Tribal gaming representatives are asking lawmakers to address growing concerns over sports prediction markets, saying some platforms are offering products that resemble sports betting while operating under a different regulatory framework.
The issue came before the Senate Indian Affairs Committee during an Aug. 4 roundtable, where tribal officials argued that sports event contracts could weaken the gaming system established under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA). They said these products compete with tribal casinos and regulated sportsbooks while avoiding requirements tied to gaming licenses, consumer protections and tribal-state agreements.
Representatives from tribal organizations said the main concern is how these contracts are classified. Prediction market operators describe sports event contracts as financial products covered by the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA), placing them under the authority of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).
Tribal leaders and several state officials disagree with that interpretation. They argue that the practical experience for customers remains the same as placing a sports wager, regardless of whether the product carries a financial-market label.
Senate Indian Affairs Committee Vice Chairman Brian Schatz highlighted that point during the hearing. He said a person looking to profit from the Philadelphia 76ers winning the NBA championship could use either a sportsbook or a prediction-market application.
Tribal Regulators Challenge the Classification of Sports Contracts
Jamie Hummingbird, chairman of the National Tribal Gaming Commissioners & Regulators, said the language used to describe these products does not change their nature.
Hummingbird pointed to recent decisions involving DraftKings and FanDuel as evidence that major sportsbook companies see prediction markets as an alternative path. He said the companies moved away from Nevada licensing efforts while exploring prediction-market options.
Tehassi Hill, vice chairman of the Indian Gaming Association and chairman of the Oneida Nation, said prediction platforms are already offering products that closely match traditional sportsbook options. He mentioned money lines, totals, parlays and player props as examples.
“They claim to be innovators, but they have invented nothing,” Hill said.
Hill also discussed the costs involved in maintaining tribal gaming oversight. He said tribes spend more than $450 million every year and employ over 6,000 workers to handle gaming-related responsibilities, including licensing, age verification, audits, responsible gaming programs and maintaining game integrity.
Debate Grows Over Federal Authority and Tribal Consultation
The discussion also focused on whether the CFTC should have authority over sports-related contracts that tribal leaders believe belong within existing gaming systems.
Mark Macarro, president of the National Congress of American Indians, said federal commodities law was not created to replace gambling regulations. He argued that prediction markets are using the CEA to avoid the protections and agreements established through IGRA.
Macarro referred to comments from former Sen. Blanche Lincoln during the debate over the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act. Lincoln had warned that event contracts could be linked to events such as the Super Bowl, Kentucky Derby and Masters without having a legitimate commercial purpose.
He also pointed to recent objections from former Sen. Christopher Dodd, one of the law’s authors, regarding the CFTC’s proposed prediction-market rule. A group of 44 state attorneys general has also asked the agency to withdraw the proposal, saying it could interfere with state gambling laws.
“The CFTC is not a gaming regulator,” Hummingbird said.
He said the agency does not have the same type of gaming oversight experience or direct relationship with players that tribal and state regulators maintain.
Macarro also criticized the lack of formal consultation with tribal governments during the CFTC’s rulemaking process.
“The CFTC must engage in meaningful consultation with tribal nations. Consultation is not a courtesy,” he said. “It is a legal and moral obligation the federal government owes to sovereign tribal governments.”
Lawmakers Consider Wider Effects on Gaming and Legislation
Tribal leaders also raised concerns about the CLARITY Act, a proposed cryptocurrency and digital asset framework. They warned that parts of the legislation related to decentralized finance could unintentionally create another route around gaming laws.
Hill urged lawmakers to make clear that the legislation would not affect IGRA or state and tribal gaming authority. The Indian Gaming Association has suggested language stating that decentralized finance cannot be used to avoid or override those protections.
Sen. Ben Ray Luján said an exemption in the bill’s DeFi section could become a problem unless lawmakers clearly limit it to spot-market activity.
Senate Agriculture Committee Chair John Boozman initially said cryptocurrency policy and prediction markets should be considered separately. After Luján explained that the concern involved existing language in the bill, an Agriculture Committee staff member said lawmakers had developed alternative wording.
The financial consequences for tribal gaming remain under review. Committee Chair Sen. Lisa Murkowski said tribal gaming produced a record $46.2 billion in gross gaming revenue during fiscal 2025. She also said the wider economic effect of tribal gaming has been estimated at $110 billion.
Murkowski asked whether the Indian Gaming Association had calculated losses connected to prediction markets. Hill said the organization is carrying out a national analysis, although much of the needed information is held by individual tribes and is not publicly available.
Macarro estimated that California tribes may have experienced an impact of about 5%, while adding that more detailed figures would be provided later.
State officials and public health advocates also raised concerns about consumer safeguards. Ohio Solicitor General Mathura Sridharan said gambling rules and financial market regulations deal with different activities.
“A wager on whether Ohio State covers the spread is not managing commercial risk or facilitating price discovery,” she said.
Sridharan said prediction markets may avoid measures commonly used in regulated gambling, including age checks, suspicious-activity monitoring and responsible gaming requirements.
Harry Levant, director of gambling policy at the Public Health Advocacy Institute, said financial terminology could lead some people to view gambling activity as an investment. He said six members of his recovery group had returned to gambling through prediction markets over the previous three months because they believed they were investing.
Levant also warned that prediction markets could increase concerns linked to microbetting.
Tribal representatives called for additional federal action, including support for the bipartisan Prediction Markets Are Gambling Act, or S. 4160. The proposed legislation would prevent CFTC-regulated entities from offering sports and casino-style event contracts.
They also asked Congress to clarify that commodities law does not override IGRA or tribal-state gaming agreements. In addition, they requested formal tribal consultation before the CFTC completes its rulemaking and approves more sports-related contracts.
Representatives from the CFTC and prediction-market companies did not participate in the roundtable.
Source:
Tribal Leaders Warn Congress Prediction Markets Bypass IGRA, gamblinginsider.com, August 6, 2026.