Kalshi and Polymarket rush to ban insider trading

[The Buzz]

Kalshi and Polymarket, the two leading prediction market platforms, moved quickly Monday to roll out new industry guardrails after two U.S. senators introduced legislation that could significantly limit the sector’s future.

Kalshi said it will prohibit political candidates from trading on their own races and will also bar athletes, coaches, and team personnel from trading contracts tied to the sports they participate in or work within.

From the AP:

Polymarket instituted a broader ban than Kalshi. Its rules now say clearly that users cannot trade on contracts where they might possess confidential information or could influence the outcome of an event. This would include athletes but could also include company officials, policymakers or anyone who would have enough influence to affect the outcome of an event or know the information in advance.

Polymarket, in particular, has faced intense criticism after some of its users made substantial bets ahead of the war in Iran and the military action in Venezuela, earlier this year. Those users appeared to have profited handsomely from knowing in advance that President Donald Trump was going to take military action in those regions.

Sen. Adam Schiff, D-California, and Sen. John Curtis, R-Utah, introduced broad legislation on Monday that would ban prediction markets from creating contracts related to sports. If enacted, the ban would wipe out much of Kalshi’s business model and substantially impact Polymarket’s business as well. While prediction markets allow users to bet on everything from the weather to political events, much of their recent growth has been in sporting events.

Read more here: https://apnews.com/article/kalshi-po...a2edb9a0e80a05

[All In Affiliates]

It's absurd that those policies weren't already in place. smh.

[NoDepositCasinos]

It's absurd that those policies weren't already in place. smh.

Some of them, yes. And while I agree that insider trading is unfair, and that certain areas (especially politics, in my opinion) are more sensitive and could require stricter scrutiny, I think a broad ban is misguided. It would also be challenging to enforce, given the president’s family's involvement.

[Pokerface]

Agree, these should have be in place a long time ago. Crazy they were not.