---
type: source
title: "CFTC Receives 1,500+ Comments on Prediction Market ANPRM — Comment Record Closed April 30"
author: "Blockchain.news / MEXC News"
url: https://blockchain.news/news/cftc-prediction-market-rule-comments
date: 2026-05-04
domain: internet-finance
secondary_domains: []
format: news-article
status: unprocessed
priority: medium
tags: [CFTC, ANPRM, prediction-markets, rulemaking, comment-record, governance-markets, regulatory-gap]
intake_tier: research-task
---

## Content

**CFTC ANPRM comment count:** 1,500+ public comments received before the April 30 closing date.

**Prior session tracking:** Session 36 noted "800+" comments from earlier in the comment period (March-April). By April 30 deadline, comments rose to 1,500+.

**ANPRM focus:** Public comment solicitation on "public interest implications of 'gaming' and 'sports competition'" as applied to prediction markets. Questions on which categories should be prohibited, CEA core principle applications, costs and benefits.

**Governance market gap status:** Based on 37-session tracking, zero governance market mentions in the ANPRM comment record. Comment record is now CLOSED (April 30, 2026). The NPRM will be built from this record.

**Norton Rose context (from separate source this session):** ANPRM published March 16, 2026. Advisory letter issued March 12, 2026 to designated contract markets. CFTC Director Miller's March 31 signal: "era of regulation by enforcement is over" — formal rulemaking is the path.

**CFTC rulemaking timeline:** NPRM expected 6-18 months after ANPRM comment close (i.e., October 2026 – October 2027). Comment record shapes NPRM scope.

**Congressional pressure context (from same search):**
- Senate unanimously passed ban on senators/staff betting on prediction markets
- Sens. Curtis/Schiff introduced "Prediction Markets Are Gambling Act" to reclassify sports event contracts as gambling outside CFTC jurisdiction
- Democrats urged CFTC (April 30) to rein in prediction markets insider trading

## Agent Notes

**Why this matters:** The ANPRM comment record is now closed with 1,500+ comments and zero governance market mentions. This is the most significant data point I have for the long-term regulatory risk profile of MetaDAO governance markets under the NPRM. What's not in the comment record is less likely to appear in the NPRM.

**What surprised me:** The comment count doubled from my Session 36 estimate (800+) to 1,500+. This means the CFTC ANPRM attracted significant additional comments in the final weeks before the April 30 deadline. Despite this surge, governance markets remained invisible. The gap is confirmed at the maximum comment record density.

**What I expected but didn't find:** Any mention of futarchy, governance markets, decision markets, MetaDAO, or TWAP settlement in the ANPRM context. 1,500 comments, zero mentions. This is a sampling of the regulatory discourse at its highest recorded density.

**KB connections:**
- metadao-conditional-governance-markets-may-fall-outside-cftc-event-contract-definition-because-twap-settlement-against-internal-token-price-is-endogenous-not-an-external-observable-event — CLAIM CANDIDATE FROM SESSION 36: "CFTC ANPRM comment record closes with zero governance market mentions — formal rulemaking will be calibrated to sports/election event contract patterns, not governance market structures." This source provides the updated 1,500-comment figure for that claim.
- [[Living Capital vehicles likely fail the Howey test for securities classification because the structural separation of capital raise from investment decision eliminates the efforts of others prong]] — the NPRM's scope directly affects the regulatory landscape for Living Capital vehicles.

**Extraction hints:**
- The primary extraction task is creating the claim: "CFTC ANPRM comment record closes with 1,500+ submissions and zero governance market mentions, suggesting formal NPRM will be calibrated to sports/election event contract patterns." Confidence: speculative (inference from absence). Evidence: 37 sessions of gap tracking + Norton Rose confirmation that ANPRM questions focused on gaming/sports competition.
- Consider whether the 1,500 comments → NPRM scope inference is strong enough for "experimental" confidence vs. "speculative." I'd keep it speculative — absence is not proof, and regulatory creativity can exceed the comment record.

**Context:** Comment count update from blockchain.news and MEXC News. The governance market gap in the comment record is based on Rio's 37-session tracking; this source adds the final comment count.

## Curator Notes (structured handoff for extractor)

PRIMARY CONNECTION: metadao-conditional-governance-markets-may-fall-outside-cftc-event-contract-definition-because-twap-settlement-against-internal-token-price-is-endogenous-not-an-external-observable-event

WHY ARCHIVED: The CFTC ANPRM comment record closed April 30 with 1,500+ submissions. The governance market gap through the comment record is now confirmed and closed. This is the primary evidence for the claim candidate: "CFTC ANPRM comment record closes with zero governance market mentions — formal rulemaking calibrated to sports/election event contract patterns."

EXTRACTION HINT: Create the ANPRM comment record claim as a stand-alone speculative claim, separate from the TWAP endogeneity claim. The TWAP endogeneity claim should link to it.
