Yes, I do hold that position regarding cash settled futures and similar side-bets, regardless of who offers them. I would also argue that US government agrees

Yes, I do hold that position regarding cash settled futures and similar side-bets, regardless of who offers them. I would also argue that US government agrees with this characterization as evidenced by the restricted access of to these products (e.g. requiring traders to be ECPs and whatnot -- the qualifying criteria for which depends on the purpose of the trades being hedges or not). (Requirements for qualifying as an ECP: (1) Entities with $10 million in total assets; (2) Entities with a guarantor that is an entity which has $10 million in assets; (3) Entities with a net worth of at least $1 million and are using the swap to hedge a commercial risk; (4) Individuals with "amounts invested on a discretionary basis" that exceed $10 million, or $5 million if the individual is using the swap to hedge a commercial risk; (5) An entity who meets all of the following conditions: (i) all of its owners are ECPs; (ii) it and its owners have, in the aggregate, $1 million in net worth; (iii) it is entering into a "swap"; and (iv) it is using the swap to hedge a commercial risk. )