It is an open question, and as of November 2026 there is no proposal to require it. The CFTC chair raised it publicly on 28 October 2026, and US lawmakers put a version of it to the SEC in June. The last time the CFTC tried to make a new class of automated traders register, in a 2015 proposal, it withdrew the plan in 2020, after 100 comment letters across two rounds of proposals.
A note on the legal and regulatory points here: they summarise public sources as of November 2026 and should not be relied on. Rules for AI agents are still being written, and some of what is described here is proposed or coming soon rather than settled. Check the current position, or ask a qualified professional, before acting on it.
This page sets out both sides. It does not take a position on what the law should be.
Who is asking the question?
Both a regulator and lawmakers are asking it, and neither has answered. In remarks on 28 October 2026 at the first forum in a new CFTC series on AI and agentic finance, listed on the CFTC’s speeches and testimony page, the CFTC chair asked directly whether the developer of an AI agent becomes subject to registration. He also asked who is liable if an agent goes rogue. He said the views were his own and not necessarily the Commission’s.
Four months earlier, eight members of the US House sent the SEC 13 questions on agentic trading. One asked when an AI agent or its developer must register as a broker, dealer, investment adviser or associated person. Another asked what liability developers carry when their agents trade for retail investors.
A third went to the duties registration usually brings. It asked whether agents, or the people who control them, must act in users’ best interest, disclose conflicts, keep records and protect customer information. Those are the obligations that would come with any registration regime.
The CFTC’s forum agenda framed the issue the same way. Its agentic trading session asked whether and how the CFTC’s framework should apply when agents transact for market participants. We had not located a published summary of that session’s conclusions as of early November 2026.
What would registration actually mean?
Registration means a firm must identify itself to a regulator, meet standards, and accept ongoing oversight. Trading-related registration already exists for people who act for others. For example, under the NFA’s guidance on commodity trading advisor registration, anyone who advises others on futures or swaps for compensation is a commodity trading advisor, subject to exemptions.
Registered advisors that manage or exercise discretion over customer accounts must also become NFA members. Membership brings application forms, fees and proficiency requirements for the people involved.
The live question is whether writing the software that makes trading decisions should count the same way. Today, registration attaches to who advises or trades for others. In our reading, a developer who ships code but never touches customer accounts generally sits outside that model.
What happened the last time the CFTC tried?
The CFTC tried something similar for algorithmic trading and abandoned it. Regulation Automated Trading, known as Reg AT, was proposed in December 2015 and revised in November 2016.
According to the CFTC’s withdrawal notice, Reg AT would have done three things:
- Required certain market participants to register based on their trading functionality, strategies or market access, even if they held no customer funds.
- Required pre-trade risk controls at set levels of the trading chain.
- Required registrants to produce their source code to the CFTC without a subpoena.
The proposals drew 100 comment letters across the original and supplemental rounds. Commenters objected to prescriptive, one-size-fits-all rules and to the new registration category. Some said the benefits did not justify the costs. The CFTC withdrew Reg AT with effect from 15 July 2020, saying it would not pursue proposals that would require additional classes of market participants to register.
The current CFTC chair said in October 2026 that Reg AT would be ill-suited to today’s landscape. That is a judgement about the old design, not a statement about whether developers should register.
What is the case for registration?
The case for registration rests on accountability: someone identifiable should answer for an agent that trades. Supporters could make four arguments, each drawing on the public record. The framing of each argument is ours.
The accountability gap. The lawmakers’ letter quotes brokerage disclosures saying platforms do not control, supervise, monitor or audit the agents. If platforms disclaim responsibility and developers are unregistered, the user is left alone.
Public expectation. In a June 2026 UK survey of 2,080 adults, 54% said the company that built an AI agent should be accountable for refunds. That survey asked about AI shopping agents, not trading agents.
Market-wide risk. The CFTC chair warned that similar models may produce correlated trading behaviour. The lawmakers asked whether similarly trained agents could cause herding or manipulation. Registration would give regulators a list of who to call.
Knowing who is trading. The chair asked how regulators can know whom an agent is trading for. A registered developer is one route to an answer.
What is the case against?
The case against rests on function: registration should follow control of money, not authorship of code. Opponents could also make four arguments drawing on the public record. Again, the framing is ours.
Function and control. The CFTC chair said the approach must stay grounded in the functions performed and the control exercised. A developer who publishes an agent does not necessarily control any account it trades.
The code-publishing precedent. The chair noted that software developers have faced uncertainty over whether publishing code could trigger rules meant for financial intermediaries. He said the CFTC has tried to provide clarity on that. Registering agent developers could reopen the same question.
Cost and design. Reg AT commenters argued that a new registration class and prescriptive controls cost more than they delivered. The CFTC cited that feedback when it withdrew the rule.
Source code and secrecy. Reg AT would have let the CFTC obtain source code without a subpoena. The withdrawal notice explicitly rejected that approach.
Is there a middle path?
There may be, though none has been proposed. The ideas below are our reading of where the debate could go, not policy.
One option is to regulate the deployment, not the code. The person or firm that runs an agent on customers’ money would register, while someone who only publishes software would not. That follows the chair’s function-and-control framing.
A second option is to require controls at the platform where agents connect. The lawmakers asked whether the SEC requires funding limits, order-size limits, trade approval, transaction logs and dispute processes. Those could apply whoever wrote the agent. A third is identity: a “know your agent” check that ties each agent to a responsible party. Our guide to Know Your Agent covers that idea.
What could go wrong?
Either outcome carries real risk. Without any registration or controls, losses from faulty agents stay with users, and regulators may struggle to see who is trading. That is the gap both the CFTC chair and lawmakers have described.
Over-broad registration has its own risk, in our judgement. It could sweep in hobbyists and open-source authors who control nothing, or push agent development out of regulators’ view entirely.
For users, the near-term risk is a false sense of safety. A registered developer would not guarantee a good agent. A registration licenses a firm; it does not test every decision its software makes.
The trust takeaway
Whatever the rule becomes, the useful question today is who is accountable for the agent you use. Check:
- Who built it. Is the developer identifiable, with a real legal entity?
- Who runs it. Is the agent operated by a registered firm, or by you?
- What controls exist. Are there spending limits, order limits and trade approval?
- What records exist. Is there a full transaction log you can see?
- What happens in a dispute. Is there a process, and who handles it?