U.S. lawmakers have introduced new legislation that would ban prediction market contracts tied to war, terrorism, assassinations, and other government actions, marking the latest congressional attempt to draw a harder line around what kinds of real-world events can be turned into tradable bets. The proposal, called the BETS OFF Act, was introduced on March 17 by Senator Chris Murphy and Representative Greg Casar.
The bill does not try to shut down prediction markets altogether. Instead, it targets the areas lawmakers see as most vulnerable to insider knowledge, manipulation, or direct control by public officials and other insiders.
The bill would ban markets tied to war, government action, and insider-controlled outcomes
The BETS OFF Act would prohibit wagering on government decisions, military operations, terrorism, war, assassination, and events where a single person knows or controls the outcome in advance. It would also cover contracts built around outcomes such as speech content, entertainment bookings, or other events that lawmakers argue are especially easy to rig.
That positions the bill as an anti-corruption measure, not just a response to the controversies of prediction markets in the U.S. Lawmakers argue that once sensitive public actions become tradable, the risk is no longer limited to speculation. It extends to a loss of trust from the public in governmental decision-making.
Recent military-event trading helped push the proposal to the congress
The immediate trigger for lawmakers was a run of suspicious trading tied to military events. Lawmakers pointed to well-timed bets placed ahead of the U.S.-Israeli strikes in Iran and a Venezuela operation, arguing that those trades raised serious questions about whether people with insider knowledge were using prediction markets to profit from the war.
That has turned a niche policy debate into a broader political one. The concern in Congress is no longer only whether these contracts resemble gambling or derivatives. It is whether markets tied to war and government decisions create an opening for insider trading on events that can carry life-and-death consequences.
The proposal would also go after payment and promotions for offshore sites
The bill would not stop at banning the contracts themselves. It would also amend existing illegal gambling laws to block payment processing for banned offshore platforms and impose criminal penalties on people in the United States who promote, manage, own, or supervise those businesses domestically.
That tougher enforcement design shows Congress is trying to reach beyond a symbolic ban. For now, the bill’s path through Congress remains uncertain, but it arrives with public opinion moving in its favor. A new poll found 59% of likely voters oppose wagers on potential government actions, while 67% support banning elected officials from using prediction markets.
