Americans Say Prediction Markets Should Be Regulated, AGA Research Finds
Summary
The American Gaming Association (AGA) commissioned a YouGov survey (1–8 August; n=2,025 registered voters; ±2 percentage points margin of error) that reveals strong public support for regulating sports event contracts sold via prediction markets in the same way as state-regulated online sports betting.
Key findings: 85% of respondents say sports event contracts resemble gambling rather than financial instruments; 80% believe these contracts should be regulated like other online sports bets; 65% prefer state and tribal gaming regulators, not the federal CFTC, to oversee them. The survey also found broad support for making such contracts available only through state-licensed sportsbooks and for letting states decide whether to allow them.
Content summary
The AGA argues platforms such as Kalshi and Polymarket are using regulatory gaps to offer products that look and function like sports wagers without following the same consumer-protection rules as sportsbooks. AGA CEO Bill Miller says the public recognises sports bets when they see them and expects consistent protections. The AGA is calling on the CFTC to enforce its prohibitions on gaming contracts and for Congress to use oversight to close perceived loopholes.
Key Points
- YouGov survey (n=2,025) finds 85% view sports event contracts as similar to gambling, not financial instruments.
- 80% of Americans want prediction-market sports contracts regulated like other online sports betting.
- 65% favour state and tribal gaming regulators rather than the federal CFTC overseeing these products.
- 84% of all Americans (and 69% of current sports bettors) think such contracts should only be offered via state-licensed sportsbooks.
- About 70% believe some prediction platforms exploit legal loopholes to operate like unlicensed sportsbooks.
- AGA urges enforcement by the CFTC and Congressional oversight to prevent unregulated gambling via prediction markets.
Context and relevance
This research matters because it signals broad public backing for tighter oversight of novel betting products — a trend that could prompt enforcement actions, state-level rules or federal scrutiny. Operators running prediction markets that touch on sporting outcomes may face increased regulatory risk, potential limits on product offerings, or requirements to partner with licensed sportsbooks. For policymakers and industry stakeholders, the poll clarifies public sentiment and strengthens the AGA’s case for harmonised consumer protections.
Author style
Punchy: The piece cuts straight to the point — overwhelming public opinion, clear regulatory asks from the AGA, and named examples of operators relying on loopholes. If you follow gambling regulation or run related products, the implications are immediate and worth digging into.
Why should I read this?
Because if you care about where sports betting rules are heading — and whether sites like Polymarket or Kalshi can keep offering sports-style contracts without regulation — this story tells you how the public feels and what regulators might do next. Short version: most Americans want these markets treated like betting, not finance.