Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is John Dang, and I'm a business owner from Illinois. I'm writing in response to the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets, as published in 91 FR 12516. I actively trade on platforms like Kalshi, and I strongly support the proportionate regulation of prediction markets. I believe they provide real value to people like me, and I want to share why I think the CFTC should encourage their growth under a fair regulatory framework.
As a business owner, I face constant uncertainty, whether it's policy changes, economic shifts, or even weather events that could impact my operations. Prediction markets have become a vital tool for me to hedge some of those risks. For instance, I've used event contracts on Kalshi to offset potential losses tied to regulatory changes that could affect my supply chain costs. This isn't gambling; it's a practical way to protect my livelihood. These markets aren't just games. They serve a legitimate economic purpose, much like trading futures or options to manage risk. Classifying them as "gaming," as discussed in Questions 15-22, would ignore their real utility for businesses and individuals.
Beyond hedging, I value the information these markets provide. The prices often reflect a clearer picture of what's likely to happen than any poll or news report. That kind of insight helps me make better decisions, and I think it benefits the public too. On top of that, allowing everyday Americans like me to participate in these markets feels democratic. It's a chance to have a stake in understanding and responding to major events. If we ban or over-restrict these markets, as hinted at in some of the public interest questions like 7-14, we're not just cutting off access to useful tools. We're also pushing activity to unregulated offshore platforms where there's no consumer protection at all. I've seen what unregulated markets look like, and Id much rather trade on a CFTC-registered platform like Kalshi where there are rules and oversight.
I also believe the U.S. should be a leader in financial innovation. If we clamp down too hard, we risk ceding this space to other countries that are more open to new ideas. Sure, the government always wants its share, but that doesn't mean they need to dismantle a system that gives everyday Americans a fair shot. I'm not blind to concerns like manipulation or insider trading, mentioned in Questions 29-32. But those issues are already illegal, and the CFTC has the tools to enforce against bad actors. Punishing everyone by shutting down or over-regulating prediction markets isn't the answer.
I urge you to support proportionate regulation that addresses specific risks without stifling the benefits of prediction markets. Lets keep these markets safe, accessible, and innovative right here in the U.S. Thank you for considering my perspective.
Sincerely,
John Dang
