Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Zhenhuan Yang, and I'm a software engineer based in California. Im writing to express my strong support for the proportionate regulation of prediction markets as outlined in your Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets (91 FR 12516). As someone who actively trades on platforms like Kalshi, Ive seen firsthand how these markets provide unique value, both to me personally and to society at large, and I believe the CFTC has an opportunity to foster innovation while protecting consumers.
I rely on prediction markets to gain insights that I cant find anywhere else. Whether its an election outcome that might affect tech regulations or a Federal Reserve decision that could impact my financial planning, the aggregated forecasts on these platforms are often more accurate than polls or pundits. Ive noticed how the data transparency and real-time pricing help me make informed decisions, and I know Im not alone. These markets benefit the public by offering better information for decision-making, something I think aligns with your goals around price discovery as raised in Questions 7 and 8 of the ANPR.
As a tech professional, Im also deeply concerned about U.S. competitiveness in financial innovation. If we over-restrict or ban prediction markets, we risk pushing activity to unregulated offshore platforms, which are far less safe for consumers like me. Id much rather trade on a CFTC-regulated platform like Kalshi, where there are safeguards in place, than be forced into sketchy alternatives. This ties into your questions in the Public Interest section (Questions 7-14) about balancing innovation and protection. Regulation, not prohibition, is the answer.
I also want to address a misconception Ive seen floating around. Event contracts are not gambling. They serve real economic purposes, like hedging against uncertainty or contributing to price discovery. When I trade, Im using research and judgment, just as I would in any other investment. Classifying these as "gaming" under Questions 15-22 feels like a misstep to me. And on the topic of manipulation or insider trading, raised in Questions 29-32, I believe the CFTC already has robust tools to tackle bad actors. Informed trading actually improves price discovery, benefiting everyone, not just traders. Lets not punish the majority for the actions of a few.
The U.S. should be a leader in this space, not cede ground to other countries. I urge you to craft rules that allow everyday people like me to participate in legal, regulated markets while addressing specific risks with targeted measures. Please dont let over-restriction push innovation and activity offshore.
Thank you for considering my input.
Sincerely,
Zhenhuan Yang
