TLDR The CFTC received over 1,330 public comments on prediction market regulation, with a last-day surge of filings before the April 30 deadline Tribal governments and casino groups argue prediction markets are gambling and should fall under gaming law, not derivatives regulation Academics are split — some praise prediction markets for price discovery, while others flag $143 million in suspicious trading profits Senator Catherine Cortez Masto called prediction markets “nothing more than gambling” and cited national security risks Kalshi created an AI tool to generate supportive comments, but only about 15 of the last 120 filings came from it
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission closed its public comment period on prediction market regulation on April 30. The deadline triggered a wave of last-minute filings that revealed just how divided stakeholders are on the issue.
By midday on the final day, more than 60 new comments had been submitted. The day before saw over 80 filings. In total, the CFTC received around 1,330 comments.
The comments were part of the agency’s Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, which asked for public input on how event contracts should be regulated under the Commodity Exchange Act.
Most of the submissions raised concerns about the risks of prediction markets. But a steady stream of support came from academics, researchers, and individual users who see value in the products.
Gambling or Financial Tool? The Core Dispute
The sharpest criticism came from tribal governments and casino industry groups. They argued that prediction markets are functionally the same as gambling and should not be regulated as financial derivatives.
The Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation said event contracts amount to interstate wagers. The Prairie Band Potawatomi Tribal Gaming Commission asked the CFTC to delay its rulemaking and consult with tribal regulators first.
The Casino Association of New