CFTC settlement bars former White House worker from prediction markets after Kalshi profits

A federal settlement with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission puts a new spotlight on prediction-market compliance after a former White House teleprompter operator was ordered to give up more than $100,000 in profits, pay a $65,000 civil penalty, and accept a three-year trading ban.

The case does not report any West Virginia-specific change. But it is a notable enforcement action involving Kalshi, a prediction-market platform that has drawn attention as regulators and market participants debate how event contracts should be policed.

CFTC says trader used White House role to profit on prediction markets

According to the AP summary carried by WVNews, Gabriel Perez was placed on unpaid leave after reports that he used his position to bet on what President Donald Trump would say in speeches.

The CFTC found that Perez made $107,500 on prediction markets using information obtained through that role. In the federal settlement, Perez was ordered to surrender more than $100,000 in profits and pay an additional $65,000 penalty. The settlement also includes a three-year ban on trading.

The source summary identifies the matter as a federal settlement over alleged insider trading on the prediction market Kalshi.

Why the case matters for prediction-market oversight

While prediction markets are often discussed separately from traditional sports betting or online casino products, this case shows the same core regulatory issue can still apply: whether a participant had an unfair informational advantage.

For PlayWV readers, the main takeaway is that no West Virginia market action was reported here, and the story is not about a change to gambling law in the state. Instead, it is a national enforcement development tied to a gambling-adjacent product category.

What to watch next is whether federal regulators bring more cases involving event-contract trading and platform conduct. Based on the source report, this proceeding ended with a settlement rather than a trial, but it adds another example of regulators scrutinizing how prediction markets are used.

—

Source: As reported by wvnews.com.