly “exporting” DeFi to the US is a de-dollarization attempt. Among the $4 trillion aggregated market capitalization of all cryptocurrencies, stablecoins are about 7.5% (~ $300 billion). NOTE:  the 1:1 reserve requirement under the GENIUS Act is NOT a daily mark-to-market, but rather requires permitted issuers to provide monthly public reporting on their reserve assets. The dilemma is – the more we add new compliance requirements, the more accumulated bureaucracy in dragging the US productivity. Foreign adversaries want the Western civilizations to fall in their trap. The approach to “suck” new money from Digital Asset activities may be unconventional (like Mafia making other gangs abide by their rules), but becoming the biggest force behind DeFi is better. We recommend: Dollarize everything to turn the table against de-dollarization threats, even if it means spreading the risk abroad. The EU should NOT perceive the US as a hazard. Western Civilization should stand by the US against countries with human rights violations that hide under the guise of “safety monitoring and assessments”. The phenomena of currency and tariff wars today are the result of breached contracts (some US allies included). TradFi establishments infuse trust into crypto ecosystem while a toll gate to profit or rent seek from flows passing through their infrastructures is inevitable. To prevent these infrastructure providers from exploiting small investors, we recommend a 2-tier or a dual-track regulatory regime (see page 5 of our comment letter to the CFTC). DCM’s betting odds may be used as a reference if the operator of such platform may also apply for Securities Exchange or Alternative Trading System license(s) under the SEC oversight. In vice versa, the SEC should review the long-term betting odds of Stock Exchanges to consider license renewals or enforcement actions. This helps keep both the DeFi and TradFi intact, where healthy competition will be promoted, bureaucracy and barriers would be minimized and removed. The ideal way to weed out Illicit activity involving Digital Assets is by reducing bureaucracy and removing barriers that widened the gap between the “haves” and “have nots.” When the World prospers more under the US leadership, there will be less bad actors and adversaries. Revisit Part 1: Definition of Artificial Intelligence By Kelvin To, Founder and President of Data Boiler Technologies Data Boiler is a Type C organization member of the European Commission’s Data Expert Group. Between my patented inventions in signal processing, analytics, machine learning, etc. and the wealth of experience of my partner, Peter Martyn, we are about Market Reform, Governance, Risk, Compliance, and FinTech Innovations to create viable paths toward sustainable economic growth. By Kelvin To, Founder and President of Data Boiler Technologies Data Boiler has patented inventions (US, Canada, Singapore, Japan, Europe, and Australia). It is a crossover between Music and Trading in signal processing, trade analytics, machine learning, time-lock cryptography, etc. We commented frequently on regulatory policies, was a Type C organization member of the European Commission’s Data Expert Group, and a former committee of BITS (Banking Policy Institute). With over 12 years in business, we remain deeply passionate about the long-term development of capital markets.

In a major milestone to drive digital asset adoption, The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC), the premier post-trade market infrastructure for the global financial services industry, today announced that its subsidiary, The Depository Trust Company (DTC), has received a No-Action Letter (NAL) from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to offer, under federal securities laws and regulations, a new service to tokenize real-world, DTC-custodied assets in a controlled production environment. DTC anticipates beginning to roll out the service in the second half of 2026. The No-Action Letter authorizes DTC to offer a tokenization service for DTC Participants and their clients on pre-approved blockchains for three years. Under the NAL, DTC will have the ability to tokenize real-world assets, with the digital version having all the same entitlements, investor protections and ownership rights as the asset in its traditional form. In addition, DTC will provide the same high level of resiliency, safety and soundness as that of traditional markets. The authorization applies to a defined set of highly liquid assets, including the Russell 1000, which represents the 1,000 largest publicly traded U.S. companies by market cap, as well as ETFs tracking major indices and U.S. Treasury bills, bonds and notes. The No-Action Letter is significant because it allows DTC to launch the service once finalized, under certain limitations and representations, more quickly than would have otherwise been possible. “I want to thank the SEC for its trust in us. Tokenizing the U.S. securities market has the potential to yield transformational benefits such as collateral mobility, new trading modalities, 24/7 access and programmable assets, but this will only be achievable if market infrastructure provides a robust foundation to usher in this new digital era,” stated Frank La Salla, President & CEO, DTCC. “We welcome this opportunity to further enable and innovate for the industry, our participants and their clients. We look forward to partnering across the industry to tokenize real-world assets safely and securely while advancing the future of finance for generations to come.” The SEC’s No-Action Letter is a critical enabler of the firm’s broader strategy to advance a secure, transparent and interoperable digital asset ecosystem that leverages the full potential of blockchain technology. “From the start, DTCC has been pioneering breakthrough technologies that redefine markets and safeguard their integrity. Our tokenization initiative will build upon that legacy and enable us to work collaboratively with industry participants to usher in the era of digital markets,” stated Brian Steele, Managing Director, President of Clearing & Securities Services at DTCC. “In partnership with our clients and the broader market, we will tokenize securities with uncompromising security, sound legal footing and seamless interoperability, all backed by the resilience that has anchored traditional markets for decades.” In support of this strategy, DTCC’s tokenization approach will enable DTC Participants and their clients to take advantage of a comprehensive tokenization service, underpinned by DTCC’s ComposerX suite of platforms. This will enable DTC to create a single pool of liquidity across the TradFi and DeFi ecosystems and deliver a more resilient, inclusive, cost-effective and efficient financial system. “Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) has the power to reshape markets, and DTCC is championing this transformation through innovative actions and bold solutions,” said Nadine Chakar, Managing Director and Head of Digital Assets at DTCC. “Our suite of DLT offerings will underpin DTCC’s tokenization service and, together with the industry, will drive development of a new digital asset ecosystem for all.” DTC has, in coordination with Participants, peers, and technology providers, explored and facilitated the use of DLT for almost a decade to determine how it could be utilized to allow market participants to leverage the benefits of blockchain and tokenization technology, including mobility (the ability to transfer an asset across jurisdictions and time zones without regard to standard trading hours or holidays), decentralization (the ability for market participants to access their assets more directly), and programmability (the ability to use smart contracts to optimize transfers or allocations of assets), all with the same protections and accountability that DTC provides. Under the No-Action Letter, DTC is authorized to offer a limited production environment tokenization service across L1 and L2 providers. DTCC will provide more details about on-boarding requirements, including registering wallets, as well as the approval process for L1 and L2 networks in the coming months. A full copy of the SEC’s No-Action Letter is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/tm/no-action/dtc-nal-121125.pdf.

Introductory remarks: Now, turning to our first agenda item, we will discuss the Council’s annual report.  Since the first day of this Administration, we have focused on building Parallel Prosperity—an era of economic expansion where Wall Street and Main Street grow together.  To that end, we have tirelessly pursued pro-growth policies to help unlock the potential available to all Americans when they are free to save, invest, innovate, build businesses, and drive their own economic destinies. It is my firm belief that the Financial Stability Oversight Council plays an important role in ensuring that the financial system is contributing to this vision.  Too often in the past, efforts to safeguard the financial system have resulted in burdensome and often duplicative regulations.  Little thought was given to the harms of overregulation, the imbalance between costs imposed and benefits achieved, and the economic stagnation that can follow.  Our Administration is changing that approach.  We understand that sustainable long-term economic growth and economic security are both essential to financial stability.  Today, I will explain how the Council is prioritizing these concepts in its work, and how they are reflected in this year’s annual report.  Economic growth underpins financial stability.  Growth contributes to higher earnings and capital cushions for financial institutions that can serve as buffers against unexpected losses. Similarly, households and businesses with stronger balance sheets are more resilient to shocks, less likely to default on debts, and more likely to maintain consumption and investment.  Yet policymakers have not routinely considered the cumulative burdens of regulatory and supervisory regimes, the interactions among individual rules, or how a failure to modernize regulations can hurt both resilience and growth.  The work we are doing at FSOC will be amplified by the United States when we host the G20 in 2026. The main priority of our host year will be on promoting economic growth and deregulation, which will include focusing on policies that will increase global prosperity by removing harmful regulations and barriers to innovation. The Council has a statutory duty to monitor financial regulatory proposals and developments.  It also has a duty to make recommendations to enhance the integrity, efficiency, competitiveness, and stability of U.S. financial markets.  To fulfill that obligation, the Council is working with member agencies to consider where aspects of the U.S. financial regulatory framework impose undue burdens and where they harm economic growth, thereby undermining financial stability. Economic security is also a necessary condition for financial stability.  In the national security context, “economic security” is defined as having a secure and resilient domestic production capacity, combined with reliable access to the global resources necessary to maintain an acceptable standard of living.  This concept of economic security must be integrated into the financial stability analysis and the Council’s framework for understanding risks.  Why?  Because the fallout from decreasing living standards can contribute to financial instability.  Economic security and financial stability are bolstered by technologies that keep our financial system secure and financial regulation that incentivizes the flow of credit to strategic sectors. The twin priorities of economic growth and economic security will guide the Council’s future approach to identifying priorities, evaluating risks, and recommending regulatory or supervisory changes.  The Council is operationalizing these priorities through interagency staff working groups, and we will share updates about their progress next year as the work takes shape.  This year’s annual report also reflects the reorientation of the Council’s priorities. In this report, we are shifting away from the past approach – where nearly every sector of the economy, major market, and major financial institution was described as a financial stability vulnerability.  By introducing a new structure centered on fostering economic growth and security, we are focusing on the issues that matter most for enduring U.S. financial stability. 

Universidad de Monterrey won first place, with two others from outside the U.S. in the top five Record participation from over 615 teams across 25 countries  CME Group, the world's leading derivatives marketplace, today announced the winners of its 22nd annual University Trading Challenge, led by Universidad de Monterrey in Mexico. 22nd Annual CME Group University Trading Challenge Winners   Team Position University Name Country First Place Universidad de Monterrey Mexico Second Place University of Chicago United States Third Place University of Illinois Chicago    United States Fourth Place Tecnológico de Monterrey Mexico Fifth Place Universidad de Guadalajara Mexico This year's four-week competition reached a new participation record, with more than 615 teams of 1,800 students from 25 countries. Teams represented 174 universities around the world. Students learned hands-on techniques for trading agriculture, energy, metals, equity indices, interest rates and foreign exchange futures contracts using CQG's real-time simulated electronic trading platform. Throughout the challenge, students also received live market updates through Dow Jones newsfeeds and The Hightower Report.  "The University Trading Challenge offers a truly unique educational opportunity, giving the next generation of potential trading professionals the hands-on experience and skills needed for navigating futures markets in a fun, interactive and competitive environment," said Anita Liskey, CME Group Senior Managing Director of Global Brand Marketing and Communications. "We were so pleased to have record-breaking participation in this year's competition and congratulate the winning teams for their impressive achievements." "Congratulations to all of the winners and participants in this year's University Trading Challenge," said Pat Kenny, SVP of Client Relations at CQG. "CQG remains committed to educating the next generation of derivatives traders. The competition offers students the unique opportunity to make trading decisions based on real-time CME Group data, CQG's analytics, commentary and real-time news feeds from Dow Jones, and executed with CQG's premier trade routing technology." Students on the top five winning teams receive cash prizes, if eligible, and all participants from this year's trading challenge were invited to attend an exclusive one-day, in-person market education event on December 8. CME Group provides a wide range of risk management education, including its CME Institute education hub, which offers detailed courses, webinars and videos on trading futures on options markets, as well as a trading simulator. CME Group also partners with other industry organizations to offer educational tools, such as Futures Fundamentals, a one-stop educational resource to help learners of all levels understand futures markets and the role they play in everyday life.

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s Division of Market Oversight and the Division of Clearing and Risk today announced they have taken a no-action position regarding swap data reporting and recordkeeping regulations in response to requests from multiple registered entities. The divisions will not recommend the CFTC initiate an enforcement action against certain registered entities or their participants for failure to comply with certain swap-related recordkeeping requirements and for failure to report to swap data repositories data associated with binary option transactions executed on or subject to the rules of the registered entities, subject to the terms of the no-action letters. The no-action letters apply only in narrow circumstances and are comparable to no-action letters issued for other similarly situated designated contract markets and derivatives clearing organizations. RELATED LINKS CFTC Staff Letter No. 25-44 CFTC Staff Letter No. 25-45 CFTC Staff Letter No. 25-47 CFTC Staff Letter No. 25-48