A thoughtful piece this morning from my friend @glandegger. Could the Crypto Battle Between the SEC and CFTC End in a Merger? Crypto investors have long struggled with the conflicting mandates of America’s two most powerful market regulators: the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). The SEC is charged with regulating securities, enforcing disclosure rules, and protecting investors against capital market fraud. The CFTC oversees commodities and derivatives, with a mandate to safeguard market integrity, manage systemic risks, and ensure transparent trading. On paper the split seems clear, but in practice digital assets blur the boundaries, and that has set the stage for more than a decade of regulatory confusion. The SEC made its opening move in 2017 with the DAO Report, applying the 1946 Howey Test to declare that many digital tokens were, in fact, unregistered securities. Around the same time, the CFTC formally declared bitcoin a commodity, asserting its jurisdiction over crypto futures and swaps. This divided the landscape: the SEC took the lead on token sales and securities-like assets, while the CFTC assumed authority over bitcoin, ether, and the derivatives markets. Over time, this uneasy split hardened into what many in the industry describe as a turf war. Exchanges have found themselves caught in the middle, facing SEC enforcement for listing unregistered securities while also navigating CFTC scrutiny for derivatives trading. The expectation was that Congress would eventually settle the matter through comprehensive legislation, such as the proposed CLARITY Act. At the same time, the idea of merging the SEC and CFTC has resurfaced repeatedly, especially under the Trump administration’s calls for deregulation. Proponents argue that a unified regulator would provide clear rules, eliminate jurisdictional arbitrage, and reduce costly administrative duplication. A single authority could, in theory, strengthen investor protections and streamline America’s position in global capital markets. Opponents counter that the agencies have fundamentally different mandates and institutional cultures. The SEC focuses on investor protection and disclosure, while the CFTC specializes in market structure and risk management. Combining them risks creating an unwieldy “super agency,” slower to act, more bureaucratic, and potentially less effective in both domains. The latest twist came with the resignation of CFTC Commissioner Kristin Johnson, which leaves the agency with no Democratic representation and just one remaining commissioner, the acting chair. The leadership vacuum intensifies the debate: is the CFTC too weakened to stand alone, and does this moment make a merger more practical? In my view, the answer is yes. With the US the leading capital market in the world, presenting a unified regulatory voice would bring clarity at home and greater credibility abroad. As digital assets evolve into a permanent fixture of the financial system, the case for a single regulator overseeing this sector is stronger than ever. A single rulebook would end years of uncertainty over whether tokens are securities or commodities, reducing costly litigation and regulatory whiplash. Developers, exchanges, and investors could build with confidence, knowing which standards apply. Instead of stifling innovation through fragmented oversight, a unified regulator could encourage responsible growth while ensuring robust protections. In an industry where capital moves at the speed of code, regulatory clarity is not just desirable, it is essential.