Congress Is Holding a Hearing on Whether Prediction Markets Are Sports Bets — With No Prediction Market Companies in the Room
The House Agriculture Committee will hold a hearing on Tuesday July 22 on the status of sports event contracts, featuring the American Gaming Association, tribal gaming interests, and former CFTC attorneys — but no representatives from Kalshi, Polymarket, or any other prediction market platform. The AGA will argue that sports event contracts are sports bets. Former CFTC counsel will defend the agency's authority. The hearing comes as the World Cup winner market on Kalshi hit a record $1.9 billion in total volume — more than double this year's Super Bowl.
The House Agriculture Committee will hold a hearing on Tuesday July 22 examining whether sports event contracts on prediction markets should be regulated as sports bets — or whether the CFTC's authority over them as federally-designated financial instruments should stand. The witness list is notable for who is there and who is not. Testifying are Chris Cylke of the American Gaming Association, David Bean of the Indian Gaming Association, Solidus Labs CEO Asaf Meir, and two former CFTC attorneys in private practice. Kalshi, Polymarket, or any representative of the prediction market industry will not be in the room.
Cylke's written testimony, seen by Barron's ahead of the hearing, argues that sports event contracts are sports bets and should be regulated as such. The AGA made the same argument at a Senate hearing in May, pointing to two compounding concerns: prediction markets are not required to offer responsible gambling tools — including self-exclusion for customers who want to cut themselves off — that licensed sportsbooks must provide; and they do not generate state tax revenue. David Bean of the Indian Gaming Association will raise a third line of objection: that federally-supervised prediction market contracts may intrude on tribal sovereignty in states where Native American groups have been awarded exclusive sports-betting rights, as in Florida.
Solidus Labs CEO Asaf Meir pushed back on the integrity-monitoring argument in an interview with Barron's ahead of his testimony. Solidus provides surveillance systems to prediction market platforms, including Kalshi. Meir said that in the second quarter of 2026 alone, Solidus surfaced 120,000 alerts to one of its clients, of which 400 became active investigations and two dozen were referred to the CFTC for enforcement. He argued the monitoring infrastructure on prediction markets is 'superior' to what sportsbooks operate, because it combines otherwise siloed data feeds across exchange activity in ways that traditional sportsbook surveillance cannot. Two former CFTC attorneys — former general counsel Robert Schwartz and Carl Kennedy, who was special counsel during the drafting of the 2010 Dodd-Frank swaps provisions — will defend both the agency's legal authority over event contracts and its operational capacity to regulate them.
The hearing arrives at an odd moment for the industry. Kalshi's World Cup winner market generated $1.9 billion in total trading volume by the tournament's conclusion — a record for any single prediction market contract on a US exchange, and more than double the volume of this year's Super Bowl. Kalshi added three million new users over the course of the month. Those numbers make the AGA's framing harder to dismiss as a narrow regulatory argument: what is now a $1.9 billion single-contract market, conducted on a federally licensed exchange under CFTC supervision, sits in direct competition with the sportsbooks the AGA represents. The legal question — are sports event contracts swaps or sports bets — is slowly working through courts toward the Supreme Court. The congressional question running in parallel is simpler: who has the political standing to define what these products are, and who profits from the answer.
Operators mentioned in this article
Recent updates
Kalshi's Parlays Drive Back-to-Back $5B Days — and Hand Critics Their Strongest Argument
Kalshi traded a record $5.33 billion on November 7 and $5.36 billion on November 8, with multi-leg parlay-style 'combos' making up roughly 75% of both days' volume. Its 30-day volume topped $100 billion. But the parlay dominance cuts against the platform's legal defense: parlays are a quintessential sportsbook product, and the American Gaming Association has told the Second Circuit that parlays make up about two-thirds of Kalshi's volume and should be treated as sports bets. The implied house edge on 10-plus-leg combos is around 25%, undercutting the argument that these are neutral financial instruments rather than gambling.
Cruz Bill Would Require State or Tribal Approval for Sports Contracts — a Bipartisan Legislative Threat Emerges
Senator Ted Cruz, who chairs the Senate Commerce Committee, is preparing a bill that would bar federally regulated prediction markets from offering gambling-tied event contracts, including sports, unless a state or tribal government authorizes them. It would not ban the contracts nationwide but would require platforms to obtain approval jurisdiction by jurisdiction, resembling state-by-state sportsbook regulation. The proposal arrives as Democrats take control of both chambers after the midterms, creating a potential bipartisan reckoning: a Republican committee chair and a newly skeptical Democratic majority both eyeing restrictions on a sector that had relied on federal protection.
CFTC Tells Platforms to Stop Geofencing States — Directly Colliding With State Court Orders
The CFTC issued an interpretation on November 5 of its 'impartial access' core principle, telling regulated exchanges including Kalshi and Polymarket to drop state-by-state geographic blocks within 30 days or explain why they cannot. The demand collides head-on with existing state court orders that require the platforms to geofence: Washington ordered Kalshi to geofence in August, and Michigan ordered it to use licensed geolocation to block the state in September, with a $500,000 daily fine for violations. Chairman Michael Selig framed the interpretation as a uniformity requirement. The platforms are now caught between a federal demand to unblock states and state court orders to block them.