Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Antti Turunen, and I'm a trader and investor based in California. I'm writing to express my strong support for the proportionate regulation of prediction markets as outlined in the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets (91 FR 12516). I've been actively trading on platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket for a while now, and I believe these markets provide real value to people like me, as well as to society at large.
As a trader, I rely on prediction markets for insights that I can't get from polls or pundits. Time and again, these markets have proven to be more accurate in forecasting election outcomes and other public events. I remember last year, tracking the odds on a major election, and the market prices were spot-on while the talking heads on TV were all over the place. That kind of information isn't just useful for traders; it's valuable for anyone trying to understand what's really happening. Beyond forecasting, these markets let me hedge personal financial risks tied to political or economic events. For instance, I've used event contracts to offset potential impacts of policy changes on my investments. This isn't gambling. It takes research and judgment, just like trading stocks or commodities.
I also worry that banning or over-restricting these markets would push activity to unregulated offshore platforms. I've seen what happens when people can't access legal, safe venues. They don't stop trading; they just go to sketchier places with no oversight. Keeping prediction markets under CFTC regulation, like Kalshi, ensures transparency and protects participants. Plus, informed trading isn't a problem; it actually improves price discovery. When knowledgeable people trade, the prices get sharper, and that benefits everyone, not just the traders.
Addressing some of your specific questions, like those in Topic Area C (Questions 15-22), I strongly believe event contracts shouldn't be classified as gaming. They serve legitimate economic purposes, like hedging and information aggregation, which are far from gambling. And on Topic Area B (Questions 7-14), I think the public interest is best served by balancing innovation with consumer protection, not by shutting down access. I'm all for rules to prevent manipulation or insider trading, but the CFTC already has tools to handle those issues. Let's not punish everyone for the actions of a few bad actors.
I urge you to support well-regulated prediction markets with clear, fair guidelines. Don't ban or overly restrict them. These markets give people like me a way to participate in legal, transparent systems that provide real economic value and better information for everyone.
Thank you for considering my input.
Sincerely,
Antti Turunen
