Proposed regulations for prediction markets by the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), initiated during the Trump administration, are facing strong public pushback. Lawmakers, Native American tribes, and consumer advocates have voiced opposition to the rule, according to public comments reviewed on Monday, July 27, 2026.
What Happened
The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) introduced a proposal last month to set regulatory boundaries for prediction markets, which enable users to place wagers on various outcomes (Reuters). This proposed rule, originating from the Trump administration, has since elicited widespread opposition from diverse groups, including lawmakers, Native American tribes, and consumer advocacy organizations (Reuters, Europesays).
Public comments reviewed on Monday, July 27, 2026, indicate significant pushback against the proposed framework (Reuters). These comments represent a range of perspectives regarding the regulation of the burgeoning prediction market industry, which facilitates wagering on events such as sports outcomes (Reuters).
Key Details
- The proposed rule was put forth by the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) (Reuters).
- The proposal originated during the Trump administration (Reuters, Europesays).
- Opposition has come from lawmakers, Native American tribes, and consumer advocates (Reuters, Europesays).
- The comments were made in response to the CFTC’s proposal concerning prediction markets (Reuters).
- Prediction markets allow users to place yes/no wagers on various outcomes (Reuters).
- Senators Lisa Murkowski and Brian Schatz have urged the CFTC to consult with tribes and extend the comment period for the rule, according to Native News Online.
- Organizations like Demand Progress oppose the proposal “in its entirety,” stating it fails “as a matter of law, as a matter of policy, and as a matter of institutional competence,” as detailed in their July 24, 2026, letter to Chairman Michael S. Selig.
- Demand Progress’s letter alleges that the proposal functions as a “green light” for largely unregulated financial speculation platforms to offer nationwide sports betting, bypassing existing state and tribal protections.
- The Demand Progress letter cites Kalshi, valued at $22 billion with an annualized volume of $178 billion in trades monthly, as an example. It claims sports-related contracts account for 89 percent of Kalshi’s total fee revenue, suggesting these companies operate more like sportsbooks than derivative exchanges.
Why It Matters
The extensive opposition to the Trump administration’s proposed prediction market rule highlights ongoing concerns regarding the regulation of the rapidly expanding prediction market industry (Reuters, Europesays). The debate underscores the challenges in classifying and overseeing platforms that facilitate wagers on various outcomes, particularly given the involvement of diverse stakeholders ranging from lawmakers to tribal authorities and consumer protection groups (Reuters, Native News Online, Demand Progress). The claim by Demand Progress that the rule could enable widespread sports betting, bypassing established community and mental health protections, signals a significant policy conflict within regulated markets.
What’s Next
Senators Lisa Murkowski and Brian Schatz have urged the CFTC to consult with tribes and extend the comment period for the proposed rule (Native News Online). The agency will likely continue to review public comments as it considers the future of the prediction market regulatory framework.
Originally reported by ReutersPublished
Sources & References
Primary source
- Reutersreuters.com
Additional references
- Trump admin’s proposed prediction market rule faces …tradingview.com
- Trump administration’s proposed prediction market rule faces public pushback – Japaneuropesays.com
- Murkowski, Schatz Urge CFTC to Consult Tribes and Extend Comment Period on Prediction Markets Rule – Native News Onlinenativenewsonline.net
- July 24, 2026 Chairman Michael S. Selig Commodity Futures Trading Commission Three Lafayette Centre 1155 21st Street NW Washington, DC 20581 RE: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets, 91 Fed. Reg. 12516, RIN 3038-AF65 Dear Chairman Selig: On behalf of millions of Americans who depend on strong consumer protections, well-regulated financial markets, and the respect for Congressional intent, we submit this comment letter in response to the Commission’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets. We oppose the proposal in its entirety. It fails as a matter of law, as a matter of policy, and as a matter of institutional competence, and we emphatically urge the Commission to withdraw it. When Kalshi and Polymarket launched just five years ago, they were curiosities; today Kalshi alone is valued at $22 billion and processes an annualized volume of $178 billion in trades every month. This proposal should be understood for what it is: a green light for these immense and largely unregulated financial speculation platforms to offer sports betting nationwide and aggressively market it to the public, bypassing the community and mental health protections that states and tribal authorities have spent generations building to address the risks present in this type of speculative activity. Sports-related contracts now account for 89 percent of Kalshi’s total fee revenue. That single fact should settle the question of whether these companies are derivatives exchanges or sportsbooks, but if we need more evidence, we can begin with the rulemaking proposal’s treatment of “gaming.” The NPRM says it will block contracts that bet on the outcome of speci fic plays or moments — but it permits contracts that settle on of ficial, league-veri fied statistics like scores and player performance numbers, on the theory that those are just measuring objective facts. By that logic, a bet on how many touchdowns a quarterback throws on Sunday is not a sports bet, because you can look it up after the game ends.demandprogress.org