BETS OFF Act Targets Prediction Markets to Halt Insider Profiteering on Military and Federal Actions

New BETS OFF Act aims to ban prediction markets from offering bets on U.S. military strikes and government decisions to prevent insider trading.

By: AXL Media

Published: Mar 18, 2026, 11:53 AM EDT

Source: The information in this article was sourced from Gambling Insider

Legislative Strike Against Sensitive Event Wagering

Senator Chris Murphy and Representative Greg Casar have launched a bicameral legislative effort to fundamentally restrict the scope of prediction markets within the United States. The Banning Event Trading on Sensitive Operations and Federal Functions (BETS OFF) Act seeks to outlaw wagering on high stakes government outcomes, including military maneuvers, acts of terrorism, and political assassinations. According to the bill's sponsors, these markets have transitioned from harmless forecasting tools into corrupt environments where individuals can monetize confidential state secrets. The legislation specifically targets platforms that allow users to bet on events controlled or known by a single individual, which lawmakers argue is a direct invitation for institutional corruption.

Suspicious Market Activity Preceding Military Action

A primary catalyst for the BETS OFF Act is a series of "highly unusual" betting patterns observed on Polymarket just hours before U.S. strikes were conducted in Iran. Representative Casar revealed that approximately 150 accounts placed significant bets on the precise timing of the military action, with over 100 of those accounts netting profits exceeding $10,000 each. Most troubling to lawmakers was the discovery that the majority of these accounts were created on the same day the bets were placed, suggesting they were opened specifically to capitalize on advance knowledge. This pattern of cashing in while military personnel are deployed has been described by sponsors as a moral and security failure that the federal government must address.

Eroding National Security Through Financial Incentives

The proposed ban is not merely about preventing profit, but about protecting the integrity of presidential and military advice. Senator Murphy argued that the existence of these markets creates a dangerous conflict of interest where advisors might recommend specific overseas actions based on their personal portfolios rather than national interests. By allowing government officials or those in their orbit to hold financial stakes in policy outcomes, the current system risks turning somber questions of war and peace into mere speculative opportunities. The legislation aims to decouple the heavy weight of public policy from the volatile incentives of the derivatives market.