Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Francis Ynoa, and I'm a trader and investor based in North Carolina. I've been actively trading on prediction markets like Kalshi and Polymarket for a while now, and I'm writing in response to the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets (91 FR 12516). I strongly support the idea of well-regulated prediction markets, and I hope my perspective as an active participant can help inform your approach.
I got into prediction markets because they offer something you can't find anywhere else: real-time, crowd-sourced forecasts on elections, economic data, and other public events that often beat polls and pundits. I've seen firsthand how these platforms cut through the noise and give a clearer picture of what's likely to happen. That kind of information isn't just useful for traders like me; it's valuable for anyone trying to make sense of the world, from small business owners to regular folks planning their finances. Beyond that, these markets let me hedge real risks. For example, I've used them to offset uncertainties around election outcomes that could impact my investments or tax planning. This isn't gambling. It takes research and judgment, just like trading stocks or futures.
I'm all for regulation, but it needs to be proportionate. Platforms like Kalshi, which operate under CFTC oversight, are far safer than unregulated offshore sites like Polymarket. If you ban or over-restrict these markets, you're just pushing people like me to less safe venues where there's no accountability. The U.S. should be leading the way on financial innovation, not handing that advantage to other countries. And honestly, the CFTC already has solid tools to handle issues like manipulation and insider trading in other derivatives markets. Use those same tools here instead of broad bans that punish everyone for the actions of a few bad actors.
On some of the specific questions in the ANPR, I want to weigh in on a couple. Regarding Question 7 under Public Interest, I believe prediction markets serve the public good by improving price discovery and giving better data for decision-making. As for Question 15 under Listed Activities, event contracts shouldn't be classified as gaming. They have legitimate economic purposes like hedging and forecasting, not just entertainment. And on Question 29 about inside information, I think informed trading actually helps make prices more accurate, which benefits all participants, as long as existing laws against insider trading are enforced.
I urge you to support prediction markets with targeted, reasonable rules. Don't shut them down or box them in with overly harsh restrictions. Keep the focus on fostering innovation while addressing specific risks. Thanks for considering my input.
Sincerely,
Francis Ynoa
