Tag: Kalshi prediction markets

  • CLARITY Act Prospects Remain Uncertain as Senate Showdown Nears

    CLARITY Act Prospects Remain Uncertain as Senate Showdown Nears

    Kalshi traders see a strong chance that the Senate will hold a vote on the CLARITY Act before Oct. 1, but prediction markets assign the legislation a much smaller chance of becoming law in 2026.

    As of Aug. 31, Kalshi traders priced the probability of a Senate vote before Oct. 1 at 91%. Polymarket, however, gave the CLARITY Act only a 13% implied chance of becoming law this year.

    Image source: Kalshi, Aug. 31, 2026.

    Sept. 15 Senate Vote Sets the CLARITY Act Timeline

    The Senate left Washington on Aug. 8 after Majority Leader John Thune filed a cloture motion, setting up a procedural vote for Sept. 15. Cloture generally requires 60 votes and would allow the Senate to move toward debating and potentially passing the legislation.

    Clearing that hurdle would solve only the first problem. According to reporting by American Banker, Capital Alpha Partners’ Ian Katz cut his estimate for enactment from about 40% to 25%, or potentially lower. He warned that overcoming cloture would not guarantee final passage.

    Galaxy Digital reduced its estimate even further, placing the probability at 10% in August as Congress used up more of the legislative calendar.

    Prediction Markets Expect a Vote but Doubt Final Passage

    Trading activity in prediction markets reflects the same divide. Kalshi’s Senate vote contract has generated more than $1.25 million in volume, while its broader crypto market structure enactment contract has attracted more than $6.8 million.

    Image source: Kalshi, Aug. 31, 2026.

    Polymarket’s market on whether H.R. 3633 will become law in 2026 has drawn roughly $11.5 million. Its implied probability stands at just 13%, down sharply from the 82% odds traders assigned in February.

    Image source: Polymarket, Aug. 31, 2026.

    Three Disputes Threaten the Crypto Market Structure Bill

    The CLARITY Act would establish a federal framework for crypto markets, give the Commodity Futures Trading Commission exclusive authority over spot digital commodity markets, and leave the Securities and Exchange Commission responsible for certain securities offerings and exchange activity.

    Three disputes are putting pressure on the coalition needed to secure 60 Senate votes: ethics restrictions involving government officials and crypto, stablecoin rewards that banks view as competition for deposits, and protections for decentralized finance (DeFi) projects and non-custodial software developers.

    Several Democrats who once appeared open to negotiations have criticized the latest version of the bill. Banking groups have also continued to oppose stablecoin yield provisions. Republicans including Sens. Cynthia Lummis, Tim Scott, John Boozman, John Thune, and Thom Tillis remain among the legislation’s strongest supporters.

    SEC and CFTC Move Ahead as Congress Runs Out of Time

    Federal regulators are not waiting for lawmakers to resolve the legislation. SEC crypto rulemaking and CFTC initiatives involving exchanges, leveraged trading, and decentralized finance could establish major parts of the regulatory framework without congressional action.

    However, future administrations can generally reverse agency rules more easily than federal statutes. That makes the Sept. 15 vote a critical pressure point for the CLARITY Act.

    Even if senators clear the 60-vote procedural threshold, Congress faces a crowded schedule that includes government funding, defense legislation, and the approaching midterm elections. Another failure could push the broader crypto market structure debate into a lame-duck session or into 2027.

    For crypto companies, banks, and investors, the key question is no longer whether Washington will continue discussing the CLARITY Act. It is whether senators can assemble enough votes on Sept. 15 to keep the bill moving.

  • Former White House Teleprompter Operator Fined for Prediction Market Insider Trading

    Former White House Teleprompter Operator Fined for Prediction Market Insider Trading

    A former White House teleprompter operator has agreed to pay $172,000 to settle allegations that he used advance knowledge of presidential speeches to trade prediction-market contracts linked to words President Donald Trump would say.

    The Commodity Futures Trading Commission said Gabriel Perez misappropriated confidential government information to trade “presidential mention market” contracts. These event contracts pay out based on whether a president uses specific words or phrases during a speech.

    Because his role gave him access to presidential speeches before they were delivered, Perez allegedly placed trades on outcomes he already knew, according to the CFTC. Between December 2025 and February 2026, he generated more than $107,500 in profits, the agency said.

    Under the settlement, Perez must disgorge $107,539.02 in gains, pay a $65,000 civil penalty, accept a three-year trading ban and cease further violations of the Commodity Exchange Act.

    The CFTC said the penalty was substantially reduced under a new cooperation policy because of what it described as Perez’s “exemplary assistance” with the investigation. The regulator also credited exchange operator Kalshi with helping advance the case.

    Prediction markets face growing insider-trading scrutiny

    The enforcement action is one of the clearest examples yet of the insider-trading risks facing prediction markets as they grow in popularity. These platforms allow users to wager real money on real-world outcomes, including elections, sports and increasingly specific details of political speeches.

    The risks are not hypothetical. Earlier this year, a U.S. soldier was charged over alleged Polymarket trading that produced more than $400,000 in illicit gains tied to the military operation that ousted Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro. Separately, a MrBeast video editor was fired in March amid a Kalshi insider-trading investigation.

    Kalshi has also been working through a backlog of suspicious-activity reviews and has introduced additional safeguards amid increasing scrutiny over whether insiders are manipulating its markets.

    The case comes as prediction markets move further into the mainstream, generating billions of dollars in trading volume and attracting greater regulatory attention. It also signals that the CFTC considers event contracts to fall squarely within its authority as swaps subject to insider-trading rules.

  • “This Seems Incorrect”: Ripple CTO Emeritus Slams Kalshi’s CFTC Argument

    “This Seems Incorrect”: Ripple CTO Emeritus Slams Kalshi’s CFTC Argument

    A new legal and regulatory debate is emerging over whether U.S. states or the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) should oversee the rapidly expanding prediction markets industry. The dispute follows a federal appeals court ruling that Kalshi cannot prevent Nevada gaming regulators from supervising its platform.

    Kalshi and the CFTC maintain that sports event contracts qualify as “swaps” under the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reforms, giving the agency authority to oversee them through its regulation of national swaps markets.

    David Schwartz, Ripple’s CTO emeritus, responded to an X post by sports betting and gaming attorney Daniel Wallach. Wallach argued that the CFTC’s rulemaking was effectively “dead on arrival” under the major-questions doctrine, which restricts federal agencies from asserting broad powers without clear authorization from Congress.

    Schwartz challenged that reasoning, saying the central issue is whether Congress delegated authority to regulate gambling conducted through exchange-traded contracts.

    “This seems to be incorrect to me. The question is only whether Congress delegated the power to regulate gambling through exchange-traded contracts. As Kalshi correctly points out, traditional sportsbook gambling is very different,” Schwartz wrote.

    This seems to be incorrect to me. The question is only whether Congress delegated the power to regulate gambling through exchange traded contracts. As Kalshi correctly points out, traditional sportsbook gambling is very different. https://t.co/EY6MKlq1Mx
    — David ‘JoelKatz’ Schwartz (@JoelKatz) August 28, 2026

    Elaborating on his position, Schwartz stated: “Of course Congress didn’t intend to replace state-regulated sportsbook gambling with exchange-traded products outside of state regulation. It meant to create a new, uniform federal framework for creating exchange-traded products outside of state regulation.”

    How the Kalshi prediction markets case began

    The legal battle started in March 2025, when the Nevada Gaming Control Board issued Kalshi a cease-and-desist letter. The regulator alleged that the company’s sports event contracts amounted to an unlicensed sports pool under Nevada gaming law.

    Kalshi countered that the CFTC’s authority over swaps preempted Nevada’s gambling regulations.

    On Friday, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco upheld Nevada’s authority to regulate Kalshi’s prediction market activities. Circuit Judge Ryan Nelson said the contracts bear the characteristics of sports betting, “a quintessential form of gambling” that falls outside the CFTC’s regulatory jurisdiction.

    “The CFTC is not a national gambling regulator,” Nelson said, adding that “it is difficult, then, to conclude that Congress intended to ​upend its decades of careful regulation ​of gambling based on broad definitions of the words used in a Wall Street Reform Bill.”