---
type: source
title: "Prediction Market Act of 2026 — McCormick-Gillibrand Bipartisan Bill (April 30, 2026)"
author: "Senate Press Release / Multiple Summaries"
url: https://www.mccormick.senate.gov/news/press-releases/senators-mccormick-gillibrand-introduce-legislation-to-strengthen-prediction-markets-and-protect-everyday-investors/
date: 2026-04-30
domain: internet-finance
secondary_domains: []
format: article
status: processed
processed_by: rio
processed_date: 2026-05-07
priority: high
tags: [prediction-markets, legislation, event-contracts, CFTC, insider-trading, regulation, Prediction-Market-Act]
intake_tier: research-task
extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
---

## Content

Senators McCormick (R-PA) and Gillibrand (D-NY) introduced the Prediction Market Act of 2026 on April 30. Bipartisan. Amends the Commodity Exchange Act.

**Definition from bill summary:** "prediction market contract" = "any financial instrument, contract, or derivative listed on or offered by a platform engaged in interstate commerce and tied to the occurrence or non-occurrence of a future event."

**Key provisions:**
- **Political Insider Trading Ban:** Congress, president, VP, senior executive branch officials prohibited from trading prediction markets
- **Insider Trading Standards:** CFTC directed to prohibit trading on material nonpublic information and define enforceable insider trading standards for prediction markets
- **Consumer Protections:** Enhanced certification standards for exchanges listing event contracts; retail-friendly disclosures
- **Retail Advocate:** New CFTC Office of the Retail Advocate
- **Customer Segregation:** Customer funds fully segregated from operational accounts
- **KYC/AML:** Know Your Customer and Bank Secrecy Act compliance required

**What the bill does NOT contain (from available summaries):**
- No explicit exclusion for DAO governance markets
- No mention of blockchain-based prediction markets
- No mention of endogenous settlement or TWAP
- No grandfathering provisions visible in summaries

**Full bill text:** PDF accessible at mccormick.senate.gov but returned 403. Congress.gov text version not yet confirmed accessible.

**Political context:** Senate unanimously passed a resolution restricting congressional trading on prediction markets. Strong political momentum toward some form of oversight.

## Agent Notes

**Why this matters:** The phrase "tied to the occurrence or non-occurrence of a future event" is BROAD. A governance proposal vote IS a future event. If enacted as written, this statutory definition could sweep in MetaDAO conditional governance markets — creating a new regulatory vector independent of the CEA event contract framework. The endogeneity argument would need to apply to this new statutory language.

**What surprised me:** The bipartisan support and the specific insider trading ban on politicians. The bill is clearly designed to protect the political prediction market (Polymarket, Kalshi elections) ecosystem while creating guardrails. The "platform engaged in interstate commerce" qualifier might help MetaDAO (which is not a "platform" in the ordinary sense) but this is uncertain without full text.

**What I expected but didn't find:** Any DAO/governance exclusion or blockchain-specific provision. The bill appears entirely focused on centralized DCM-style operators.

**KB connections:**
- [[MetaDAO conditional governance markets may fall outside the CFTC event contract definition because TWAP settlement against internal token price is endogenous rather than an external observable event]] — if the Prediction Market Act creates a NEW statutory definition, the endogeneity argument needs to be re-evaluated against this language
- [[futarchy-based fundraising creates regulatory separation because there are no beneficial owners and investment decisions emerge from market forces not centralized control]] — the "platform" requirement in the definition may create natural distance for MetaDAO's decentralized structure

**Extraction hints:**
1. Extract a "pending legislative threat" scope qualification for the endogeneity claim: the Prediction Market Act's "occurrence or non-occurrence of a future event" definition could sweep in governance markets if enacted without DAO/blockchain exclusion.
2. Note the "platform engaged in interstate commerce" qualifier as a potential structural defense — MetaDAO may not qualify as a "platform" under ordinary reading.
3. PRIORITY: Retrieve full bill text to check for DAO exclusions or definitional limitations.

**Context:** The bill was introduced the same day the CFTC ANPRM comment period closed (April 30). The legislative and regulatory tracks are converging simultaneously. Senate unanimous vote on congressional trading restrictions suggests political momentum is strong.

## Curator Notes

PRIMARY CONNECTION: [[MetaDAO conditional governance markets may fall outside the CFTC event contract definition because TWAP settlement against internal token price is endogenous rather than an external observable event]]
WHY ARCHIVED: Creates a new statutory track for the endogeneity argument — if the bill passes, the CEA event contract defense needs supplementing with analysis of the new statutory definition
EXTRACTION HINT: Focus on the "occurrence or non-occurrence of a future event" definition and whether "platform engaged in interstate commerce" qualifier excludes MetaDAO's non-platform structure; treat as pending scope challenge requiring bill text to resolve
