Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Prediction Markets Are Gambling, Despite What They Tell The Government

Opinion

Prediction Markets Are Gambling, Despite What They Tell The Government
person using smartphone

“Kalshi Offers $1 Billion for a Perfect March Madness Bracket.” The company’s recent website headline is exactly what you would see on a sportsbook ad to lure in zealous gamblers and soon-to-be gamblers. But despite the marketing blitz aimed at the public, in legal circles and before government regulators, Kalshi and competitor Polymarket claim to be financial exchange platforms. For everyday Americans, the pitfalls are troubling.

Prediction market companies like Kalshi are selling their services as investment tools, prodding Americans to use their knowledge of world events, political dynamics, sports, and other topics to pad their pockets.


There was a fair amount of attention to these markets when reports came out showing how a small handful of users made large sums of cash, $2.4 million in one case, wagering on operational details of President Trump’s military actions against Iran.

For Americans with much less insider knowledge, the rapid rise of these platforms represents a new and unsettling “get-rich-quick” scheme that is separating families from their hard-earned money at a time when they can least afford it.

The prediction platforms allow users to place wagers on the outcomes of various sporting contests and events within games. Users can wager on point spreads, “over/unders”, and player proposition bets (“props”).

At the same time, the platforms present sports betting as “investing,” lowering users’ guard and masking the risks. The unassuming user would have no idea that they are using a platform that isn’t held to the same regulatory standards as legal sportsbooks. Even the user interface mirrors a sportsbook.

The sheer volume of this unregulated activity is enormous. During this year’s opening round of the Men’s and Women’s March Madness college basketball tournaments, Kalshi alone saw more than $800 million wagered on its "contracts."

Indeed, the overwhelming majority of activity on U.S. prediction markets is just plain old sports gambling.

Meanwhile, the platforms are wrapping themselves in financial terminology before regulators to claim their products are akin to financial derivatives tied to commodities like wheat and copper futures. Regulators at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) have lent their credibility to this view.

In addition to the platforms' faulty substantive claims, the CFTC lacks the commensurate resources to govern the rapidly evolving prediction market space. For example, the Chicago enforcement division of the CFTC recently went from 20 trial attorneys to zero—not an especially encouraging sign for the agency.

The CFTC decision suddenly made prediction markets available to anyone 18 or older anywhere in the country—even in states that have not legalized sports betting.

In states that have legalized sports betting, prediction market platforms can now avoid age restrictions, gambling taxes, requirements for responsible gaming resources, and other regulations that lawmakers and voters established as part of decisions to greenlight sports betting in their jurisdictions. Prediction markets completely lack the consumer safeguards that apply to legal sportsbooks.

By magnifying the problem for users, this regulatory backdoor is paving the way for an alarming lack of transparency, allowing prediction market platforms to mislead people into believing they are making financial investments while providing a wild-west of gambling options.

Of course, prediction market platforms say they are providing an innovative service and increasing access to financial opportunities for normal people. That would be nice, except for the discrepancies between what they say to policymakers and how they present themselves to consumers, which show otherwise.

Wrapping gambling activity in investment terminology serves only to mislead Americans. Muddying the distinctions between these two activities allows platforms to prey on Americans with lower levels of financial literacy and lower incomes—populations where even relatively small financial losses can have significant long-term consequences.

True innovation in the financial services industry should be about expanding pathways for wealth creation and opportunity.

With the economic effects of tariffs, war, and inflation, families across the country are increasingly facing substantial headwinds as they struggle to pursue the American dream.

Without meaningful regulatory change, users will continue to be too easily lured into repeatedly funneling more money into their accounts, diverting funds from real investments, such as savings, education, or other long-term financial goals.

Policymakers need to close the regulatory gap between how prediction markets actually function and how they are marketed once and for all, starting with putting the brakes on so-called “sports event contracts,” sports betting by another name.

The lines between gambling and investing are being blurred to an indistinguishable degree, leaving everyday Americans, especially those who are financially vulnerable, at risk.

Mario H. Lopez is the president of the Hispanic Leadership Fund, a public policy advocacy organization that promotes liberty, opportunity, and prosperity for all.


Read More

 Medical Vial Vaccine on Shelf Table

Peptides like BPC-157, MOTS-c and Semax are surging in popularity despite limited human evidence. Here’s why FDA regulation, research and safety matter.

skaman306/Getty Images

Millions Using Unapproved Peptides as FDA Debates Regulation

Peptides, the short chains of amino acids that help regulate biological functions, have become the latest obsession in health, fitness, and longevity.

Online clinics and wellness influencers promote them as ways to heal injuries, reduce inflammation, improve metabolism, sharpen thinking, and slow aging.

Keep ReadingShow less
An illustration of the U.S. flag on the shape of the U.S. with blue and red figures of people across it.

Every state has its own constitution.

How State Constitutions Became the Battleground for American Rights and Liberties – on Both the Left and Right

Beyond picking governors, state legislators, local officials and representatives to serve in Congress, voters in almost every state this year will have the opportunity to amend the language of their state constitution. In one state, they could potentially rewrite the constitution altogether.

Though the U.S. Constitution is rarely amended, voters frequently amend their state constitutions. In every election cycle, voters are asked to ratify constitutional amendments.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Unscrupulousness of AIPAC

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses the American Israel Public Affairs Committee's annual policy conference at the Washington Convention Center March 6, 2018 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

The Unscrupulousness of AIPAC

After AIPAC failed to defeat El-Sayed in the Michigan Democratic Senate primary—after spending $32 million—it said that it remains committed to defeating El-Sayed and his "radical, anti-Israel" agenda in the general election. Which means it is poised to sink tens of millions of dollars in supporting Republican Mike Rogers. It also said that Haley Stevens, his opponent, had presented "an authentic Democratic agenda." Meaning that El-Sayed did not? And they think that Mike Rogers, a MAGA Trump supporter, does compared with El-Sayed?

How can AIPAC say that El-Sayed does not present an authentic Democratic agenda when his socialist stance is much more in line with the principles stated in the Declaration of Independence than most centrist Democrats'? And making it sound like AIPAC cares about an authentic Democratic agenda is deceitful, when in the same breath they make clear that they will support Mike Rogers, a Trump lackey, in the general election.

Keep ReadingShow less
Scientists Warn of Deepening Federal Attacks on Research
silhouette of person using microscope

Scientists Warn of Deepening Federal Attacks on Research

Scientists and the federal government have been close partners since World War II. A landmark report by President Truman’s chief science advisor laid out a vision for government research that shaped eight decades of federally funded science. That vision is now at risk. In principle, the Trump administration has supported scientific research with its own vision for a new “golden age of science.” But in practice, the administration has upended the relationship between the government, researchers, and their institutions. The changes have alarmed working scientists and their allies, who have protested in record numbers.

In July, I moderated a webinar on “Rewriting the Rules: What’s happening to public science?” (read the transcript here). The webinar was co-sponsored by NAPA, CODE, and the Bridge Alliance, with Dr. Aaron Carroll of AcademyHealth, Dr. Chris Marcum of the Federation of American Scientists, Dr. Gretchen Goldman of the Union of Concerned Scientists, and Dr. Maryam Zaringhalam of the Center for Open Science. I also interviewed Cole Donovan of the Stand Up for Science Foundation by email.

Keep ReadingShow less