Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Deek Harinath, and Im a trader and investor based in Pennsylvania. Im writing to comment on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets, as published in 91 FR 12516. I strongly support the development of well-regulated prediction markets in the United States, and I want to share why I believe the CFTC should move forward with proportionate regulations rather than restrictive bans or overly broad rules.
Ive been actively trading on platforms like Kalshi, and I can tell you firsthand that these markets provide unique value. The U.S. got to where it is today because of liquidity and free markets, and I believe we need to keep pushing in that direction together. Prediction markets offer information you cant find anywhere else. Their forecasts consistently beat polls and pundits, giving me, and the public, better data to make decisions. Whether its an election outcome or an economic indicator, the prices reflect real insights. Thats not gambling, its price discovery, and its a legitimate economic tool. I use these markets to understand risks that affect my investments, and I know others do too, whether theyre hedging business decisions or just trying to make sense of the world.
Im also worried about U.S. competitiveness. If we over-restrict or ban these markets, were just pushing activity to unregulated offshore platforms where theres no oversight. Kalshi is proof that regulated markets work; the demand and volume it commands show this isnt going away. We should be leading in financial innovation, not handing that edge to other countries. Regulated markets like Kalshi are far safer than the alternatives, and the CFTC already has strong tools to tackle manipulation and insider trading. Use those tools, dont shut down the whole space.
Addressing some of your specific questions, like those in Topic B on public interest (Questions 7-14), I believe prediction markets serve the public by improving information and price discovery. Informed trading isnt a problem, its a benefit; it makes prices more accurate for everyone. On Topic C (Questions 15-22), event contracts shouldnt be labeled as gaming. They have real economic purposes, like hedging or understanding risk, just like any other derivative. And on Topic A (Questions 1-6), I trust the CFTC can handle manipulation concerns with existing powers, without resorting to categorical bans.
I get that there are risks, like potential insider trading or market abuse. But banning entire categories of contracts punishes honest participants like me. Targeted, proportionate rules can address specific issues without throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Please support the growth of regulated prediction markets in the U.S. Lets keep innovation here, keep markets safe, and keep valuable information accessible to all of us.
Thank you for considering my input.
Sincerely,
Deek Harinath
