White House Warns Staff Against Using Nonpublic Information on Prediction Markets
The White House sent staff an email warning them not to place bets on prediction markets, saying wagering on platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi — which had markets on strikes on Iran, oil prices and other policy‑contingent events — could amount to trading on material nonpublic information. Senior aides were alarmed by the scale and timing of war‑related betting and worried some employees might not recognize the criminal‑risk equivalence to securities or commodities insider trading, so the guidance used plainer language about legal exposure.
📌 Key Facts
- The New York Times (Apr 10, 2026) reported that the White House warned staff against using nonpublic information in prediction markets amid the war with Iran.
- The guidance was driven not just by generic ethics concerns but specifically by fears that insiders could profit from Iran‑war decisions and related moves in oil markets.
- Senior aides were alarmed by the scale and timing of war‑related betting on prediction‑market platforms such as Polymarket and Kalshi.
- Those platforms were offering markets on strikes on Iran, oil prices, and other policy‑contingent events tied to the conflict.
- White House officials worried some staff might not see prediction‑market wagering as legally equivalent to trading on material nonpublic information, so the internal email used plainer language stressing potential criminal liability.
📊 Relevant Data
In the United States, Black households spend an average of 5.1% of their income on energy costs, compared to 3.2% for White households, based on a 2025 national study analyzing census tracts.
Black families pay more to keep their houses warm than average, study finds — Phys.org
Black and Latino households in the US pay 13-18% more on average for energy per square foot of housing compared to White households, according to a 2025 study examining racial disparities in energy insecurity.
Race, rates, and energy insecurity: exploring racial disparities in energy burden — Nature
The 2020 congressional insider trading scandal involved allegations against several US Senators, including Kelly Loeffler and Richard Burr, for stock trades based on nonpublic COVID-19 briefings, leading to investigations but no charges.
2020 congressional insider trading scandal — Wikipedia
📰 Source Timeline (2)
Follow how coverage of this story developed over time
- The New York Times piece confirms the guidance was driven not only by generic ethics concerns but specifically by fears that insiders could profit from Iran‑war decisions and oil‑market moves, tying the warning directly to the current conflict.
- It details that senior aides were alarmed by the scale and timing of war‑related betting on platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi, which were offering markets on strikes on Iran, oil prices, and other policy‑contingent events.
- The article reports additional internal concern that some staff might not recognize prediction‑market wagering as legally equivalent to trading on material nonpublic information in securities or commodities markets, prompting plainer criminal‑risk language in the email.