Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission proposed new rules on Aug. 31 that would let licensed intermediaries facilitate retail investment in qualifying digital asset derivatives traded overseas.

The proposal covers retail, high-net-worth and ultra-high-net-worth investors. It does not authorize unrestricted access to every crypto futures or options product listed outside Thailand.

Eligible contracts would have to resemble digital asset derivatives permitted in Thailand. The SEC identified the underlying asset, maturity, leverage, delivery method and settlement structure as relevant comparison points.

The consultation will remain open through Sept. 30. The regulator has not announced when final rules could take effect or which foreign exchanges and contracts would qualify.

Retail access would carry product and exchange limits

Under the proposal, an overseas crypto derivative offered to noninstitutional clients must have characteristics consistent with products traded domestically. That condition is intended to prevent intermediaries from directing retail clients toward contracts carrying unfamiliar structures or substantially greater leverage.

The SEC did not publish a list of eligible cryptocurrencies, exchanges or maximum leverage levels in its English-language announcement. Those details may depend on the domestic contract specifications being developed with the Thailand Futures Exchange.

The overseas exchange must use a central counterparty, or CCP, to clear trades. A CCP becomes the buyer to each seller and the seller to each buyer, reducing direct counterparty exposure between market participants.

The exchange must also be supervised by a regulator that is a Signatory A to the International Organization of Securities Commissions’ Multilateral Memorandum of Understanding, or belong to the World Federation of Exchanges.

Those criteria create a regulatory test rather than a blanket country list. An offshore platform would not qualify merely because it offers Bitcoin or Ether futures to customers in another jurisdiction.

Institutional investors could access broader products

Crypto derivatives that fail the proposed retail conditions could only be offered to institutional investors. The SEC said these investors are better equipped to assess complex products and manage losses from leverage, volatility and settlement risks.

This distinction means qualifying the exchange alone would not be enough. The specific contract would also need to match the relevant Thai product characteristics before an intermediary could make it available to retail or wealthy individual clients.

Existing Thai rules already let intermediaries facilitate overseas derivatives investments for retail and high-net-worth clients when the foreign instruments resemble products tradable in Thailand. The new proposal creates tailored conditions for crypto because overseas contracts vary widely in leverage, maturity and settlement.

Perpetual futures may require particular scrutiny because they have no fixed expiry and use recurring funding payments. The SEC did not state whether such products would meet the similarity test. Their eligibility will depend on the final rules and domestic specifications.

The proposal also concerns regulated intermediaries facilitating access. It does not legalize direct use of every offshore crypto exchange by Thai residents or override restrictions affecting unlicensed foreign platforms.

Thailand is still designing domestic crypto contracts

Thailand expanded its derivatives framework earlier in 2026 by adding cryptocurrencies and digital tokens as eligible underlying assets under the Derivatives Act.

As crypto.news previously reported, Thailand formally recognized cryptocurrencies as permissible underlyings for regulated futures and options. The SEC Board’s related notification was dated March 5.

The regulator is now discussing contract specifications with TFEX. Those discussions are expected to address the underlying assets, contract sizes, margin requirements, leverage and settlement methods needed for a domestic product.

TFEX had not listed a cryptocurrency futures or options contract as of Sept. 1. Its public product directory showed equity index, single-stock, precious metal, currency, interest-rate and agricultural derivatives, but no digital asset category.

The absence of a domestic contract creates an open question for the overseas-product comparison. The SEC may need to complete or substantially define the TFEX framework before intermediaries can determine which foreign contracts meet the similarity requirement.

Thailand has separately considered allowing crypto businesses to obtain derivatives licenses without establishing new corporate entities. The planned change would let qualified firms expand within one regulated structure while maintaining controls for conflicts and customer protection. The earlier licensing proposal sought to reduce duplicate corporate requirements.

Sept. 30 feedback will shape the final rules

Investors, intermediaries, banks, digital asset businesses and other stakeholders can submit comments through the SEC’s consultation page, Thailand’s Legal Hub or the email addresses provided by the regulator.

The consultation asks respondents whether noninstitutional investors should receive access when every prescribed condition is met. It separately asks whether institutional investors should be allowed to access products outside those conditions.

After Sept. 30, the SEC can revise the proposal before approving final amendments. No statutory deadline requires the regulator to complete that process immediately after comments close.

Further information will also be needed from TFEX. Contract specifications would determine which overseas instruments have sufficiently similar leverage, maturities and settlement arrangements.

The proposal produced no verified market movement directly attributable to the announcement. It did not approve a particular cryptocurrency, exchange, broker or derivatives contract.

Thailand is also developing locally regulated crypto exchange-traded funds. In related coverage, proposed spot Bitcoin and Ether ETF rules set an 80% minimum digital asset exposure. Together, the initiatives show the regulator expanding supervised investment access while retaining product-level restrictions.

Ireland has excluded crypto and derivatives from tax-advantaged investment accounts due to the launch in 2027, while allowing listed stocks, bonds, ETFs and retail investment funds.

Ireland’s Department of Finance said in its retail investment roadmap that crypto assets and derivatives will remain outside the new account because the government considers them “highly complex and risky” products.

The account will instead cover listed shares, listed bonds, financial instruments traded on regulated markets, and funds considered suitable for retail customers. Exchange-traded funds and certain insurance-based investment products will also qualify.

Scheduled to become available next year, the structure will be open to Irish tax residents aged 18 or older who hold a Personal Public Service Number. Each person may have one account, and approved providers will calculate, report and pay any tax owed to Ireland’s Revenue Commissioners on the investor’s behalf.

No minimum contribution will apply, although the government plans to impose an annual contribution limit. The size of that limit, the tax-free threshold, and the low annual flat tax rate on balances above the threshold will be announced in Budget 2027, scheduled for Oct. 6.

Ireland investment accounts will simplify retail taxes

Investments held within the account will not fall under Ireland’s existing investment tax rules, including the deemed-disposal system. Under the current framework, certain funds are treated as sold after eight years, requiring investors to pay tax on gains even when they continue holding the investment.

By removing deemed disposal from the account and assigning tax administration to providers, the government plans to reduce the filing work handled by individual investors. Account holders will also be able to access their money when needed rather than facing restrictions commonly attached to retirement products.

Cash deposits will not qualify as investments inside the account. According to the roadmap, providers may hold cash only temporarily while an account holder purchases another eligible asset.

Tánaiste and Minister for Finance Simon Harris said Irish households save at high rates but invest comparatively little through capital markets. Central Bank of Ireland research cited when the proposal was discussed in March found that households held only 2.3% of their financial assets in listed shares and debt securities, compared with an EU average of 7.5%.

Roughly €170 billion was held in Irish bank deposits at the time, according to figures reported by Reuters. Harris said inflation can reduce the value of money left in low-yield accounts, while the proposed structure would bring several investment types together under one tax system.

Legislation establishing the accounts is due to appear in Ireland’s Finance Bill. The roadmap also lists possible reforms from Budget 2028 onward, including a lower investment tax rate, changes to deemed disposal and simpler administration across the existing retail tax framework.

Crypto remains outside Ireland’s tax preference

Excluding crypto means Irish residents will not receive the account’s tax treatment when buying Bitcoin, Ether or other digital assets directly. The roadmap does not prohibit residents from owning or trading crypto through services that are otherwise permitted to operate in Ireland.

Irish authorities have separated market access from tax eligibility by allowing regulated crypto activity under European Union rules while keeping digital assets outside the new retail account. The Central Bank of Ireland oversees crypto service providers operating from the country under the EU’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation.

As crypto.news reported in August, Ireland’s national AML strategy requires service providers to conduct enhanced checks on some transfers involving self-hosted wallets. For transfers exceeding €1,000, regulated firms must take steps to assess whether a customer owns or controls the private address involved.

Ireland’s 12-month MiCA transition period ended on Dec. 30, 2025, earlier than the final EU-wide cutoff of July 1, 2026. Firms previously operating under national registrations needed MiCA authorization or another lawful route to continue providing covered services.

A separate Irish risk assessment published in June classified digital assets as a “very significant” money laundering and terrorist financing risk. The assessment cited crypto-related fraud, sanctions evasion, tax enforcement difficulties, and activity in less-regulated areas such as decentralized finance.

Central bank data included in that assessment showed that about 10% of Ireland’s population had invested in crypto as of December. Authorities also assigned the Gambling Regulatory Authority of Ireland responsibility for establishing standards on crypto-linked sources of funds by the second quarter of 2027.

MiCA controls access without granting tax benefits

Under MiCA, an authorized crypto asset service provider may use passporting rights to serve customers across EU and European Economic Area markets. Ireland has become one of the jurisdictions used by firms seeking regulated access to the region, including Kraken, which received its MiCA authorization from the Central Bank of Ireland in June 2025.

Authorization has not been extended to every provider. An August analysis found that 1,062 EEA firms in a TRM Labs dataset had not obtained MiCA approval after the final EU transition deadline. Only 281 of the 1,343 providers examined had secured authorization by July 1.

TRM Labs found that 12% of unauthorized providers carried a High or Severe risk rating, compared with 2% of authorized firms. Unauthorized providers also sent $5 billion directly to sanctioned counterparties, nearly three times the $1.7 billion linked to authorized firms, according to the blockchain intelligence company.

MiCA governs matters such as authorization, custody, disclosures, and consumer protection for crypto service providers. Ireland’s investment account follows a separate tax policy, allowing the government to keep regulated crypto services available while limiting the assets that receive preferential retail tax treatment.

U.S. investors can access crypto through some IRAs

Ireland’s decision differs from the approach available to some American investors. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s investor education office says custodians of self-directed IRAs may allow retirement money to be invested in alternative assets, including crypto.

The SEC warns that self-directed accounts can carry fraud, custody, and valuation risks. Custodians generally do not evaluate the quality or legitimacy of an investment, leaving account holders responsible for checking the asset and the promoter offering it.

Outside a tax-advantaged account, the Internal Revenue Service treats digital assets as property rather than currency for federal tax purposes. U.S. taxpayers may need to report income, gains, and losses from crypto transactions, including sales and exchanges between different digital assets.

The IRS has also introduced Form 1099-DA reporting for certain broker-handled digital asset transactions. Under current instructions, covered brokers must provide information related to qualifying sales, while taxpayers remain responsible for reporting taxable digital asset income even if they do not receive the form.

Kalshi has secured an exclusive partnership with the U.S. Tennis Association to become the US Open’s prediction market platform partner as the tournament’s main draw gets underway in New York.

Front Office Sports reported on Aug. 30, citing two people familiar with the agreement, that the partnership took effect immediately after being finalized following last week’s qualifying rounds. Financial terms and other parameters of the agreement were not disclosed.

The deal gives Kalshi an official role at one of tennis’s four Grand Slam tournaments and was completed later than initially planned. The US Open, owned and operated by the USTA, had previously considered waiting until 2027 or later before entering a prediction market partnership.

Kalshi becomes US Open prediction market partner

Discussions in recent weeks had involved multiple prediction market platforms and focused partly on match integrity and potential partnerships beginning next year, Front Office Sports reported.

Plans changed after Craig Tiley took over as USTA CEO on July 20. Tiley played a major role in pushing for an agreement covering the 2026 tournament, according to the report.

One source told Front Office Sports that the arrangement would prevent competing prediction market companies from advertising at the US Open venue and across television coverage of the tournament, including ESPN broadcasts.

The agreement had not yet been fully reflected across the organizations’ public materials when the main draw started Sunday. Kalshi was absent from the US Open’s official partner list as of Sunday afternoon.

A Kalshi blog post published earlier that day analyzing the women’s singles tournament still carried a disclaimer saying the company was “not affiliated with the U.S. Open or WTA,” according to Front Office Sports.

Kalshi already offers a large number of contracts tied to US Open matches. Its tennis markets on Sunday included individual men’s and women’s singles matches, with some contracts recording more than $1 million in trading volume.

The US Open agreement expands a sports strategy that has increasingly put prediction market platforms alongside leagues, teams and major events.

In June, crypto.news previously reported that Kalshi had secured World Cup branding exposure through a partnership with ADI Predictstreet, FIFA’s official prediction market partner for the 2026 tournament. The arrangement placed Kalshi branding alongside ADI Predictstreet across stadium, television and digital coverage beginning with the knockout stage.

Sports partnerships have spread across the prediction market industry. Kalshi and Polymarket have partnerships with the NHL, while Polymarket has worked with Major League Baseball and the New York Yankees. Kalshi has separately announced relationships with MLB clubs including the Atlanta Braves, Boston Red Sox, Los Angeles Dodgers, San Diego Padres and San Francisco Giants.

Novig has moved into the same market through a partnership with the New York Mets, becoming the first prediction market platform to sign an individual MLB team.

Sports contracts drive Kalshi’s expansion

Sports have become a central source of trading activity for Kalshi as the platform expands beyond the political and economic event contracts that helped prediction markets gain attention.

The company’s sports strategy was particularly visible during the FIFA World Cup. Weekly Kalshi trading volume reached a record $5.1 billion in June as activity tied to the tournament increased, while sports-related contracts had become its largest product category, according to previous coverage.

Kalshi has developed compliance systems alongside the expansion. Its sports-market surveillance includes IC360 screening and a prohibited-persons system designed to identify athletes, coaches, referees and league personnel who should not trade certain contracts. The company has paired those controls with its proprietary Poirot detection engine and Solidus Labs’ HALO surveillance platform, as detailed in crypto.news’ examination of prediction market surveillance in July.

The commercial push has continued while courts consider whether sports event contracts offered on federally regulated prediction markets can remain outside state gambling regimes.

Kalshi faces conflicting rulings over sports contracts

Two days before the US Open partnership emerged, Kalshi suffered a setback in its dispute with Nevada gaming regulators.

The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Aug. 28 that Kalshi had not shown that the Commodity Exchange Act was likely to preempt Nevada gaming regulations as applied to its sports event contracts. The three-judge panel affirmed in part a lower court order dissolving a preliminary injunction that had prevented Nevada from enforcing its laws against Kalshi.

Nevada’s Gaming Control Board had sent Kalshi a cease-and-desist letter alleging that it was operating a sports betting platform in violation of state laws and gaming regulations.

Kalshi argued that it operates as a designated contract market under the Commodity Exchange Act and that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission therefore has exclusive authority over its sports contracts.

The Ninth Circuit rejected Kalshi’s request for preliminary protection from Nevada enforcement. Its ruling found that the sports event contracts at issue did not qualify as swaps under the relevant Commodity Exchange Act definition because they were sports bets. The court remanded issues involving Kalshi’s election contracts to the district court for further consideration.

The decision came after Kalshi and Polymarket had already lost separate efforts connected with state gambling enforcement. In May, a Ninth Circuit panel denied emergency motions involving disputes in Nevada and Washington, finding that a Commodity Exchange Act preemption defense did not by itself establish federal jurisdiction.

Kalshi received a different result in the Third Circuit, which previously upheld preliminary relief preventing New Jersey regulators from enforcing state gambling laws against its sports contracts. The court found Kalshi had demonstrated a reasonable chance of succeeding on its argument that the contracts were swaps covered by federal derivatives law.

New York has produced another unfavorable ruling for the company. A federal judge in July rejected Kalshi’s injunction bid, leaving the state’s gambling-law claims against its sports event contracts in place while the litigation proceeds.

State and local challenges have continued during August. Baltimore sued Kalshi and Polymarket on Aug. 13 over alleged unlicensed sports betting, with the Kalshi complaint naming Coinbase, Robinhood and Webull because the platforms distribute its event contracts to their customers.

Baltimore alleged that contracts covering game winners, point spreads and player performances operate like sports wagers without the licenses and consumer protections required under state law. Kalshi rejected that characterization and maintained that its federal regulatory status permits it to offer the contracts.

The city is seeking statutory penalties, customer restitution and disgorgement of proceeds it alleges came from unlawful activity, along with an order preventing the companies from offering unauthorized sports betting to Baltimore residents.

Robinhood Chain recorded $2.66 million in application revenue over 24 hours on Aug. 31, according to a rolling DeFiLlama dashboard.

The reading placed the network above Hyperliquid L1 at $1.71 million, Ethereum at $1.57 million and Base at approximately $439,252. Robinhood Chain’s total was roughly 6.1 times Base’s figure during the same snapshot.

The dashboard had shown lower totals earlier in the day. That difference reflects the rolling measurement window rather than a correction or separately reported financial result.

Robinhood Chain app revenue led the snapshot

DeFiLlama’s dashboard aggregates revenue retained by applications operating on each network. Its Robinhood Chain reading increased 201% from the previous week and reached $23.23 million over 30 days.

However, the 30-day comparison presented a different ranking. Hyperliquid L1 recorded $53.6 million, while Ethereum generated $52.03 million. Robinhood Chain therefore led the daily snapshot but remained behind both networks over the longer period.

The comparison also does not mean Robinhood Markets earned more revenue than Ethereum or Hyperliquid. Application revenue belongs to individual protocols and may include several measurement methods, depending on how each service collects fees.

Three applications generated about 93% of revenue

GMGN led Robinhood Chain applications with approximately $1.11 million in 24-hour revenue. DeFiLlama defines that figure as trading fees retained by GMGN after referral commissions. Its EVM referral deduction is partly estimated using the rate measured on Solana.

Pons followed with approximately $1.03 million. Its total includes launch fees and portions of swap fees retained by the protocol. Uniswap ranked third with about $327,707.

Together, the three applications generated nearly $2.47 million, equivalent to approximately 93% of Robinhood Chain’s reported total. The concentration shows that the daily result depended heavily on trading bots, token launches and decentralized exchange activity.

Pons has been expanding its Robinhood Chain presence through an ETH-based bonding curve and Uniswap v4 integration

App revenue differs from blockchain revenue

Application revenue measures fees retained by protocols after payments to liquidity providers, referrers or other participants. It differs from gross user fees, transaction volume and revenue retained by the underlying blockchain.

DeFiLlama separately estimated Robinhood Chain’s own 24-hour revenue at about $963,612. Its definition covers transaction gas fees after Ethereum execution costs, blob costs and the Arbitrum Expansion Program share.

The distinction matters because Robinhood Chain is an Ethereum-compatible Layer 2 built with Arbitrum technology. Robinhood launched its public mainnet on July 1 for tokenized assets and decentralized financial applications.

Uniswap became one of its main liquidity venues at launch. In related coverage, crypto.news reported that cumulative tokenized-stock trading through Uniswap had surpassed $1 billion by Aug. 21.

Longer data will test whether the lead continues

Robinhood Chain would need to maintain stronger seven-day and 30-day results before the daily reading could indicate a sustained change in network rankings. Daily revenue can rise sharply during token launches or periods of concentrated speculative trading.

Future assessments should examine whether revenue spreads across more applications, whether active users continue returning and whether transaction activity persists without short-term incentives. GMGN and Pons currently account for most of the total, making the network sensitive to changes in either platform.

The earlier $1.84 million reading and the later $2.66 million total demonstrate how quickly a rolling dashboard can change. Articles comparing networks should therefore identify the measurement time and avoid presenting the figure as a completed financial period.