Technology & Cyber in United States

What Changed

• - Regulation E‑Delivery would formally replace the SEC’s decades‑old, purely guidance‑based approach to electronic delivery and establish a rule‑based framework that expressly permits e‑delivery to...
• Electronic delivery would become the default method of delivery, meaning firms could deliver required regulatory information electronically without first obtaining the investor’s affirmative consent,...
• The rule would preserve investor choice by requiring that investors and other recipients be able to request paper delivery at any time and continue receiving paper format upon request.
• The proposal would set out requirements and conditions for when e‑delivery is deemed compliant, including use of electronic addresses or other electronic methods reasonably designed to ensure receipt...
• The range of deliverable documents under Regulation E‑Delivery would be broad, covering prospectuses for funds and other issuers, fund annual and semi‑annual shareholder reports, proxy statements,...

Suggested Considerations

• Conduct a comprehensive mapping of all documents currently delivered under federal securities law requirements (prospectuses, shareholder reports, proxy materials, trade confirmations, Form CRS, Form ADV brochures) and determine how each will be delivered under Regulation E‑Delivery.
• Review and update disclosure, investor communication and delivery policies to incorporate e‑delivery as the default method while clearly documenting investor rights to request and receive paper delivery at any time.
• Design and implement procedures for maintaining accurate electronic contact information for investors and clients, including periodic verification processes and remediation steps for undeliverable emails or failed electronic transmissions.
• Develop and operationalize the transition process for paper‑based recipients, including generation and mailing of the two required paper notices that explain the move to e‑delivery and the opt‑out option.
• Update client and investor onboarding materials, account agreements and preference‑capture workflows to reflect the new default e‑delivery model and how investors can elect paper delivery or change their preferences.

Key Dates

References

• [1] reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=202510&RIN=32...
• [2] morganlewis.com/blogs/finreg/2023/04/an-end-to-the-paper-...
• [3] sec.gov/rules-regulations/2000/04/use-electronic-media
• [4] sec.gov/files/rules/proposed/2023/33-11176.pdf
• [5] sec.gov/comments/s7-09-20/s70920-8210190-227541.pdf
• [6] finra.org/media-center/blog/facilitating-e-delivery-while...
• [7] planadviser.com/white-house-to-review-sec-electronic-deli...
• [8] klgates.com/Click-Here-for-Your-Fund-Report-SEC-Endorses-...

What Changed

• - The SEC, jointly with seven other U.S. financial regulators, has established mandatory technical data standards for information submitted to those agencies pursuant to the Financial Data...
• The joint standards apply to regulatory data collections within each participating agency’s remit (e.g., SEC filings and reports, certain prudential and market data submissions), and are intended to...
• The rule requires use of structured, non‑proprietary, machine‑readable formats (such as XML, JSON, XBRL, or similar open standards) where data is collected electronically, moving away from...
• The standards require use of public, non‑exclusive data dictionaries and taxonomies, so that data elements (e.g., fields, metrics, identifiers) are consistently defined and tagged across different...
• The rule embeds interoperability requirements, so that the same data element (for example, a LEI, CUSIP, counterparty ID, asset class, or exposure type) is reported using harmonized definitions and...

Suggested Considerations

• Conduct a comprehensive mapping of all current and upcoming regulatory data submissions to the SEC and other FDTA‑covered agencies to identify which reports are likely to be brought under the joint data standards.
• Review and update data governance frameworks so that key data elements (counterparty identifiers, instrument identifiers, balances, exposures, classifications) are uniquely defined, consistently sourced, and traceable across internal systems in alignment with anticipated joint taxonomies.
• Assess existing regulatory reporting systems and vendor solutions (including XBRL tools, data warehouses, and filing platforms) and develop an upgrade plan to support the new machine‑readable, standardized formats and schemas.
• Establish an internal FDTA/joint data standards implementation program, with clear ownership (e.g., finance, regulatory reporting, data management, IT) and a cross‑functional steering committee to oversee design, testing, and rollout.
• Engage with technology, regtech, and data vendors to confirm their timelines for supporting the new SEC and cross‑agency standards and to obtain updated taxonomies, schemas, and validation rules as soon as they are published.

Key Dates

References

• [1] fisglobal.com
• [2] ecb.europa.eu/stats/financial_corporations/list_of_financ...
• [3] bankingcircle.com
• [4] bis.org/fsi/publ/insights33.pdf
• [5] nuvei.com
• [6] goldmansachs.com
• [7] ripple.com
• [8] adyen.com

What Changed

• - The SEC is proposing a strategic reorientation toward core statutory objectives: investor protection, fair and orderly markets, and capital formation.
• The plan emphasizes clearer, fit-for-purpose rules intended to support innovation while deterring misconduct.
• The SEC says it will prioritize modernizing and simplifying disclosure practices, which may affect reporting frameworks and issuer-facing compliance processes.
• The draft plan highlights expanded access to private markets and new capital-raising pathways, signaling possible future changes in offering, exemptive, and disclosure regimes.
• The SEC identifies digital assets and distributed ledger technologies as an area needing a “firm regulatory foundation,” indicating continued policy development for crypto-related activities.

Suggested Considerations

• Submit written comments by 02 July 2026 if your firm wants to influence the SEC’s strategic priorities, especially on disclosure modernization, private markets, digital assets, or enforcement posture.
• Include File Number DSP-3 on all comments and use only one submission method, because the SEC requires the file number on email subject lines and asks commenters to choose a single channel.
• Review internal compliance roadmaps for likely impacts from disclosure simplification, rule retrospectives, and enforcement refocusing, and identify where current controls may become redundant or need redesign.
• Assess whether your firm’s digital asset, tokenization, or distributed ledger activities may benefit from future SEC guidance or may face new framework requirements.
• Monitor developments on EDGAR modernization and filing technology changes, and test whether internal reporting, tagging, or submission processes would need upgrades.

Key Dates

References

• [1] sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2026-51-sec-publishes-dra...
• [2] sec.gov/ix?doc=%2FArchives%2Fedgar%2Fdata%2F0000070858%2F...
• [3] prnewswire.com/news-releases/fs-kkr-capital-corp-announce...
• [4] pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.4c12667
• [5] sec.gov/ix?doc=%2FArchives%2Fedgar%2Fdata%2F1498067%2F000...
• [6] blackstone.com/insights/article/office-of-the-cio-2026-in...
• [7] sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1357615/000110465926036847/tm...
• [8] federalregister.gov/documents/2025/11/28/2025-21379/termi...

What Changed

• - The CFTC Portal now supports consolidated product self‑certification submissions, enabling exchanges to file a single set of certification documents that apply to multiple closely related contracts...
• Exchanges are no longer required to upload multiple identical copies of supporting product certification documents when listing several closely related contracts; one shared documentation set can be...
• The enhancement is framed as an administrative/technical change to the filing process; it does not alter substantive legal standards for product self‑certification under the Commodity Exchange Act or...
• The CFTC has issued updated submission instructions on the Portal site specifying how to use the new consolidated filing functionality, including formatting and process guidance.
• Dedicated technical and non‑technical CFTC contacts have been identified (Howard Rosen for system use; Chris Goodman for product submission process questions), signaling that the Commission expects...

Suggested Considerations

• Review and obtain the updated submission instructions on the CFTC Portal and ensure legal, compliance, and operations staff understand the consolidated filing functionality and any new formatting or data‑entry requirements.
• Update internal product approval and submission procedures (including Part 40 playbooks and checklists) to reflect the ability to file a single set of documents for multiple closely related contracts, and to define when consolidation is appropriate.
• Revise internal documentation templates (e.g., product term sheets, legal analyses, core principle compliance memos, risk assessments) so that they can explicitly support multiple closely related contracts in a single package where relevant.
• Adjust governance workflows (approvals, sign‑offs, and quality checks) so that:
• Each contract included in a consolidated submission is clearly identified and traceable, and

Key Dates

References

• [1] quickreads.ext.katten.com/post/102jlxr/the-cftc-amends-pa...
• [2] cftc.gov/PressRoom/SpeechesTestimony/romerostatement072623c
• [3] cftc.gov/IndustryOversight/ContractsProducts/ListingProce...
• [4] cftc.gov/PressRoom/SpeechesTestimony/mersingerstatement09...
• [5] law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/17/40.6
• [6] federalregister.gov/documents/2024/11/07/2024-24388/provi...
• [7] fia.org/fia/articles/cftc-examines-self-certification-pro...
• [8] cftc.gov/IndustryOversight/ContractsProducts/index.htm

What Changed

• The CFTC FAQs address implementation questions arising from two prior staff positions:
• Tokenized Collateral Guidance (CFTC Staff Letter 25-39): Established the framework allowing futures commission merchants (FCMs) and designated contract markets (DCMs) to accept digital assets as...
• No-Action Position (CFTC Staff Letter 26-05): Provided temporary relief permitting FCMs to accept payment stablecoins, Bitcoin, and Ether as customer margin collateral, subject to specific...
• How registered entities should operationalize tokenized collateral acceptance
• Compliance with notification and operational risk management requirements

Suggested Considerations

• *Immediate (0–30 days):
• *Asset Classification Audit: Map every crypto asset in your portfolios, products, or platforms against the five-category framework (digital commodities, digital collectibles, digital tools, stablecoins, digital securities) established in the March 17 joint interpretation.
• *Investment Contract Review: Identify any assets subject to active issuer promises of essential managerial effort—those remain securities regardless of category and cannot be treated as digital commodities.
• *FAQ Implementation Review: Obtain and review the full CFTC FAQs (available at https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/9200-26) to identify specific operational questions relevant to your entity type.
• *Notification Protocol Establishment: If relying on the no-action relief for tokenized collateral, establish procedures to notify the CFTC of significant operational, system, or cybersecurity issues affecting digital asset collateral use (required for first three months of relief).

Key Dates

References

• [1] sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2026-30-sec-clarifies-app...
• [2] consumerfinancialserviceslawmonitor.com/2026/02/cftc-and-...
• [3] klgates.com/Crypto-in-2026-The-Democratization-of-Digital...
• [4] genfinity.io/2026/03/17/sec-cftc-final-rule-digital-commo...
• [5] compliance-risk.com/sec-cftc-joint-crypto-asset-interpret...
• [6] cftc.gov/csl/26-09/download
• [7] sec.gov/files/rules/interp/2026/33-11412.pdf
• [8] fintechweekly.com/news/sec-bitcoin-ether-solana-digital-c...