Kalshi will require some users to disclose employment details before trading on higher-risk prediction markets, as the platform moves to address mounting concerns over insider trading and market manipulation.
The US prediction market operator said the new requirement will apply to contracts with heightened insider or manipulation risk. Users seeking to trade on these markets may be asked to provide information about where they work, their industry and their job function before placing a trade.
Kalshi says the measure is designed to identify likely insiders and prevent them from trading before a transaction is placed. The platform gave the example of a market on whether OpenAI or Anthropic would go public first, where employees, advisers or others with access to non-public information could have an unfair advantage.
The company is also introducing a risk-scoring framework for new markets, assessing factors such as corporate performance, product launches, national security sensitivity and potential manipulation risk. It will also add a whistleblower portal and tools allowing users to flag suspicious activity directly from market pages.
The measures follow recommendations from an independent Surveillance Audit Committee overseeing Kalshi’s market integrity efforts. Kalshi made more than 20 referrals to law enforcement in Q1 of 2026 after opening more than 150 internal investigations into possible illegal trading activity.
George Santos, a former Congressman, is reportedly under investigation over alleged insider trading on Kalshi, while the platform has previously said congressional candidates in Minnesota, Texas and Virginia had bet on their own races.
Concerns have also extended to rival platform Polymarket. A Google employee was charged earlier this year with using company information to place trades on Polymarket, while other cases have raised questions over contracts linked to political and national security events.
These latest measures show how prediction markets are moving towards compliance systems more commonly associated with regulated betting and financial trading. The question for regulators is whether those controls are sufficient for markets where the outcome may be known in advance by a small number of participants.
