White House Warns Staff Against Using Nonpublic Info for Prediction Market Bets

The prospect that nonpublic details from the volatile U.S.-Iran conflict could translate into private profits has left many Americans uneasy. A White House memo sent March 24 reminded staff that betting on platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi with inside information violates ethics rules and can constitute a criminal offense. The guidance arrived one day after President Trump announced on Truth Social a pause in threatened strikes on Iranian infrastructure, citing productive talks with Tehran.

At the center of the story lies a single unresolved tension: prediction markets now let anyone wager on war timelines, cease-fires and oil shocks, yet those closest to the decisions face growing suspicion whenever trades align too neatly with announcements. Bloomberg reported an unusual spike in oil futures at 6:49 a.m. New York time on March 23. Contracts for at least six million barrels of Brent and West Texas Intermediate crude traded in two minutes, far above the recent average of 700,000 barrels in the same window, according to data cited by Bloomberg and the Financial Times. Separately, the Wall Street Journal described new anonymous Polymarket accounts that profited by correctly timing a subsequent cease-fire announcement. No evidence has surfaced linking any White House employee to those positions.

The March 24 email, obtained by CBS News, came from the White House Management Office. It explicitly referenced "recent press reports" about government officials using nonpublic information on Kalshi or Polymarket. Staff were directed to contact the White House Counsel's Office with questions. White House spokesman Davis Ingle told multiple outlets that "any implication that Administration officials are engaged in such activity without evidence is baseless and irresponsible reporting." He added that President Trump wants "a strong and profitable stock market for everyone" but insists officials be barred from profiting off nonpublic information. All federal employees, Ingle noted, remain subject to longstanding ethics guidelines.

Lawmakers responded along largely partisan lines, though some measures drew bipartisan sponsors. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, a Connecticut Democrat, wrote to Polymarket demanding explanations for its oversight of national-security-related trades and introduced legislation with Sen. Andy Kim of New Jersey to ban markets tied to war, death or military action. Rep. Ritchie Torres, a New York Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee, sent letters to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and Securities and Exchange Commission urging investigation into the pre-announcement oil trades. Torres posted on X that the speed, scale and lack of hedging made insider involvement the only plausible explanation. A separate bipartisan House bill introduced March 25 would prohibit the president, Congress members, executive officials and their families from trading on prediction markets linked to political events.

The platforms themselves moved to tighten rules. Kalshi, regulated by the CFTC, said it would bar political candidates from trading on their own campaigns and bar sports insiders from related wagers. Polymarket announced it would prohibit users from betting on events they might influence with inside knowledge. The company had been barred from most U.S. customers until a limited 2025 relaunch after acquiring a licensed exchange; its larger global crypto platform operates outside CFTC oversight. Prediction markets have surged in popularity since the 2024 election, allowing bets on everything from interest-rate decisions to election outcomes to geopolitical flashpoints. Their operators argue the contracts resemble investing more than gambling and therefore escape strict U.S. gambling laws.

Concerns about officials trading on sensitive information are not new. Members of Congress have faced criticism for years over stock transactions timed near major legislative developments. What feels different now is the speed and specificity of prediction markets, where a well-placed wager on a cease-fire hour can pay out anonymously via cryptocurrency. The White House memo does not single out Iran; it frames the issue as part of broader ethics enforcement. Yet the timing, one day after the oil-market spike and Trump's announcement, keeps the focus on national-security leaks. Investigations have not produced charges or identified specific White House-linked accounts. Polymarket trades are difficult to trace to individuals. Whether tighter regulation or better platform guardrails can close the gap without chilling legitimate market signals remains unsettled.

The episode arrives as the Iran conflict continues to drive oil-price swings and national-security debates. No public official has been proven to have bet improperly. The memo, the legislative push and the platform changes all point to the same underlying worry: in an era where wars can be wagered on in real time, the line between foresight and forbidden foreknowledge is thinner than ever.