While sports betting has been a debate in North Carolina for years, bets on the midterm election cycle are raising new concerns about prediction markets.
Prediction markets are marketplaces where participants buy and sell contracts tied to the outcomes of future events. Other forms of betting, such as traditional sports betting, typically involve wagering on the outcome of a sporting event, with odds set by the house.
Election prediction markets on platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket allow users to buy and sell shares tied to election outcomes, margins of victory and which party will control Congress in the next legislative session.
Gov. Josh Stein signed North Carolina’s $34 billion budget bill into law in July. The measure included a 6% tax on prediction market operators’ net trading fee revenue, estimated to generate about $1 million in the 2026-27 fiscal year. The tax takes effect in January, adding to the debate over whether federal or state regulators should have ultimate authority over prediction markets.
We discuss the ethics of election prediction markets, whether they constitute gambling or a new financial avenue and potential regulatory measures.
GUESTS:
Michelle Malkin, director of the Gambling and Research & Policy Initiative at East Carolina University
Danny Funt, reporter and author of "Everybody Loses: The Tumultuous Rise of American Sports Gambling"
Harry R. Lloyd, assistant professor of philosophy at The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
