Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Daniel Balint, and I'm a trader and investor based in Florida. I've been actively trading on prediction markets like Kalshi and Polymarket for a while now, and Im writing to share my thoughts on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets (91 FR 12516). I strongly support the development of well-regulated prediction markets in the United States, and I hope my perspective as an active participant can help shape your approach.
I rely on prediction markets not just as a way to invest, but as a source of unique information. The prices often tell me things I can't find in news articles or polls, whether it's about an election outcome or an economic indicator. This isn't gambling to me. Trading on these platforms requires research, analysis, and real-world judgment, much like trading stocks or commodities. Classifying event contracts as "gaming" (as raised in Questions 15-22) ignores their legitimate economic purpose, like price discovery and hedging. Ive used these markets to hedge personal financial risks, such as election outcomes that could impact my taxes or business environment. This is a real tool, not a game.
I also believe regulated markets are the way to go. Platforms like Kalshi, operating under CFTC oversight, provide transparency and safety that unregulated offshore platforms simply dont. If the CFTC over-restricts or bans these markets, people like me will be pushed to less secure, offshore venues. Thats a worse outcome for everyone. On this point, Id urge you to consider Question 7 about balancing innovation and consumer protection. The US has a chance to lead in financial innovation, not cede ground to other countries. Lets keep this activity here, under proper oversight.
Im aware of concerns like manipulation or insider trading, often mentioned in Questions 29-32. But the CFTC already has strong tools to address these issues in other derivatives markets. Those same tools can work here. Banning or over-restricting prediction markets to stop a few bad actors feels like punishing the majority for the sins of a few. Id rather see proportionate, targeted rules that tackle specific risks without shutting down the whole industry. Broad categorical bans, as discussed in Questions 23-28, arent the answer.
As someone who values the freedom to participate in legal, regulated markets, Im asking you to support prediction markets with fair and balanced regulation. Keep them accessible to everyday traders like me, and ensure the US remains a leader in this space. Dont let overly restrictive rules push this innovation offshore.
Thank you for considering my input.
Sincerely,
Daniel Balint
