Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Quyen Tran, and I'm a trader and investor from Pennsylvania. I work in contracting and real estate, and I've been actively trading on prediction markets like Kalshi for a while now. I'm writing to express my strong support for well-regulated prediction markets in response to your Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets (91 FR 12516). I believe these markets are valuable tools for people like me, and I urge you to craft rules that allow participation while addressing risks sensibly.
As someone who deals with real estate and contracting, I often face uncertainties tied to economic policies, interest rates, and even local regulations. Trading on prediction markets lets me hedge some of that risk. For example, I've used Kalshi to take positions on Federal Reserve decisions that could impact my financing costs for projects. This isn't gambling; it's a practical way to manage real-world exposure. I put in time to research and analyze before making trades, just like I do with traditional investments. Labeling event contracts as "gaming" feels off to me, since they serve genuine economic purposes like price discovery and risk management.
I also value the freedom to participate in legal, regulated markets. Prediction markets give regular folks like me access to information and opportunities that would otherwise be locked up with big institutions. But I get that there are concerns about manipulation or insider trading. My take is simple: the CFTC already has solid tools to tackle those issues. You've got authority to go after bad actors in any derivatives market, and that should apply here too. Banning or over-restricting prediction markets doesn't solve the problem; it just pushes activity to unregulated offshore platforms where there's no oversight at all. I'd much rather see the CFTC focus on keeping markets like Kalshi safe and transparent for users like me.
On a broader level, I think the US should be a leader in financial innovation. If we clamp down too hard, other countries will step in and take the lead, and we'll lose out on the economic benefits. Im particularly drawn to your questions 7 and 8 in the ANPR about balancing innovation with consumer protection. My view is that regulation should protect participants without stifling new ideas. Keep markets onshore, under your watch, where you can enforce rules and ensure fairness.
I'm asking you to support proportionate regulation that lets prediction markets thrive while addressing specific risks with targeted solutions. Don't let overly broad restrictions or bans limit access for everyday traders like me. Thank you for considering my perspective, and I hope you'll craft rules that keep the US competitive and protect consumers through smart oversight.
Sincerely,
Quyen Tran
