On Wednesday, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) published a formal Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to amend US Code § 40.11. The proposed amendments would clarify some of the regulatory questions surrounding prediction market event contracts, including those that involve sports contests.
The new rules proposal is subject to a 90-day review that includes an allowance for public comment. While the 267-page document isn’t viewable through a traditional URL, it can be downloaded directly from the CFTC website.
DOWNLOAD: Prediction Markets; Public Interest Determinations (published June 10, 2026)
In an official press release posted Wednesday, CFTC chairman Mike Selig said that “the CFTC will protect the integrity of our regulated markets without standing in the way of responsible innovation. This proposal gives the Commission a durable, transparent framework to identify the contracts Congress directed us to scrutinize while letting legitimate markets move forward.”
Selig is referring to the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010, which provided the CFTC with broad regulatory powers over derivative exchanges that are within the agency’s purview. However, current chairman Selig and former CFTC chairman Gary Gensler disagree on the exact interpretation of the 2010 law.
For those who are uninterested in binge-reading 267 pages of one, single federal rules proposal involving prediction markets, the most relevant parts of the document are provided below.
This is perceived to be the least controversial section of the proposed rules that were published Wednesday. The CFTC is aiming to amend Part 40 of US Code § 40.11 in a way that would allow the agency to restrict certain trades related to “terrorism, assassination, or war,” (Page 212). While the proposal doesn’t call for an outright ban of these controversial markets, it does allow the CFTC to act if it determines that markets are “contrary to the public interest.”
If the rules are enacted as written, the CFTC would have broad regulatory authority over determining when “event contracts involving sports activities are not contrary to the public interest,” (Page 113). There is a specific consideration for many types of sports predictions that the CFTC lists – which the agency, again, argues are “not contrary to the public interest.”
These include “the extent to which event contracts settle based on the overall outcome of a sporting event – including final scores, point differentials, win-loss results, tournament advancement, individual or team statistical performance or season long performance metrics.” For our readers who are familiar with industry jargon, the above language can be construed to mean moneylines, point spreads, winner results, qualifier advancement, individual or team props, and futures.
Although much of the news coverage surrounding public comments to the CFTC’s latest rules proposal will focus on submissions by lobbyists, activist groups, and politicians, any individual can provide feedback via the official mechanisms provided by the CFTC.
As it stands, state and tribal gaming authorities are likely to be positioned against any CFTC regulation over sports-related prediction markets, while those who are in favor of federally regulated event contracts (even those involving sports contests) are expected to agree with the overall proposed framework published Wednesday.
Loading …
