Comment Text:
Dear Chairman and Commissioners,
My name is Amardeep Singh, and I'm a trader and investor based in Minnesota. I'm writing to share my thoughts on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Prediction Markets, as published in 91 FR 12516. I actively trade on platforms like Kalshi, and I strongly support the idea of well-regulated prediction markets. They've become a valuable tool for me, and I believe they offer unique benefits to society as a whole.
What draws me to prediction markets is how accurate they are compared to polls or pundits. I've seen this firsthand while trading on election outcomes and other public events. The prices on these markets often cut through the noise of opinion pieces or biased surveys, giving a clearer picture of what might actually happen. For me, this isn't just about making a profit, though that's a nice bonus. It's about having access to information that feels more grounded in reality. I think this accuracy benefits everyone, not just traders like me. When regular people can see reliable forecasts, it helps us make better decisions, whether it's planning for policy changes or just understanding the world.
I also appreciate how easy and engaging these platforms are to use. The straightforward design makes trading on events enjoyable, and that accessibility encourages more people to participate. When more folks get involved, the market's predictions get even sharper because you're pooling insights from a wider crowd. I don't see this as gambling at all. It takes research and judgment, much like trading stocks or commodities. Calling it "gaming" feels like a misstep to me.
I know there are concerns about things like insider trading or market manipulation, and I get why those are issues to watch. But those are already illegal under existing laws, right? The CFTC has the power to go after bad actors without shutting down entire markets. Banning or over-restricting prediction markets to stop a few cheaters feels like punishing the rest of us who use them responsibly. Id rather see targeted rules that address specific risks while keeping these platforms open.
Looking at some of the questions in the ANPR, I want to touch on Question 7 under Public Interest. I believe prediction markets serve the public good by offering better forecasting than traditional methods. They democratize access to information, and thats worth protecting. Also, on Question 15 about defining "gaming," Id argue these markets arent games of chance. Theyre based on real-world analysis, and thats a key distinction.
I urge you to support proportionate regulation of prediction markets. Don't ban or overly restrict them. They provide unique value through accurate forecasting and broad participation, and with the right oversight, they can thrive safely. Thank you for considering my perspective.
Sincerely,
Amardeep Singh
