Hyperliquid founder Jeff Yan has outlined a US regulatory approach in which compliance obligations would fall on the companies operating trading venues on the network, rather than on the blockchain itself. He described that framework in an interview with Bloomberg as the project seeks a path to work with established financial firms.

Yan said Hyperliquid is intended to function as infrastructure for trading and liquidity that other businesses can build on. While the platform itself remains unavailable to US customers, its technology could still reach that market through regulated intermediaries.

Regulation at the application layer

Yan's core argument is that oversight should sit with the entities that control how markets are run on Hyperliquid, not with the underlying network. In his view, the relevant obligations belong to the firms that deploy products and exercise operational control over trading venues.

He compared that structure to broader internet infrastructure. As an example, he pointed to Amazon Web Services, saying a computing provider can support financial companies without becoming the financial product itself. On that basis, Yan argued that the blockchain should not automatically bear the same regulatory burden as a conventional exchange.

Aiming to serve traditional finance

The proposal is tied to Hyperliquid's larger goal of positioning itself as a technology layer for major financial institutions rather than a system designed to displace them. Yan said the project wants banks and other established firms to use its tools to launch their own offerings.

He also pushed back on the idea that traditional financial institutions are obsolete. Instead, he said they could use Hyperliquid to build products on top of a permissionless and independent system, with the broader ambition of making the financial system work better for users globally.

US market remains closed, but a route is emerging

Hyperliquid is still not available to US customers. Even so, Bloomberg reported that Payward, the parent company of Kraken, plans to offer US investors derivatives based on Hyperliquid technology through a regulated exchange.

That detail points to the model Yan is advocating: the underlying technology may remain separate from the regulated venue, while the customer-facing operator handles the compliance requirements attached to offering products in the United States.

Cautious regulators and the next test

Yan said US regulators are moving carefully because they must account for the existing financial system and the protections already built into it. At the same time, he said authorities appear willing to react quickly when new technologies emerge, even as that openness carries significant responsibility.

For now, the clearest confirmed next step is not a direct US launch of Hyperliquid itself, but the planned use of its technology by a regulated exchange tied to Payward. How that arrangement develops may provide an early indication of whether the infrastructure-first model can fit within US oversight.

Source: incrypted.com