The National Football League is pushing for federal regulators to prohibit wagers on specific in-game events, escalating the high-stakes battle over the future of prediction markets in the US.
The National Football League is lobbying the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission to ban event contracts based on discrete in-game outcomes, such as the first play or player injuries. The move adds a powerful new voice to a complex regulatory debate just as the CFTC’s authority over these markets faces multiple legal challenges from state gambling regulators.
“As I’ve said repeatedly, the CFTC will not allow overzealous state governments to undermine the agency’s longstanding authority over these markets,” CFTC Chairman Michael S. Selig said in a recent statement regarding a related case.
In a letter to the commission, the NFL specifically requested a prohibition on contracts tied to individual plays and player injuries, and also asked for the minimum age for traders to be raised, according to a review by CNBC. The intervention comes as the CFTC is engaged in a formal rulemaking process for event contracts, which have grown in popularity on platforms like Kalshi, which is regulated by the agency.
The NFL’s push for stricter rules highlights a critical tension for the burgeoning industry. A federal ban on certain sports-related contracts would directly curtail a popular and lucrative product category. At the same time, the CFTC is fighting to maintain its exclusive jurisdiction against states like Ohio and Arizona that argue these products are a form of gambling and should be under their control.
The NFL's letter targets the most granular, and potentially controversial, types of sports-related contracts. By seeking to ban wagers on events like the opening kickoff or whether a specific player will be injured, the league is aiming to wall off outcomes that it may see as vulnerable to manipulation or inside information, protecting the perceived integrity of its games.
This lobbying effort could force the CFTC to create a more restrictive framework than it might have otherwise considered. The commission has previously taken a largely permissive stance, with a 2023 letter easing certain reporting requirements for event contracts. The NFL's entrance into the debate adds significant weight to the argument for more stringent consumer protections and product limitations.
While the NFL pressures the CFTC from one direction, several states are challenging the commission’s fundamental right to regulate these markets at all. In a notable case, the CFTC filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit to defend its jurisdiction against Ohio officials who are trying to block Kalshi’s sports-related contracts.
The agency argues that Congress granted it sole authority over these types of financial products when it was established in 1974 to avoid a patchwork of inconsistent state laws. A similar legal fight is underway in Arizona, where a federal judge temporarily blocked the state from taking enforcement action against Kalshi. The outcome of these legal battles will have profound implications, determining whether prediction markets operate under a single federal framework or face a complex and potentially contradictory set of state-by-state gambling laws, which could stifle the industry's growth.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.
