The CFTC has put prediction markets on notice: contracts that pay out based on what a named person says, attends, or does are now presumed “readily susceptible to manipulation” — and two enforcement cases involving a White House teleprompter operator and a former congressman show exactly why.
By Maria Rodriguez | September 23, 2026
On September 22, the Division of Market Oversight at the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission issued a staff advisory covering so-called “mention markets” — prediction contracts that settle on whether a specific person says a certain word, attends an event, or makes a public appearance. Think of it like betting on whether a keynote speaker will say a particular phrase, except with real money on federally regulated exchanges. The advisory applies to designated contract markets, the regulated exchanges that list these products, and it lands as prediction-market volume surpassed 25 billion USD across 2025, according to CFTC data.
Why Mention Markets Are Different From Election Bets
Most prediction contracts settle on outcomes nobody in the market personally controls: who wins an election, what an inflation print says, who wins a regulated sports match. Mention markets are different, the CFTC explained, because settlement can depend on the conduct of one named person or a small group. A podcast host could deliberately say a word tied to a payout. People with access to scripts, prepared remarks, or guest lists could know the result before ordinary traders. That is why the regulator said it may view these contracts as “presumptively readily susceptible to manipulation.”
The advisory is guidance, not a new rule — it expressly creates no new legal obligations. But it reminds exchanges of an existing duty under Core Principle 3 of the Commodity Exchange Act: designated contract markets may only list derivatives that are not readily susceptible to manipulation. An exchange can rebut the presumption in limited cases by showing strong safeguards, with CFTC staff pointing to independent verification and substantial public scrutiny as central considerations. Formal public events involving public figures offer stronger verification, the advisory noted, while private conduct or contracts involving non-public people are harder to police.
The Teleprompter Operator and the Congressman
The advisory did not come out of thin air. On August 28, the CFTC ordered Gabriel Perez, a former White House teleprompter operator, to disgorge 107,539.02 USD and pay a 65,000 USD civil penalty after finding he used advance access to President Donald Trump’s speeches to trade presidential mention contracts between December 2025 and February 2026. Perez, who generated more than 107,500 USD in trading profits according to the order, accepted a three-year trading ban. KalshiEX was credited with assisting the investigation.
In July, the commission resolved a separate case involving former Representative George Santos. The CFTC found Santos traded contracts on whether he would attend the 2026 State of the Union while making public statements about his own attendance plans, and that contract prices moved in his favor after several of his social-media posts. His settlement required disgorgement of 17,569.98 USD, a 17,500 USD civil penalty, and a three-year trading ban. Kalshi later imposed its own permanent suspension, banning Santos from the exchange directly or indirectly. Both cases illustrate the core problem: when one person controls the outcome, that person — or anyone near them — can effectively trade on inside information about themselves.
Kalshi Keeps Speech Markets Live — For Now
The advisory does not ban anything outright. As of September 23, Kalshi still displayed markets tied to what Trump would say during United Nations meetings, including contracts on terms such as AI, NATO, and ceasefire. A contract covering Trump’s UN General Assembly speech had recorded nearly 194,000 USD in volume in the available snapshot. CFTC filing records show Kalshi previously self-certified amendments covering contracts asking whether a specific word would be said by a person, including a template tied to Trump, with those amendments recorded as certified in June.
The practical effect falls on future filings. When exchanges submit new mention products or amendments under Part 40 of CFTC rules, staff expects each filing to include a detailed evaluation of the manipulation risk factors and a description of the controls meant to address them. Mention contracts are also excluded from the commission’s proposed margining plans for prediction markets.
A Bigger Rulebook Is Still in Progress
The advisory sits inside a much larger regulatory construction site. In June, the CFTC proposed amendments to Regulation 40.11 that would create a formal process for assessing contracts in areas Congress specifically flagged — gaming, terrorism, assassination, war, and activities unlawful under federal or state law — including a 90-day review process and contract-specific public-interest factors. No final version has been published as of September 23, and the agency’s 2026 final-rule list shows no completed Regulation 40.11 rulemaking.
Courts are moving in parallel. On August 28, the Ninth Circuit ruled that Kalshi had not shown Nevada’s regulation of its sports event contracts was likely displaced by the Commodity Exchange Act, allowing Nevada’s sports-related enforcement to continue while other issues returned to the lower court — a decision that did not invalidate the CFTC’s prediction-market rules. Meanwhile, Polymarket’s U.S. operation now operates through the federally registered QCEX structure, with amendments to its U.S. rulebook certified in April and event products filed with the regulator throughout 2026. For context on scale: the 25 billion USD in 2025 prediction-market volume remains small beside the roughly 31 trillion USD notional value of the overall futures market the CFTC regulates.
What This Means for You
If you trade on prediction markets, expect fewer novelty speech contracts — or at least tougher disclosure about how they can be manipulated — as exchanges absorb the new guidance. If a market’s outcome depends on what one identifiable person does, you are structurally the outsider at the table: someone close to that person may always know more than you. The CFTC’s message is that exchanges, not traders, carry the burden of proving those products can be run safely. For the broader crypto investor, the advisory is a reminder that the prediction-market boom is growing up under real federal supervision, with enforcement teeth that have already bitten twice this year.
Market snapshot at time of writing: Bitcoin trades near 85,700 USD, Ethereum near 2,714 USD, and Solana near 117 USD, with the Crypto Fear and Greed Index at 71 (Greed).
The cryptocurrency market remains highly volatile. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice.
a WHITE HOUSE TELEPROMPTER OPERATOR was the edge case that got mention markets presumed rigged. you cannot write this stuff
25 billion in prediction volume last year and the CFTC is only now spelling out that betting on whether a named person says a word is trivially manipulable. Better late.
^ tbh the former congressman case is the wilder one. the person the contract settles on can just… choose to say the word. free money until someone enforces
Fair point, though an advisory at least puts exchanges on notice before prediction volume doubles again. Kalshi running UN speech markets right under it will be a fun test.
mention markets are just the meme coin meta with a settlement oracle bolted on. of course a guy traded his own attendance, the incentive was sitting right there
the teleprompter operator angle is insane. dude literally had the speeches on his screen before anyone else and thought hm, free money. 107k profit just for reading ahead lmao
the wildest part is he only walked away with 107k. if you are gonna burn a white house clearance at least clear seven figures lmao
65k fine on 107k of profits. net positive crime if you ignore the 3 year ban lmao
Santos trading contracts on his own attendance while publicly posting about his plans is the most on-brand thing he has ever done. A 17.5k penalty feels light given how blatant it was.
and kalshi still has the trump UN speech markets live. 194k volume on whether one guy says ceasefire. the exit liquidity writes itself