BETS OFF Act
- Sponsor
- Sen. Murphy, Christopher [D-CT]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Mar 17, 2026
Bottom line
The BETS OFF Act bans gambling on sensitive non-financial events, aiming to prevent perverse incentives and protect national security by leveraging existing federal enforcement frameworks.
What it actually does
This bill, titled the "BETS OFF Act," prohibits placing, accepting, or facilitating wagers on "specified events," which include acts of terrorism, assassinations, wars, and other non-financial events whose outcomes are controlled by governments or known in advance. It integrates this prohibition into existing federal laws concerning racketeering, illegal gambling businesses, unlawful internet gambling, and the Commodity Exchange Act, granting the Attorney General civil enforcement authority.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that this bill is crucial for preventing the creation of perverse incentives to commit or facilitate harmful events like terrorism or assassinations, as well as to protect the integrity of government functions from speculative trading. They contend it closes a dangerous loophole that could allow individuals to profit from national security threats or other morally objectionable outcomes, thereby safeguarding public safety and national interests.
Opponents contend
While direct opposition to the core intent of banning wagers on harmful events is unlikely, potential critics might argue that certain aspects of the "specified event" definition could be overly broad or vague, potentially stifling innovation in legitimate prediction markets or data analysis that could offer valuable insights into future events without malicious intent. Concerns could also be raised about the expansive application of existing federal criminal statutes to new forms of wagering.
The bill is short and clearly written, making it accessible for an informed reader to understand its provisions and implications within a short timeframe.
Section 1
Short Title
This section establishes the official short title of the Act as the "Banning Event Trading on Sensitive Operations and Federal Functions Act" or the "BETS OFF Act." This name provides a concise and recognizable reference for the legislation.
Supporters argue
Proponents argue that a clear and descriptive short title is essential for public understanding and legislative reference, effectively communicating the bill's purpose.
Critics contend
No specific opposition is typically raised against this provision as it is a standard legislative practice.
Tradeoffs
None.
Section 2
Definitions of Prohibited Wagers and Specified Events
This section defines key terms, primarily "specified event" and "wager." A "specified event" includes acts of terrorism, assassinations, wars, and any non-financial event whose outcome is controlled by a government or known in advance. A "wager" is broadly defined as staking something of value on an event's outcome for a return, but explicitly excludes various forms of legitimate insurance, such as those under the McCarran-Ferguson Act, foreign law, or federal programs like the Terrorism Insurance Program, National Flood Insurance Program, and Federal Crop Insurance Act.
Section 3(a)
Prohibition on Wagers Regarding Specified Events
This subsection establishes the core prohibition of the Act, making it unlawful for any person to place, accept, or facilitate the placement or acceptance of a wager regarding a "specified event." This directly bans the targeted activities defined in Section 2.
Section 3(b)
Civil Enforcement Authority for the Attorney General
This subsection grants the Attorney General the authority to initiate civil actions for injunctive relief in federal district courts against any person who violates the prohibition on specified event wagers. This provides a direct legal avenue for the government to stop illegal wagering activities.
Section 4
Integration with Existing Federal Criminal and Financial Laws
This section amends several existing federal statutes to incorporate the new prohibition on specified event wagers. It modifies 18 U.S.C. 1952 (Interstate and Foreign Travel or Transportation in Aid of Racketeering Enterprises) and 18 U.S.C. 1955 (Prohibition of Illegal Gambling Businesses) to explicitly include conduct prohibited by the BETS OFF Act. It also amends 31 U.S.C. 5362 (Prohibition on Funding of Unlawful Internet Gambling) to include this conduct. Finally, it amends Section 5c(c)(5) of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 7a-2(c)(5)) to explicitly prohibit any agreement, contract, transaction, or swap involving a specified event (or related index/data) from being listed or traded on a registered entity.
This provision explicitly prohibits any agreement, contract, transaction, or swap involving a "specified event" (as defined in Section 2 of the BETS OFF Act), or any index, measure, value, or data related thereto, or occurrence based thereon, from being listed or made available for clearing or trading on or through a registered entity under the Commodity Exchange Act.
Section 4(d) - Amendment to the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 7a-2(c)(5))
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for incorporating new prohibitions into existing regulatory frameworks. It ensures consistency and leverages established oversight mechanisms rather than creating entirely new ones.
Case for: Supporters argue this amendment is vital to prevent the legitimization of wagers on sensitive events within regulated financial markets. It ensures that entities overseen by the CFTC cannot inadvertently or intentionally facilitate activities deemed harmful to national security or public interest, thereby closing a significant potential loophole.
Case against: Critics might contend that this provision could stifle innovation in legitimate prediction markets that, while dealing with non-financial events, could offer valuable data or insights for risk management or policy analysis. They might argue for a more nuanced approach that distinguishes between malicious speculation and beneficial information aggregation.
Estimated impact: This provision has a significant impact on the landscape of prediction markets and financial innovation, particularly for any entity considering offering or trading instruments based on non-financial, sensitive events within a regulated framework. It effectively shuts down that avenue.